Match review Panel RD 4- Joey CLEARED yeahhh

saintbrat · Post: # 727009Post **saintbrat** » Mon 20 Apr 2009 6:14pm

offered reprimand because of good record? 73 points

will taking repimand affect Brownlow eligibility?
NOT that I think the team are worried about that- having too many points hanging may be more of a worry with the intensity they are showing.

several umpire contact investigations... from various matches

edit : SEN checked with carry over -would be ineligible.

chook23 · Post: # 727010Post **chook23** » Mon 20 Apr 2009 6:21pm

Under the system..

carry over points a concern going forward

hope they don't bite later in season.

If he accepts penalty ineligible for brownlow.....but not the issue probably with Joey.

Could have polled a few though at this stage.

saintspremiers · Mon 20 Apr 2009 8:17pm

http://www.saints.com.au/news/newsartic ... fault.aspx

Matt Thomas from Port (never heard of him!) was cited for collecting an umpire.

Suspend the prick for a week!!

St Fidelius · Mon 20 Apr 2009 8:40pm

saintspremiers wrote:http://www.saints.com.au/news/newsartic ... fault.aspx

Matt Thomas from Port (never heard of him!) was cited for collecting an umpire.

Suspend the prick for a week!!

He has played just the two matches and in both of them...

4 kicks and 14 handballs for 18 possessions

last week he to 10 marks and the week against Melbourne he took 6 marks

Enrico_Misso · Mon 20 Apr 2009 8:47pm

What was the incident with Monty

saintbrat · Post: # 727077Post **saintbrat** » Mon 20 Apr 2009 8:56pm

was higlighted on a couple of football shows

Leigh Montagna, St Kilda, has been charged with a Level Two striking offence against Paul Hasleby, Fremantle, during the fourth quarter of the Round Four match between St Kilda and Fremantle, played at Docklands on Saturday April 18, 2009.

In summary, his existing five-year good record means he can accept a reprimand and 70.31 points towards his future record with an early plea.

The incident was assessed as reckless conduct (two points), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of four activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Two offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has an existing five-year good record, which reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 93.75 points towards his future record. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 70.31 points towards his future record.

he was jumping to spoil the ball and being late supposedly collected the freo player as he went past-

Sainter_Dad · Mon 20 Apr 2009 9:02pm

So if he challenges and loses but they still uphold the 125 points - does he still get the benefit of his 5 year good record thereby reducing the penalty to 93.75 and a reprimand/carry over points?

Don't see the reason not to challenge the findings - unlike the King incident where I reckon the MRP got it wrong.

I would take the chance because the difference between 93.75 and 70.31 carry over points - 23.44 points he can save by an early plea will not save him from any further weeks on the sideline if he gets cited.

saintspremiers · Tue 21 Apr 2009 11:02am

agree Sainter Dad.

What pisses me off about the media is lack of vision of these incidents.

They are too strung up about Wallet's coaching future and Eddie and the Umpires to bother about day to day stuff that has ramifications to other clubs.

Where is some YouTube footage of the incident??

falka · Post: # 727277Post **falka** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 11:21am

They showed it on that 5th quarter show on Sat night. It didn't look great, gets his right wack, can't challenge it, it was silly. Be glad he doesn't miss

howlinwolf · Post: # 727323Post **howlinwolf** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 1:06pm

Just heard on the news Monty is going to challenge tonight.
Let's hope he gets off.

Loyal · Post: # 727325Post **Loyal** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 1:10pm

here's confident.

matrix · Post: # 727360Post **matrix** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 1:43pm

he's crazy if he challenges...
it didnt look the greatest incident when i saw it behind the play.

why the hell would u challenge it ffs knowing the way the tribunal handles things??????????

Thinline · Post: # 727380Post **Thinline** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 1:59pm

matrixcutter wrote:he's crazy if he challenges...
it didnt look the greatest incident when i saw it behind the play.

why the hell would u challenge it ffs knowing the way the tribunal handles things??????????

Because it makes no difference as I understand it.

If he loses the challenge he gets 90 odd points as opposed 70 odd. Still plays on Friday either way and would still get suspended if he does something minor and stupid down the line ie having 10-ish or 30-ish point up your sleeve is neither here nor there.

Have I got that right?

matrix · Post: # 727412Post **matrix** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 2:19pm

Thinline wrote:
matrixcutter wrote:he's crazy if he challenges...
it didnt look the greatest incident when i saw it behind the play.

why the hell would u challenge it ffs knowing the way the tribunal handles things??????????
Because it makes no difference as I understand it.

If he loses the challenge he gets 90 odd points as opposed 70 odd. Still plays on Friday either way and would still get suspended if he does something minor and stupid down the line ie having 10-ish or 30-ish point up your sleeve is neither here nor there.

Have I got that right?

oh ok, thanks for that...might as well contest it and have less points hanging over ya head then..

god we have the must unco stupidest pathetic dumbass tribunal system in all of football codes

St Fidelius · Tue 21 Apr 2009 3:38pm

Montagna to fight charge at tribunal Tonight.....

http://www.saints.com.au/season2009/new ... fault.aspx

bigcarl · Post: # 727506Post **bigcarl** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 5:11pm

St Fidelius wrote:Montagna to fight charge at tribunal Tonight.....

http://www.saints.com.au/season2009/new ... fault.aspx

any chance they will have another look at it and say "that deserved a suspension". or doesn't it work like that?

S.A Saint · Post: # 727511Post **S.A Saint** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 5:23pm

they should have done this with kingy not joey...i thought kingies was nothing really...acceidental

Thinline · Post: # 727512Post **Thinline** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 5:23pm

Not sure. Fair question. If they can give Bakes a stint without evidence, then anything's possible I guess...

35...LEGEND · Tue 21 Apr 2009 8:13pm

St Fidelius wrote:Montagna to fight charge at tribunal Tonight.....

http://www.saints.com.au/season2009/new ... fault.aspx

BUMP

Any new's?...or too early yet?

Loyal · Post: # 727606Post **Loyal** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 8:21pm

anyone? SB any news yet?

35...LEGEND · Tue 21 Apr 2009 8:32pm

Loyal wrote:anyone? SB any news yet?

Thomas of the power gets a week for Ump Bump

Loyal · Post: # 727613Post **Loyal** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 8:37pm

35...LEGEND wrote:
Loyal wrote:anyone? SB any news yet?

Thomas of the power gets a week for Ump Bump

thank you .. now joey?

sarah 2 · Post: # 727618Post **sarah 2** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 8:50pm

just rad on the heraldsun web page that the case was thrown out and hes free to play this week.
www.heraldsun.com.au

claystreet · Post: # 727619Post **claystreet** » Tue 21 Apr 2009 8:52pm

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/ ... 42,00.html

Joey is free to play

doristhesaint · Tue 21 Apr 2009 8:53pm

It was thrown out he is good to take on them stains across the border