Ling - How many weeks?

White Winmar · Mon 22 Jun 2009 3:06pm

Sorry Ace should've read your earlier post a bit more closely. In view of that clean record, the best we can hope for is he gets some carryover points that may earn him a suspension around September, if he stuffs up again. I still stand by my octopus comment. With the greatest of respect, and I know the guy can't help it, but he is a seriously frightening sight when he gets enraged and changes colour!

plugger66 · Post: # 761764Post **plugger66** » Mon 22 Jun 2009 3:07pm

Mr Magic wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Red wrote:It was a love tap. Won't have anything to answer.
Hope he gets something or half the people on here will go for AFL corruption, conspiracy theories or cheating. None of which is true but logic doesnt worry some people. Or the old chestnut, the AFL hate the Saints.
How would you rate the 'love tap' in relation to others?
Personally I think that it was a little harder than the one Gehrig gave Cloke but not quite as hard as the one Hall gave Goose.

What perplexes me is that Gehrig got 2 weeks for his 'love tap' and Hall got none?
Hence the reason for my original question - how many for Ling?

I know the issue might be clouded because Suban is a 'giant wuss' like Goose for going down after being hit with the 'love tap'.

Afterall, nobody playing AFL should be hurt/inconveniencd by a 'love tap' to the body, should they?

Doesnt matter how they compare to each other as the AFL admitted the Gehrig one was wrong by changing the rule that there must be some force. The Hall one would get the same today as it got then as they got rid of the in play and behind play points. Dont get what you are on about with the hits to the stomach thing as it either hurts or doesnt. Both Goose and Suban must have been hurt. Just one final thing every I cannot remember how G got 2 weeks. Did he get 2 which would have been one but he challenged and lost or did he get a straight 2.

As for your question on what will Ling get well it depends on if he has any points or a good record but I would think it only deserves one week reduced to a reprimand at the most.

Mr Magic · Post: # 761776Post **Mr Magic** » Mon 22 Jun 2009 3:34pm

plugger66 wrote:
Mr Magic wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Red wrote:It was a love tap. Won't have anything to answer.
Hope he gets something or half the people on here will go for AFL corruption, conspiracy theories or cheating. None of which is true but logic doesnt worry some people. Or the old chestnut, the AFL hate the Saints.
How would you rate the 'love tap' in relation to others?
Personally I think that it was a little harder than the one Gehrig gave Cloke but not quite as hard as the one Hall gave Goose.

What perplexes me is that Gehrig got 2 weeks for his 'love tap' and Hall got none?
Hence the reason for my original question - how many for Ling?

I know the issue might be clouded because Suban is a 'giant wuss' like Goose for going down after being hit with the 'love tap'.

Afterall, nobody playing AFL should be hurt/inconveniencd by a 'love tap' to the body, should they?
Doesnt matter how they compare to each other as the AFL admitted the Gehrig one was wrong by changing the rule that there must be some force. The Hall one would get the same today as it got then as they got rid of the in play and behind play points. Dont get what you are on about with the hits to the stomach thing as it either hurts or doesnt. Both Goose and Suban must have been hurt. Just one final thing every I cannot remember how G got 2 weeks. Did he get 2 which would have been one but he challenged and lost or did he get a straight 2.

As for your question on what will Ling get well it depends on if he has any points or a good record but I would think it only deserves one week reduced to a reprimand at the most.

I'm pretty sure Gehrig was given a straight 2.

The point I was alluding to re whether Suban or Goose were hurt or not was the characterization of the 'punch' as a 'love tap' and the connotation the use of that term (soft, no power etc) gives.

Why not call it what it was?
A punch that was powerful enough to drop Suban to the ground, where he remained for some time.

saintbrat · Post: # 761822Post **saintbrat** » Mon 22 Jun 2009 4:39pm

Ling- charged- good record of 5 years.
73 points after deductions.

VietNam_Saint · Mon 22 Jun 2009 5:08pm

Ah yes ,, Tummy taps ,,,

BBBBH on Goose ,, initially got a week , should have missed the Granny , but pleaded and played, fair dinkum , can you imagine Hall pleading anything !!

Should have been our GF.

Joey · Post: # 761840Post **Joey** » Mon 22 Jun 2009 5:22pm

Just posted on Sen website

"Geelong's Cameron Ling has been charged with a Level Two striking offence against Fremantle's Nick Suban, and he too can accept a reprimand with an early plea."

VietNam_Saint · Mon 22 Jun 2009 5:55pm

Just what Saintbrat said.

you gotta be quicker than that mate

The Fireman · Mon 22 Jun 2009 6:13pm

Someone painted him..

plugger66 · Post: # 761876Post **plugger66** » Mon 22 Jun 2009 6:31pm

VietNam_Saint wrote:Ah yes ,, Tummy taps ,,,

BBBBH on Goose ,, initially got a week , should have missed the Granny , but pleaded and played, fair dinkum , can you imagine Hall pleading anything !!

Should have been our GF.

How is that. If Hall was given a week I dont think we get to play instead of the Swans.

Saint Bev · Post: # 762241Post **Saint Bev** » Tue 23 Jun 2009 1:42pm

So not even a mention, typical, should have know nothing would happen as someone predicted.

Thinline · Post: # 762278Post **Thinline** » Tue 23 Jun 2009 2:55pm

I know it's all past history and everything but I simply still cannot comprehend how Barry Hall got to play the following week. The best vision EVER of a strike, and still ... Baker vs Freo, no vision, no evidence, same penalty. And dare I say it, King gets six weeks for a bump when he could surely not have foreseen the consequences and Hall gets seven for completely and utterly deliberately smashing in someone's head. I could go on: Gardiner elbow to the head, ahem, glad as I was..., um 1 week?

Nothing new in what I say. I realise that. And like I said, past history. Nor am I suggesting bias because that's just childish.

But it simply beggars belief that supposedly intelligent and apparently capable human beings simply can't get a football judicial system to work how it should.

I mean how hard can it really be?

plugger66 · Post: # 762320Post **plugger66** » Tue 23 Jun 2009 4:52pm

Saint Bev wrote:So not even a mention, typical, should have know nothing would happen as someone predicted.

Who didnt get a mention?

matrix · Post: # 762611Post **matrix** » Wed 24 Jun 2009 2:29pm

what gets me is the inconsistency

i mean look at the gards and king incident for starters.

one week its boohoo stop ya crying it was a tap
next week its YOU BASTARD cop 3 weeks.
i mean wtf is up with the tribunal
its a bigger joke than the rushed behind ruling and has a grey area bigger than the MCG playing surface.