I attempted to join in, but my repeated questions about Kosi being knocked out by a 'fair bump' and being roundly ridiculed for his 'lack of awareness' - how is this different were ignored and unpublished to the live feed (and yes, I realise they have changed the rules slightly since then), but my references to the Ben Cousins hit in the first game of the season were also unpublished and ignored.
full transcript until I got too annoyed to continue following it:
p.s. lets play the game of which regular poster am I related to on this forum?12:08
hello peole
remember, no language
12:08
[Comment From bearded clams]
saints have been the softest team for 100 years! not unsocial just dumb and behind the play acts are costing
12:08
[Comment From bearded clams]
was king under instruction?
12:09
well, there was that assertion that Power, being a run-with player, might've come in for some pre-match discussion. In essense, if anyone sees him, lay a bump or or step in his way. That's quite common...
12:09
[Comment From Rooey]
Hi Robbo, seriously this has been turned into a big deal over nothing. If King weighed 70 and ran into Power in the same incident, nothing would of amounted because Power wouldn't have got injured. The Saints have always got a raw deal at the tribunal. Baker got a lengthy penalty for an incident that didnt even have video evidence. Gardiner was stupid and that was fair enough. King although was off the ball 6 weeks is a bit too harsh. People seem to forget football is a contact sport you get injured playing contact sport. If you dont like the contact dont play it and dont watch it. No one likes seeing people get injured but it happens!
12:12
Don't bring in ifs, we can only deal with the facts.
It is a contact sport, but surely we are at a stage of the game's evolvement that a player doesn't have to be wary of being taken out behind play... those days are gone. Keep the contact, we all agree, but no cheap shots.
That said, if King appeals and loses, six weeks is way over the odds. I thought he would've got two, but I believed he should have got four.
12:12
[Comment From mr plow]
half the reason they are on top is because of this new found attitude.its only last year everyone was calling hawthorn unsociable and guess what? premiership...if more teams started playing like this they could be up there too,king was stiff for what happened,and i think they got it right with gardiner,he deserved 1 and only 1 week,and they got it right with hall,he did nothing
12:16
Exactly, Plowman. The great sides need to have an edge about them and perhaps the Saints needed a lift in that area. In fact, Ross Lyon might be disappointed, but not devastated by the events of the past two weeks. His two big men throwing their elbows and bodies around might make opposition players think more. In the end, though, most if not all AFL players are tough _ they have to be to play the game _ and finals toughness is not about taking people out, it's about controlled toughness. Head over the ball, etc etc
12:16
[Comment From barry]
not unsocail at all
12:16
[Comment From surly]
6/4 weeks is a shocking decision. Although King was intentionally trying to bump he wasn't intentionally trying to clash heads. The points activation system is flawed.
12:17
Surly, i thought the system was flawed in penalising MG for one week when he should have got three. And If King gets six, I think it's flawed, too. Four is the right whack
12:17
[Comment From Lorak]
Saints getting a raw deal? Are you kidding me? Top of the ladder and 183.2% and you are worried that they are getting a raw deal? Ask Barry Hall and the Swans about a raw deal. Lost the game on the weekend to some pretty soft free kicks not just including the 3 free 50s. Now that is a raw deal!
12:17
[Comment From chris]
before this year, the saints have had a roug deal eg steven baker 7 weeks. do you agree?
12:19
Actually I don't. Baker got sveen (which included carry over points) for an incident instigated by him and which left Farmer concussed. I can't think of too many other incidents at the moment where they have ben harshly done by
12:19
[Comment From Benny]
Interesting question. What if we asked: are St Kilda emulating the hard 'unsocial' football that brought Geelong and Hawthorn in past two years? Perhaps St Kilda are not bright enough to disguise it.
12:20
Is that you Ben Cousins?
Anyway, we could ask that. Toughness comes in many forms....
12:21
[Comment From BoB Barker]
2 suspensions in 12 weeks, and they are unsociable ?. Slow news day Robbo ?
12:23
Slow news day? Bob, thank God you don't work in the media. I reckon you would ignore the JFK shootings, calling it just another drive-by....
King and MG have crossed the line and it is legitimate to ask whether the Sainst want to increase/imporve their physicality. If they do, then MG and ASK is not the way to go about it... To be honest I would have thought the Sainsts have been playing a ruthless style of football already...
12:23
[Comment From Corey JM]
Hi Robbo, I don't think they are playing unsocial football, Gardiner is a drop kick who has always been undisciplined and maybe King wasn't thinking right. Wouldn't mind seeing some of Carlton's players showing a little grunt though!
12:25
I think Ross Lyon would've been somewhat understandable of what happened because ''things'' do happen on the field, that's the nature of the sport, but his players can't go knocking people out even if it is an accident... Do it in a final and it could cost the Saints the flag...
12:25
[Comment From brendan]
pretty peeved at both of them for jeopadising the professionalism of the club considering this is the closest ive seen the saints in 30yrs win a premership .. 33yr supporter
12:26
fair argument
12:26
[Comment From Rooey]
Just so you know King has accepted the 4 match ban!
12:27
pretty good decision I would have thought
12:27
[Comment From tomnz]
Saints supporter here, bad luck for King, he accepted 4 weeks, and we move on. It is better to shut our mouth now so that AFL will not hit us too hard toward the end of the season. Grant Thomas is not with us anymore, but it take time for AFL not to hate us. Just accept and move on.
12:27
[Comment From Ducky]
King deserves his punishment. the ball was 20 meters away. It's a bit of a dog act. Ryder however shouldn't be punished for his bump.
12:28
[Comment From andrew]
The best teams of the last few years have been the ones that have the ability to physically intimidate the opposition.Plus dont forget that Ross Lyon took his fair share of scalps when he was playing.He is no dill,he knows being physical is a huge part of the game.
12:33
Yep, RL would know that. It's a fine line between being aggressive and crossing the line and it's something RL would remind his players constantly. It would be difficult for the coach to control because on one hand he wants his players to have a killer attitude, but on the other hand not let them be killers
12:33
[Comment From Warren]
Do you think the tribunial got it right Mark???
12:33
Yes, I do
12:33
[Comment From Eric]
I agree with the suspension, this is the stuff that the AFL needs to stamp out
12:33
[Comment From Mike]
As hyped up as St.Kilda are, they are the Bulldogs of 2008. I dont see them going on to winning a premiership, but do they have the capabilities to provide consistency in the years to come with their depth and talent?
12:33
[Comment From peter]
saints aren't that tough or physical - just a couple of undisciplined acts. King's definitely not worth the 5 or 6 he's been offered - you'd have to strike someone hall style to get sort of penalty
12:34
what did Hall get.. eight/sveen.
If King got six, it would seem out of whack (pardon the pun). . That's why I settled on four...
12:34
[Comment From Pat]
Two suspensions in 11 rounds, you goose. Hardly indemic is it? Fair dinkum, Robbo, your year has been about as good as David Hale's. WAKE UP!
12:34
I could so with some plugs
12:35
[Comment From spider]
a raw deal
12:35
[Comment From George]
Undefeated after 10 rounds, does it matter? As long as they keep winning, this is not an issue. If they start to lose games then, yes, they should change but for now, keep it up. It's working wonders.
12:35
[Comment From mr plow]
let me guess robinson "punt rd again"?
12:35
what you talking about plow
12:35
[Comment From Persevering Saint]
hi Robbo - so, let's begin with whether you think the consequence of an incident should be a factor in a ruling from the Tribunal. In other words, if Power had got up or just been slightly dazed, would that lessen the crime?
12:36
yes, but the results of the crime has to be taken into acocunt. It does in every other crime committed, and what physical harm it had done to the person involved, so why not in football?
12:36
[Comment From hespey]
sounds like a case of tall poppy syndrome from you robbo. saints seem to cop raw deals from the review panel both ways. clarke (blake), kosi (gia) and maguire (hall) all were victims with no justice, and baker (farmer) king (power) and gehrig (cloke) have been pinged with unjustified suspension.
12:37
[Comment From Shezza]
Cant work out King's is worth 4, but Gardiner's was worth 1. Gardiner is very lucky to be playing this week.
12:38
Extrememly lucky... we are told from a very young age, like it is one the 10 coomandments in football, don't raise your elbow because you could hit someone in the temple and kill them. But of hysteria there, but the message was clear. No elbowibng. And the AFL system gave him one week. What a joke...
12:38
[Comment From SydneySainter]
After 11 rounds this season, the Saints have had a total of 2 suspensions! A bit premature to label them as a pack of thugs don't you think?
12:39
Didn't call them thugs.. said unsociable saints...
12:39
[Comment From chris kaleta]
Why wouldn't you take Kings word given that no other contradictory evidence is being presented eg by the so called victim.
12:39
Chris, have you eyes? Did you see the collision? It speaks volumes
12:39
[Comment From Guest]
It was a low act from King. He had Power lined up long before the contact was made and had plenty of time to change his mind given Power was no where near the play.
12:40
Woulnd't say "'long'' but King had opportunity to stop what he was doing...
12:40
[Comment From John]
You don't think in the scheme of things that 4 weeks is a bit harsh, especially as the video is unclear and the initial contact is not to the head?
12:40
No I don't. Four is the correct penalty
12:40
[Comment From Phil]
Do you think it's relevant whether it's in play or not? Maybe it should be the punishment matches the damage inflicted, regardless of anything else? Why should it be okay to injure another in any context?
12:43
Very relevant... In play, players can and do expect contact, and collisions often take place within five metres of the ball. It is expected. And being a contact sport, injuries are part of the landscape. Off the ball, however, lends itself to cheap shot terminology.
12:43
[Comment From Charlotte]
If King had hit heads with another person his size then he prob would not have had anything to answer for
12:43
[Comment From jontysc]
Hi Robbo; if you think the Saints play too hard how on earth can the blues take it up to them this week and not get reported also! Im a blues fan! cheers
12:44
The Blues, I believe, have to harden up as well. They'll need to be to beat St Kilda..
12:44
[Comment From hespey]
if power bumped king with the same force and intent, the same mens rea and actus reus, would power have got 6 weeks? NO! why is king being burned becasue he is big and powr is small??
12:45
He is being burned because he made contact and KO'd a player. If it is OK to do that, the game is stuffed. PLayers will be taking out other players all over the ground..
12:45
[Comment From Ducky]
King deserved his punishment. Dog act 20 meters off the ball.
12:45
[Comment From Amy]
Can the saints get credit where credit is due? They have won 11 in a row and everyone has to find a negative about them. Maybe people should just admit they are a good team and stop bagging them.
12:45
[Comment From Persevering Saint]
Do you think that injury incurred should be included in the punishment deciding process?
12:45
Yes.. and it is...
12:45
[Comment From mr plow]
maybe thats why they are up the top,remember hawthorn were bashed in the media for this exact same thing and they went on to win a flag,i like the new saints,king was shafted,gardiner deserved 1 and only 1.
12:45
[Comment From Raelene]
Note who King roughed up probably the smallest, youngerest person out there no hero in my mind just an idiot, More thought for himself than his team.
12:46
I liked Drew petrie's reaction.. he saw it and remonstrated.. Good leadership from petrie
12:46
[Comment From Pete]
6 weeks is perhaps a bit much, 4 down to 3 makes more sense. Are the AFL making a statement here?Also Robbo, what do you think of Ryder even being cited by the match review panel? I thought it to be a legal bump in a contested situation
12:47
One week. He ran in to shephered/bump and took PD high. PD had to go off the ground.. It's minor, but the new charging/bumping rules say don't hit anyone in the head.
12:47
[Comment From Marcus1232]
I think a suspension as justified but 4 weeks is a bit rough i would of thought 2 weeks would be sufficient
12:47
[Comment From Corey JM]
Football is a contact sport but weak behind the plays acts are not within the spirit of the game. King is a coward
12:47
[Comment From dale]
this was similar to clokes hit on cousins in round 1, was the difference then Robbo, that cousins got up?
12:48
It helps... at least Ben was closer to the ball and by memory i don't think he got hit in the head
12:48
[Comment From jimus]
St kilda does play a high pressure tackling game could just be a heat of the moment thing?
12:49
Could be. PLayers are asked to be aggressive and they make errors in assessing how aggressive they want to be. I don't think King meant to KO Power, but I still think he tried to hurt him in some way, ie slow him down.. But he stuffed up and KO'd him. He has to pay the price..
12:49
[Comment From Ducky]
Contact is expected when the ball is in the vicinity. King has lined up Power while the bloke was unaware. We've seen it a few times this year and it really should not be on.
12:50
[Comment From Amy]
Can we compare the Paddy Ryder incident to the King incident? Very similar yet he gets 2 weeks... Ryders was negligent yet Kings was intentional. Make sense?
12:50
Closer to the contest was PR... both were high, one a KO...
12:50
[Comment From Saint Al]
I read in the press that the contact with King and Power was accidental - re a clash of heads, no explanation of the penalty has been reported so the whole penalty thing appears to suggest that King was in error? Subjective guilty judgment or justice? From what one reads hard to tell and then there is bias - re the beat up that the Saints are unsocial? I remember Harry Taylor of Geelong thunping into Xav Clarke I think it was last year and nothing eventuated, is it because Geelong and Collingwood - that other 'can do no wrong' club are protected species? Tall Poppy stuff, Saints are on top so lets get them down? A fair go would be a better outcome. Gardiner - was undisciplined - the video looked worse than the outcome though.
12:51
beat up? what a joke you are.... every time the medai writes something about a particualr player, then the supporters of that club calls it a beat up. Ask Sam Power if it is a beat up...
12:51
[Comment From X]
2 words: Xavier Clarke
12:51
[Comment From jimus]
agree with Rooey
12:51
[Comment From Warren]
Surley stkilda is getting a rough deal ?? barry hall punched a guy square on the jaw and got nothing?? Ill be honest mark i think king should have got a couple and im a saints supporter!! Is this saints team any different from hawthorn last year i think its been proven that u need to be hard to win the flag. Hats off to rossy lyon to i love the discipline he has bought this year.
12:53
Yep, congrats to Ross, and I wouldn't say Barry Hall got nothing.... But, no, I don't think Saints getting rough deal.
12:53
[Comment From The Punter]
Statistically, if you want to see who is going to win the premiership every year, look at which club 1. gives away the most free kicks, and 2. which club gets suspended the most. Essendon set the benchmark in 2000, and Hawthorn replicated it last year.
12:55
Go back through history, Punter, and most of premiership teams were hard physical and thrived on intimidation. Saints have improved in that area with their defensive actions and mindset, thier attack on the ball, etc, but overt aggression or assault is not the done thing
12:55
[Comment From consumer-114]
the saints are 11 zip, so who cares...give king a rest...freshen up
12:55
[Comment From ben]
two incidents and suddenly the saints are unsociable? What about the kangaroos tagging tactics on dal santo, montagna and goddard? What they did was unsociable, and illegal, but nothing happens there!
12:55
[Comment From Don from Donvale]
Rooey - Repeat offender pay the price - don't forget that when you have carry over points it makes future suspensions longer - King had 70 points from earlier in the year so he was always going to get an extra week. Same for Baker bad record made his suspension 7 weeks as well as the incident itself.
12:55
[Comment From Mick]
Robbo if Hawthorn win the flag this year, will they be considered a better team than Geelong?
12:56
Not today, Mick. Today is St Kilda Day
12:56
[Comment From Dave]
Bravo on stirring up the hysteria Robbo, just a sterling job
12:57
stirring up? Dave, come off it. Twice in two weeks the Saints big men go the man. The Saints _ and everyone who follows football _ should know that to win the flag you have to be aggressive. Sorry, Dave, we'll not pass comment on anythign else that happens this year for fear of being hysterical..
12:57
[Comment From Eric]
King got what he deserved in the same lines as Barry Hall last year, he did his behind play which is more cowardly
12:58
[Comment From raw deal]
four weeks for that, its a joke!!!
12:58
[Comment From Trent]
Rooey you are an idiot, King did not weigh 70kgs his a huge man and like the coward he his he smashed into Power off the ball when he didn't even see him coming. Yeh great work your really tough you big man. He deserves all he got.
12:58
[Comment From John]
You don't think that it was harsh penalty overall given that the initial contact was not to the head. (St.K have accepted the 4 weeks by the way). This is what is wrong with the points system - too inflexible but somehow Cam Mooney gets away with something every second week.
12:59
No I don't think it was harsh. It was intentional contact and the bloke was KO'd behind play... where don't you see the problem here?
12:59
[Comment From Trent]
On another note i don't think Paddy Ryder deserved to be suspended for his bump on Dangerfield as that was very close to the play and didn't look head high.
12:59
[Comment From Keysee]
Unfortunately King hurt Power which resulted in the penalty, I thought Gardiners gutless hit to the head was worse, but the player wasnt hurt. Would love some more hard mongrel from the Tiges.
12:59
[Comment From Don from Donvale]
There is unsocial and there is violent. Gardiner's was not unsocial - that was stupid and violent. he was lucky to cop only 1 week. King there's no point saying if he was only 70kg cos he's not! You take someone out and you risk a long time away yourself. There was nothing about treading a fine line in the past 2 weeks forthe Saints ruckmen. They deserve what they get.
1:00
MG was extremely lucky....Very disappointed in that act. Players can shepherd without fearing an elbow to the head. The AFL tribunal system let down the game by giving him one week.
1:01
[Comment From Edith]
Just heard on the news that King has accepted the 4 week ban, If it was an accidential hit like he first claimed then he would have taken his chances at the Tribunal.
1:01
[Comment From Hawkboy23]
I think 'unsociable' is one thing missing from hawthorns game this year. Whilst I'm glad that less people are being suspended, some players attack on the ball and hunger is down on last year. That is one area the saints have improved on, but its going to cost them.
1:01
[Comment From craigy]
maybe a few other teams should take a rough approach to the saints we all know that reiwolt a bit of cry baby?
1:01
[Comment From CJ]
I hope Saints don't contest this, just cop it. Yes it's a contact sport, but this is not worth a discussion topic Robbo! He went to lay a bump off the ball and was clumsy and clashed heads and knocked him out. Big deal, because he 'chose' to make contact, he has a duty of care to the player to hit him fairly. This didn't happen so he's got 6 weeks. No conspiracy, no big issue, it's just footy - you really think this is a big deal?? I'd rather him be suspended than injured.
1:04
CJ, the incidenjt himself has been discussed. Whether the Saints are upping the ante when it comes to playing unsociable footballis the topic. Toughness is a self-prophetic thing. If RL keeps demanding they play tough and the media, the fans keep acknowledging they are tough, then the players believe they are tough. It's only a minor few _ MG and SK _ who think they'll take that toughness to darker depths... RL can't be angry with them because he wants them to be big and angry and hurt opponents, but at the same time he has tro control it...
1:05
[Comment From Romper]
cleaning up someone 50m off the ball isnt unsociable, its a cheap shot and pretty gutless. I thought a lot more of King.
1:05
[Comment From brendan]
gardiners to light , kings to heavy , 2 weeks each would have done .....
1:05
[Comment From tommowhit]
isn't the reason that King got suspended but Cloke didn't for his hit on Cousins in round one because King hit power in the head while Cloke collected with the body?
1:05
[Comment From Phil]
4/2 weeks would have been a much fairer offer
1:05
[Comment From Tim]
Is King appealing the sentence?
1:05
No, he is not.
1:05
[Comment From Jimmy]
I dont see many geelong players going up to the tribunal for "unsocial" behaviour
1:05
Um, Cam Mooney???
1:05
[Comment From bert72]
6 weeks for that. maybe they thought he was wearing a collingwood jumper. they seem to save that sort of penalty for anthony rocca
1:05
[Comment From Chris]
I see he's accepted the ban. I'd think he could've argue the high contact... it was a head clash and his elbow was tucked.
1:06
He could've, but I think the Saints would accept that it is an awkward situaion.
1:06
[Comment From Mick]
What is the point of having a live blog if your not going to answer any of my questions? Havent had a question answered for months. CRAP ROBBO
1:07
Mick, you would have to be the biggest whinger..
what is your question...
1:07
[Comment From Corey JM]
How can it be a clash of heads when both players are upright and one is a foot taller?
1:07
Ever thought about being a lawyer, JM?
1:07
[Comment From Warren]
The saints have always been seen as soft Mark. As an keen saints supporter i love the new direction Rossy Lyon has taken. Look at brisbanes triple premiership team the same tough midfielders and can do attitude. Of course i cant put the saints in the same leauge on achievments however the game plan seems similiar as we can se through the likes of leeny hayes!! he has definetley went to the next level along with montagna and dal. What do you think surely you have to have a bit of mongrel to win the silverwear?
1:08
You do need mongrel, absolutely. And it's why the Saints are 11-0....
1:08
[Comment From consumer-114]
king 6 for accidental head clash and barry hall 7 for a king hit, seems outta whack to me.
1:08
[Comment From mick]
definate problem with the tribunal syste. but i don't think saints are unsocial and i think its probally a fair punishment (4 weeks).
1:08
there you go Mick
1:08
[Comment From burt]
Hey lorak - didnt recall seeing King punch any opponents in the face?
1:09
[Comment From Persevering Saint]
I don't like the insinuation that King or Gardiner were "trying to take people out". I think King was shepherding, or at most being physically intimidating. The claim that he was trying to temporarily cripple somebody by rendering them unconscious seems a touch much, don't you think?
1:09
Disgaree. What was MG thinking, Saint?
1:09
[Comment From Homer]
Are the Saints becoming to ahead of themselves?
1:10
Don't think so. Couple of brain explosions i thnk
1:10
[Comment From David]
G'day Robbo. Do you believe the Blues have a chance of knocking off the Saints on Friday night? Surely the Saints have to lose sometime soon...
1:10
They do. Umm, don't think so,
1:10
[Comment From Guest]
Two players suspended in 11 weeks of the season. And they went through the first nine weeks without anyone getting suspended. Hardly unsocial. Another sensationalist Herald-Sun beatup.
1:11
don't be anonymous guest... put your name to your comment.
1:11
[Comment From ben]
The tribunal seems to pick certain incidents and penalise them harshly, whilst leaving other similar ones off more leniantly. I think the king decision was a bit harsh, but he probably deserved it for something so far off the ball. Do you think Mc Evoy can cover King for four weeks? Especially against the oppostion we have coming up?
1:11
Great opportunity for McEvoy, but I'm not yet convinced on him... We'll learn more over the next month
1:11
[Comment From bob]
i think that ryders bump was fair why has he beened given 1 match
1:12
hit in the head.. and if you go to bump an a player and that player is hit in the head, you will be penalised... I have no problem with that
1:12
[Comment From SydneySainter]
Would this bump off the ball even be a to point if Power had gotten up off the canvas played out the match?
1:13
No. But why does everyoe keep saying ...''but if we wasn't knocked out ....''' please, don't rewrite history. POWER WAS KNOCKED OUT
1:13
[Comment From raw deal]
would it be a different story if he was not KO'd
1:13
[Comment From Marco]
I thought Gardiners hit was alot worse than Kings, atleast he didn't raise an elbow. As for the saints being to unsocial, no way. I'm pretty sure those are the only players we've had out this year through suspension.
