Zac dawson- offered 1 week?? - Kosi 1

The Fireman · Mon 20 Jul 2009 7:45pm

degruch wrote:
RodKeoghsLoveChild wrote:Kossie is getting two weeks guys.

He has carry over points and CANNOT get his charge reduced.
Ergo, nothing to lose. Challenge I say!

Challenging Kosi's would be a waste of a challenge.....guilty your honor..and I'm a fan of his.

degruch · Post: # 779065Post **degruch** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 7:48pm

The Fireman wrote:
degruch wrote:
RodKeoghsLoveChild wrote:Kossie is getting two weeks guys.

He has carry over points and CANNOT get his charge reduced.
Ergo, nothing to lose. Challenge I say!
Challenging Kosi's would be a waste of a challenge.....guilty your honor..and I'm a fan of his.

Meh, nothing to lose really. I reckon it's worth a week, because it was a bloody stupid act, but the tribunal has let off much worse despite charges being laid...why shouldn't we reep the benefits of their own stupid conduct for once???

Of course, the club is less cavalier than me...or Collingwood...or Carlton...or Essendon, etc, etc. So, I'd imagine they'll only challenge the Zac Dawson penalty.

kaos theory · Mon 20 Jul 2009 7:55pm

Oh FFS.

What a joke. How does Kosi get a week for that soft hit on the back. He arm, clearly, didn't hit his head first, and that's all that matters.

Appeal saints.

fonz_#15 · Post: # 779075Post **fonz_#15** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 7:57pm

that's bizarre, Kosi's one is line ball and reckless, Zac's is absolute crap. a farce

plugger66 · Post: # 779076Post **plugger66** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 7:58pm

kaos theory wrote:Oh FFS.

What a joke. How does Kosi get a week for that soft hit on the back. He arm, clearly, didn't hit his head first, and that's all that matters.

Appeal saints.

If you see the replay his eyes were clearly looking straight at the players head. He was never going for the ball. It was stupid. No point in appealing. He is missing a week through injury why take the risk of 2.

fonz_#15 · Post: # 779077Post **fonz_#15** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 7:59pm

plugger66 wrote:
kaos theory wrote:Oh FFS.

What a joke. How does Kosi get a week for that soft hit on the back. He arm, clearly, didn't hit his head first, and that's all that matters.

Appeal saints.
If you see the replay his eyes were clearly looking straight at the players head. He was never going for the ball. It was stupid. No point in appealing. He is missing a week through injury why take the risk of 2.

yeah agreed, not fussed too much about Kosi's although it was line ball although it was soft

st.byron · Post: # 779081Post **st.byron** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:02pm

I distinctly remember the commentators on ABC radio looking at a replay of Zac's hit on Symes at the time. They ALL said nothing wrong with it, perfectly legitimate bump. Unbelievable.

Eastern · Post: # 779084Post **Eastern** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:04pm

The Fireman wrote:Kosi....Gorn.
Zac...must appeal.

OMG Firey. Gerard Healey said exactly that on 3AW about 1 hour ago !!

plugger66 · Post: # 779087Post **plugger66** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:05pm

st.byron wrote:I distinctly remember the commentators on ABC radio looking at a replay of Zac's hit on Symes at the time. They ALL said nothing wrong with it, perfectly legitimate bump. Unbelievable.

Looked ok and didnt look head high. Not sure if was charged with head high but if he was that is a problem because accidents count when head high. If it isnt head high he has a good chance except hitting a guy on the mark probably isnt the greatest thing to do.

degruch · Post: # 779089Post **degruch** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:07pm

Eastern wrote:
The Fireman wrote:Kosi....Gorn.
Zac...must appeal.
OMG Firey. Gerard Healey said exactly that on 3AW about 1 hour ago !!

Could we have uncovered Firey's true identity???

Mr Magic · Post: # 779090Post **Mr Magic** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:07pm

plugger66 wrote:
st.byron wrote:I distinctly remember the commentators on ABC radio looking at a replay of Zac's hit on Symes at the time. They ALL said nothing wrong with it, perfectly legitimate bump. Unbelievable.
Looked ok and didnt look head high. Not sure if was charged with head high but if he was that is a problem because accidents count when head high. If it isnt head high he has a good chance except hitting a guy on the mark probably isnt the greatest thing to do.

Charged with
reckless, medium impact, body contact
- 2 weeks less 25% for early plea.

SainterK · Post: # 779092Post **SainterK** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:09pm

I hope this doesn't affect how Dawson plays the game, it has been refreshing to see him come in and impose himself....

SaintDebi · Post: # 779093Post **SaintDebi** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:09pm

st.byron wrote:I distinctly remember the commentators on ABC radio looking at a replay of Zac's hit on Symes at the time. They ALL said nothing wrong with it, perfectly legitimate bump. Unbelievable.

Still have to watch the tape back. Interesting how different things can look through the lens of a camera compared to how it looks live at the time. I'm interested to see if it looks as bad as I thought it did at the time.

plugger66 · Post: # 779094Post **plugger66** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:09pm

Mr Magic wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
st.byron wrote:I distinctly remember the commentators on ABC radio looking at a replay of Zac's hit on Symes at the time. They ALL said nothing wrong with it, perfectly legitimate bump. Unbelievable.
Looked ok and didnt look head high. Not sure if was charged with head high but if he was that is a problem because accidents count when head high. If it isnt head high he has a good chance except hitting a guy on the mark probably isnt the greatest thing to do.
Charged with
reckless, medium impact, body contact
- 2 weeks less 25% for early plea.

Well he is chance then except for the part of hitting a guy on a mark. I think they will appeal unless they were going to rest a backman anyway this week. Its working out ok in the last couple of weeks. Given 4 players a week off with little or no injuries.

InkerSaint · Post: # 779096Post **InkerSaint** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:12pm

I suspect it's being misreported.

Kosi has copped 125 points. Don't points get halved with a guilty plea? So 54 carryover points plus 62.5 = 116.5, or plus 125 = 179. 1 week either way by my math, not 2.

Grimfang · Post: # 779098Post **Grimfang** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:14pm

terry smith rules wrote:I just went and rewatched the Dawson bump a couple of times.

I am not sure that it is a week but it is not good. The Adelaide player is standing the mark. You can't allow hits on players like that who are just standing the mark.

It brings up all that discussion on players anticipating a hit. I think if you are just standing the mark you should not have to anticipate a hit.

Different kettle of fish if it is a shepherd, but this one is not.

You missed where the umpire called play-on then. He was no longer standing the mark and was a perfectly legitimate target to be shepherded.

claystreet · Post: # 779107Post **claystreet** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:31pm

I have watched the hit a couple of times just now and the ump had called play on, i cant see what the fuss is about, even the ump at the time let it go.

The Fireman · Mon 20 Jul 2009 8:57pm

degruch wrote:
Eastern wrote:
The Fireman wrote:Kosi....Gorn.
Zac...must appeal.
OMG Firey. Gerard Healey said exactly that on 3AW about 1 hour ago !!
Could we have uncovered Firey's true identity???

I still have most of my hair ...so no.. mind you I wouldn't mind doing a bit of cas work on the radio.

and no Eastern, I wasn't listening to 3AW.

wallbanger · Post: # 779123Post **wallbanger** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 9:05pm

Zac's is absolutely ridiculous - surely the club must fight that. It was play on and he hit the guy within a few metres of the ball, legitimately. Has to get off on review.

As for Kosi, a stupid act of frustration that has cost the team, especially as it possibly free's up Lake to move on to Roo - not that I think he can stop him (or even keep up for that matter) but he will be a harder opponent than that loser Hargreaves.

Gotta wonder about Kosi sometimes. Whilst treading carefully in saying this, is he one of the few players on the list who's season this year hasn't seen him improve on his career so far?? Yes, the he pulls down some awesome marks on his day, and the team structure is so much better with him there beacuse he takes one of the best defenders...but I just feel that the difference between his best and his worst is such a Grand Canyon, and there aren't to many in the team like that at the moment. Consistency has to be the key with Kos - on down days he needs to work through, even just doing a few of the simpler things like shepherds and tackles if he is not on his game. Seems that when he is off, his impact is almost negligible.

And he is prone to the odd frustrating act like on Sunday...which even he would be feeling sheepish about today I reckon. Not overly malicious or anything like that, but just silly and unnecessary.

Dan Warna · Post: # 779129Post **Dan Warna** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 9:08pm

should just belt someone in the face, you only get two weeks for that...no wait thats just barry hall + a track record

thejiggingsaint · Mon 20 Jul 2009 9:09pm

I was sitting right in front of the incident and it appeared to be a good old bump....the Crows player was out the game however!

degruch · Post: # 779131Post **degruch** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 9:09pm

Dan Warna wrote:should just belt someone in the face, you only get two weeks for that...no wait thats just barry hall + a track record

A headbutt is a better option apparently.

aussierules0k · Mon 20 Jul 2009 9:14pm

SainterX · Post: # 779136Post **SainterX** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 9:16pm

Steven Baker many weeks.
Zac Dawson 1 week
Trent West nothing.

Priceless.

joffaboy · Post: # 779138Post **joffaboy** » Mon 20 Jul 2009 9:18pm

Kosi - take the week and rest your hand.

Zac - appeal and get off.

On the plus side isn't it great to be so pissed off that Zac Dawson is to miss matches?

At the beginning of the year we would have been begging for that to happen