Selwood offered 3 weeks

[fingers]

Second week in a row the AFL have stuffed up. Thomas not getting off last week and Selwood getting 3 next week. Cant wait till a player finally gets off and it will be the currupt AFL again.

They are only doing it to throw us all off the scent

[saintbrat]

Vision although grainy in this report
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

[joffaboy]

Guerra never minded hitting high and late on numerous occasions, now tattles on Selwood.

Seems like tough guy Guerra can dish it out but cant take it

[saintspremiers]

IMO had someone like Baker or Hall king hit Goo it would've been sent to the tribunal.

But Selwood has no good or bad record, has no loading, so is clearly not a known thug, so gets the benefit of the Level 5 charge.

[plugger66]

IMO had someone like Baker or Hall king hit Goo it would've been sent to the tribunal.

But Selwood has no good or bad record, has no loading, so is clearly not a known thug, so gets the benefit of the Level 5 charge.

But he got the same as Baker.

[maverick]

IMO had someone like Baker or Hall king hit Goo it would've been sent to the tribunal.

But Selwood has no good or bad record, has no loading, so is clearly not a known thug, so gets the benefit of the Level 5 charge.

But he got the same as Baker.

Did he stop in front of Guerra?
What's that got to do with it?

[plugger66]

IMO had someone like Baker or Hall king hit Goo it would've been sent to the tribunal.

But Selwood has no good or bad record, has no loading, so is clearly not a known thug, so gets the benefit of the Level 5 charge.

But he got the same as Baker.

Did he stop in front of Guerra?
What's that got to do with it?

Well Baker didnt but I have no idea about Selwood. I was pointing out that Selwood didnt get off lightly or if he did then so did Baker.

[mr six o'clock]

Forget the punch in the head .FFS peake getting a fine for the umpire contact , My love of the game is waining when i see ridiculous things like that . Umpires who are becoming pouncy primadonnas with there exaggerated decisions , watch a game from 20 years ago , you barely notice the umps !!! If you watch peakes eyes he never takes it off the ball , the ump backs towards his foot like a mincing ballerina ( apologies to ballet lovers ! ) and poor peake cops a fine !!!

[mr six o'clock]

3 weeks for boxing someone's ears to point of causing deafness. Quite lenient when put into context.

Remember, Steven Baker was given 10 weeks for accidently running into Jeff Farmer.

They both got 4 weeks and it was no accident.

How do you know re Baker?

If you saw it, what did you see?

I've always wanted to know myself...

No I never saw it. Wish i had of. He actually told me one night.

And what did he tell you?

I think his exact words was 7 weeks seems about right but he as still pissed off with what the club told him to say. He thought he would get off. I never asked what he actually did.

I didn't think there was any doubt Bakes did something, deliberately, it was just the audacity of the tribunal to give him 7 weeks with no evidence to charge him with!

As i said he was pissed off with our defence.

Believe it or not but I actually saw the incident , baker was tagging farmer , freo got a turnover and farmer followed by baker ran into a vacant forward area to create a target , freo inturn gave it back to us ,
so farmer turned around , put his head down ( you know like sprinters do when they start a race ) baker who was behind farmer , was now ahead of him , deliberately veered into farmer path to block him , farmer didn't see this as his head was down and consquently ploughed straight into bakes back . there was a head clash and it was lights out farmer ( remember baker also went off the ground with a cut to the back of his head ! ) bakes tried to block him thats all , players lay blocks every week , he was shafted by the afl and a poor defence ,
Afl incosistencies remember when x clarke was blocked by a cat player with a hip and shoulder, clarke wasn't looking either yet no report or investigation by the afl ( clarke was never the same player after that !!! )

[plugger66]

3 weeks for boxing someone's ears to point of causing deafness. Quite lenient when put into context.

Remember, Steven Baker was given 10 weeks for accidently running into Jeff Farmer.

They both got 4 weeks and it was no accident.

How do you know re Baker?

If you saw it, what did you see?

I've always wanted to know myself...

No I never saw it. Wish i had of. He actually told me one night.

And what did he tell you?

I think his exact words was 7 weeks seems about right but he as still pissed off with what the club told him to say. He thought he would get off. I never asked what he actually did.

I didn't think there was any doubt Bakes did something, deliberately, it was just the audacity of the tribunal to give him 7 weeks with no evidence to charge him with!

As i said he was pissed off with our defence.

Believe it or not but I actually saw the incident , baker was tagging farmer , freo got a turnover and farmer followed by baker ran into a vacant forward area to create a target , freo inturn gave it back to us ,
so farmer turned around , put his head down ( you know like sprinters do when they start a race ) baker who was behind farmer , was now ahead of him , deliberately veered into farmer path to block him , farmer didn't see this as his head was down and consquently ploughed straight into bakes back . there was a head clash and it was lights out farmer ( remember baker also went off the ground with a cut to the back of his head ! ) bakes tried to block him thats all , players lay blocks every week , he was shafted by the afl and a poor defence ,
Afl incosistencies remember when x clarke was blocked by a cat player with a hip and shoulder, clarke wasn't looking either yet no report or investigation by the afl ( clarke was never the same player after that !!! )

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

[degruch]

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

...and you have a crack at stinger for saying he's a 'lawyer'.

[mr six o'clock]

3 weeks for boxing someone's ears to point of causing deafness. Quite lenient when put into context.

Remember, Steven Baker was given 10 weeks for accidently running into Jeff Farmer.

They both got 4 weeks and it was no accident.

How do you know re Baker?

If you saw it, what did you see?

I've always wanted to know myself...

No I never saw it. Wish i had of. He actually told me one night.

And what did he tell you?

I think his exact words was 7 weeks seems about right but he as still pissed off with what the club told him to say. He thought he would get off. I never asked what he actually did.

I didn't think there was any doubt Bakes did something, deliberately, it was just the audacity of the tribunal to give him 7 weeks with no evidence to charge him with!

As i said he was pissed off with our defence.

Believe it or not but I actually saw the incident , baker was tagging farmer , freo got a turnover and farmer followed by baker ran into a vacant forward area to create a target , freo inturn gave it back to us ,
so farmer turned around , put his head down ( you know like sprinters do when they start a race ) baker who was behind farmer , was now ahead of him , deliberately veered into farmer path to block him , farmer didn't see this as his head was down and consquently ploughed straight into bakes back . there was a head clash and it was lights out farmer ( remember baker also went off the ground with a cut to the back of his head ! ) bakes tried to block him thats all , players lay blocks every week , he was shafted by the afl and a poor defence ,
Afl incosistencies remember when x clarke was blocked by a cat player with a hip and shoulder, clarke wasn't looking either yet no report or investigation by the afl ( clarke was never the same player after that !!! )

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

yeah he did it deliberately in that he mean't to put him down but i wouldn't think he meant to knock him out!! and he didn't deserve 7 weeks

[plugger66]

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

...and you have a crack at stinger for saying he's a 'lawyer'.

What does that actually mean?

[degruch]

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

...and you have a crack at stinger for saying he's a 'lawyer'.

What does that actually mean?

I was just talking to Elvis the other day, and he informed me that you've never even met Bakes. Then I unfurled my cape and flew away...during the day, I am a lowly designers, but on this forum, I am SUPERGUY!!!

Read: You could dribble any old crap on a forum.

[plugger66]

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

...and you have a crack at stinger for saying he's a 'lawyer'.

What does that actually mean?

I was just talking to Elvis the other day, and he informed me that you've never even met Bakes. Then I unfurled my cape and flew away...during the day, I am a lowly designers, but on this forum, I am SUPERGUY!!!

Read: You could dribble any old crap on a forum.

Well some people lie so I suppose you can choose to believe want you want. I know I was speaking to Steven Baker about it. It is your choice to believe or not. I havent spoken to Elvis in weeks.

[degruch]

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

...and you have a crack at stinger for saying he's a 'lawyer'.

What does that actually mean?

I was just talking to Elvis the other day, and he informed me that you've never even met Bakes. Then I unfurled my cape and flew away...during the day, I am a lowly designer, but on this forum, I am SUPERGUY!!!

Read: You could dribble any old crap on a forum.

Well some people lie so I suppose you can choose to believe want you want. I know I was speaking to Steven Baker about it. It is your choice to believe or not. I havent spoken to Elvis in weeks.

Nice finish.

[maverick]

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

...and you have a crack at stinger for saying he's a 'lawyer'.

What does that actually mean?

Read: You could dribble any old crap on a forum.

Yes you could

[degruch]

Funny that the guy who did it said he deserved 7 weeks. The way you say it he should have got off. I will go with the guy who did it.

...and you have a crack at stinger for saying he's a 'lawyer'.

What does that actually mean?

Read: You could dribble any old crap on a forum.

Yes you could

You're a champion for the cause Mav. Do you think Selwood will get off when the Cats challenge? I believe their defence will revolve around the fact that none of the MRP we actually at the game, and only saw the incident on TV, therefore unfit to make a judgement.

Idiot.

[bigcarl]

Second week in a row the AFL have stuffed up. Thomas not getting off last week and Selwood getting 3 next week. Cant wait till a player finally gets off and it will be the currupt AFL again.

3 weeks for snotting someone behind the play, causing serious injury?

should consider himself extremely lucky. i reckon it's worth about seven.

[Dr Spaceman]

Ironically, if Guerra had've ducked his head Selwood may have escaped punishment

[bigcarl]

Ironically, if Guerra had've ducked his head Selwood may have escaped punishment

good one. there is a bit of irony in that

[saintspremiers]

Selwood contesting ban - 5.30pm tonight

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

Come on guys, this was posted at 11.41am

I came onto the Forum to get the goss, and had to divert to afl.com.au!

Poor work.


Anyway, back on topic, let's hope the new sniper gets 4 weeks

[SainterK]

I think they will have no option but to give him 4...risky by the Cats.

[saintspremiers]

I think they will have no option but to give him 4...risky by the Cats.

Correct.

It's a shame that 4 is the maximum under the current system.

Had it been sent straight to the tribunal it could've been 6 weeks!

[meher baba]

I think they will have no option but to give him 4...risky by the Cats.

Particularly risky given that the Cats have won all their games - and are therefore in a tall poppy postion - and that Selwood is not an especially popular player around the AFL traps due to the general perception that he spends a lot of his time playing for free kicks.

I don't expect him to get much sympathy.