MRP: Kosi 1 week, Fiora Reprimand

Otiman · Post: # 607273Post **Otiman** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 4:33pm

Source: SEN news.

No reduction for early plea.

saintsRrising · Mon 21 Jul 2008 4:38pm

RedWhiteBlack has posted all the details in the oroginal string if you want the full wording.

http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... 8&start=25

saintsrus · Post: # 607284Post **saintsrus** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 4:42pm

Take it, very lean in my opinion, didnt look too good even if the jumper was between his fist and the face.

RedWhiteBlack · Mon 21 Jul 2008 4:43pm

saintsrus wrote:Take it, very lean in my opinion, didnt look too good even if the jumper was between his fit and the face.

Sounds like a good week to bring Gardi back in to face his old mob

mick13 · Post: # 607293Post **mick13** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 4:54pm

Goddamit, cant even jumper punch someone in this game anymore... what next, no bumps? no tackles? no dont argues? if you push a player just slightly you get red carded? Sin bin? offside?

lol...getting a little carried away there.

Ah well, looks like we'll only win by 10 goals this week then.

Sainter_Dad · Mon 21 Jul 2008 5:00pm

Did the MRP take into account that Osbourne followed the play (was not involved) and shoved Kosi into the interchange area after the ball was out. It was probably unexpected by Kosi. Again the retaliator gets done for reacting.

This kind of dog act is becoming more prevalent. It will result in someone being injured as they get pushed into the fence after a hard chase.

Saints in 20?? · Mon 21 Jul 2008 5:02pm

Uh ..he did punch him in the face hard.
I know the s*** we have copped at the tribunal, but this 1 seems fair. Would be fun tho if they were more consistent with the players that belt St.Kilda players.

GrumpyOne · Post: # 607299Post **GrumpyOne** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 5:04pm

Told you.

The Grumpy One KNOWS Football.

Sainter_Dad · Mon 21 Jul 2008 5:10pm

I loved the punch - reckon it was worth the week - but the decision to suspend is weak - and Osbourne will still run round next week sniping players without having he guts to get involved.

Persuader · Post: # 607327Post **Persuader** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:00pm

He is a stinking little sniper...notice Fiora's hit was against him too.
Hope someone from Geelong wipes him out.

Selhurst Saint · Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:02pm

Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??

Mr Magic · Post: # 607329Post **Mr Magic** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:06pm

Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??

The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.

That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!

That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.

the other was .....?

Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.

perfectionist · Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:15pm

Correct - He gets two weeks for doing what fifty other players have done this year and in previous years and received no penalty.

On a completely unrelated matter, the Saints are threatening Sydney for fourth spot - can't have that!

Also, as Kosi was coming from the ground Osborne charged him. Umpires everywhere and not one saw it.

The MRP commented on the head whack to Ball and excused it by saying he was going for the ball. Bull. But even if that was true, why was there no 50 metre penalty?

chook23 · Post: # 607340Post **chook23** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:18pm

Mr Magic wrote:
Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.

That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!

That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.

the other was .....?

Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.

had a loading added of 10%(suspended last 3 years) of initial finding......

but what hurt him suspended in last 12 months as per AFL definition...
was suspended in round 16 last year

there fore if had been one round later this year or his suspension had been one round ealier last year he would have NOT HAD ADDED

68.75 they would have lapsed

just our luck

but it was undiciplined

Mr Magic · Post: # 607347Post **Mr Magic** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:38pm

So the AFL definitiion of 12 months is obviously 12 months plus a round?

I mean a season is 22 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup) yet the AFL version of a footy year is 23 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup)?

It must be if they are counting 'penalty points' from Round 16 as part of a penalty incurred in Round 16 of the following season.

bigcarl · Post: # 607353Post **bigcarl** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:43pm

RedWhiteBlack wrote:
saintsrus wrote:Take it, very lean in my opinion, didnt look too good even if the jumper was between his fit and the face.
Sounds like a good week to bring Gardi back in to face his old mob

gardi in to play kosi's role - ruck/forward. bj to ff.

chook23 · Post: # 607355Post **chook23** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:46pm

Mr Magic wrote:So the AFL definitiion of 12 months is obviously 12 months plus a round?

I mean a season is 22 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup) yet the AFL version of a footy year is 23 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup)?

It must be if they are counting 'penalty points' from Round 16 as part of a penalty incurred in Round 16 of the following season.

The definition is

this offence Round 16 2008.....
any points carrying over from Round 16 2007 on count

not 12 months by date

22 rounds following the offence round of round 16, 2007

started 17

meaning finishing round 16 this year

Mr Magic · Post: # 607361Post **Mr Magic** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:50pm

I've just seen the vision of Kosi's 'hit' on CH10 News and I am flabbergasted at this.

How can this be worth 1 week?

I've also just watched the highlight package APU put up on YouTube and the 'crunch' Croad gave Roo (resulted in his third goal for the 3rd qtr) was absolutely disgusting.

He deliberately charged at him and jumped into his unprotected ribs with his knee.
What is the definition of 'unduly rough play'?

IMHO how Kosi can cop a week for what he did and yet no mention is made of Croad is simply mind-boggling?

saintsrus · Post: # 607398Post **saintsrus** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 7:26pm

bigcarl wrote: bj to ff.

Lucky ff

plugger66 · Post: # 607401Post **plugger66** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 7:29pm

Mr Magic wrote:
Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.

That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!

That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.

the other was .....?

Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.

You are consistant. Even have a whinge about the commentators today.

Mr Magic · Post: # 607409Post **Mr Magic** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 7:35pm

plugger66 wrote:
Mr Magic wrote:
Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.

That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!

That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.

the other was .....?

Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.
You are consistant. Even have a whinge about the commentators today.

See Pugger, you thought your position as worst poster had been usurped.
Not a chance.

Can you please enlighten us all on the official AFL version of the Kosi report and their 23 Round/12 month definition of a year?

plugger66 · Post: # 607414Post **plugger66** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 7:41pm

Mr Magic wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Mr Magic wrote:
Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.

That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!

That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.

the other was .....?

Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.
You are consistant. Even have a whinge about the commentators today.
See Pugger, you thought your position as worst poster had been usurped.
Not a chance.

Can you please enlighten us all on the official AFL version of the Kosi report and their 23 Round/12 month definition of a year?

Wouldnt have a clue but if it wrong then the Saints will challenge. Worst poster pot kettle black. Look at a few of yours today. Its either we are getting picked on without using those words or continuing the RL v GT threads with Rogerfox.

Kosi did it and yes there wasnt alot any it but the points say he gets what he gets. Not sure the match review panel compare every decision to Hall or Bakes but maybe you should suggest that to them.

Mr Magic · Post: # 607439Post **Mr Magic** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 8:09pm

plugger66 wrote:[
Wouldnt have a clue but if it wrong then the Saints will challenge. Worst poster pot kettle black. Look at a few of yours today. Its either we are getting picked on without using those words or continuing the RL v GT threads with Rogerfox.

Kosi did it and yes there wasnt alot any it but the points say he gets what he gets. Not sure the match review panel compare every decision to Hall or Bakes but maybe you should suggest that to them.

Sheesh you're hard to please Plugger66.

Here I am being nice to you and yet you come back with your typical sarcastic bs.

Do you recognize this post of yours from earlier today?

plugger66 wrote: I may have had the worst posts on here but congratulations you are now the clear leader.

If not I'll remind you - it was you to Top4King in a thread on the Opposition Forum.

Now, to the gist of your accusations.

I don't believe i've actually responded to rodgerfox today, as you alleged. I stopped responding to him last night.
Please feel free to post where I am wrong/mistaken on tis. But I know you won't because you never do when challenged to do so.

On the other hand, since you are an unofficial AFL spokesperson and if a year can be 23 rounds (as they apparently define it) then I suppose today could also include last night?

Raven · Post: # 607448Post **Raven** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 8:16pm

Anyone know if the hit is on Youtube or somewhere?

plugger66 · Post: # 607457Post **plugger66** » Mon 21 Jul 2008 8:20pm

Mr Magic wrote:
plugger66 wrote:[
Wouldnt have a clue but if it wrong then the Saints will challenge. Worst poster pot kettle black. Look at a few of yours today. Its either we are getting picked on without using those words or continuing the RL v GT threads with Rogerfox.

Kosi did it and yes there wasnt alot any it but the points say he gets what he gets. Not sure the match review panel compare every decision to Hall or Bakes but maybe you should suggest that to them.

Sheesh you're hard to please Plugger66.

Here I am being nice to you and yet you come back with your typical sarcastic bs.

Do you recognize this post of yours from earlier today?

plugger66 wrote: I may have had the worst posts on here but congratulations you are now the clear leader.
If not I'll remind you - it was you to Top4King in a thread on the Opposition Forum.

Now, to the gist of your accusations.

I don't believe i've actually responded to rodgerfox today, as you alleged. I stopped responding to him last night.
Please feel free to post where I am wrong/mistaken on tis. But I know you won't because you never do when challenged to do so.

On the other hand, since you are an unofficial AFL spokesperson and if a year can be 23 rounds (as they apparently define it) then I suppose today could also include last night?

Firstly it didnt sound like you were being nice to me. Second I said I had the woest post on here not I am the worst poster. I have already said I wouldnt have a clue on the other question and if it is wrong the Saints will challenge. How many times can I answer that. And lastly sorry I got that wrong should have said 2 days of either posting to Roger about RL and Gt or we are getting picked on posts. Hope that answers your questions.