Another rant after the boring made me forget about the AFL mid season break…
The tussle between Steven Baker and Steven Johnson has seen the Match Review Panel go to ridiculous new heights
Will the AFL really listen to us the public?
You got to be joking if you think the AFL will really listen to the public with our opinions about the season and final fixturing. I do like how they are thinking outside the box with their ideas but I think every fan has rocks in their head if you think your opinion will count for anything.
Double Standards in the MRP as they play favourites
So Steven Johnson gets four weeks (three with an early plee) for a round arm swing at his attacker while Judd does not even get cited? Remember Judd hit Pavlich who was NOT his attacker while Steven Johnson did what every AFL ball player has wanted to do for the last 5 odd years.
Suspended for interfering with an Injury Player?
I dont swear but what the …..
What happened to if you cross that white line, your fit enough to play? I am not saying I’m a tough man but I played the game with cancer in my youth. Should I have worn a shirt saying “be careful im injured”. Interesting to see Johnson just get on with the game after a slap on his broken hand.
Your Rant or Opinion?
What do you think of the fat couch potatoes rant? Agree with him or do you think he has to get off the couch and do some exercise? If you have your own rant, please also sit on the couch with me and lets rant together.
Loading ...
June 29th, 2010 at 10:55 am
Most believe that the AFL already have resolved the future fixture issues from next season. Although it makes people feel nice to be included, another successful PR campaign?
Is anyone upset that Baker will not be playing for 9 weeks? Surely the Saints can get someone else to annoy opposition players.
[Reply to Comment]
June 29th, 2010 at 9:46 pm
@Justin: Yes Baker is annoying but did he get the 9 weeks because of his reputation or because he deserved it?
Re Fixturing: does anyone think their opinion will count? As you say they already have probably made up their mind.
[Reply to Comment]
June 29th, 2010 at 11:30 am
Yes, Baker deserved what he got, but we must remember it took 4 charges to get the 9 weeks. It’s also ridiculous that Johnson played on with a broken hand. Nothing wa made of the Barte/Fisher incident though.
The MRP is a joke at times. The NRL supended Tomaha Tahu for 6 weeks for one hit.
[Reply to Comment]
June 29th, 2010 at 9:47 pm
No comment about interfering with an injured player Craig? Are they fair game if they return to the field?
[Reply to Comment]
June 29th, 2010 at 4:46 pm
Fans’ opinions
Gee, the AFL are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. If you propose a fixture to give West Coast five more home games, you’re the only person who proposes it and the AFL doesn’t implement it, does that mean they haven’t listened? If the opinions I hear uttered around me each week in the stands are anything to go by, fans are complete dolts.
MRP
While I’d agree that consistency and the MRP haven’t been linked often this year, comparing Judd’s elbow and Johnson’s is simply ludicrous. Johnson’s was delivered with real venom and intent to injure. Judd’s, on my viewing, was little more than incidental, with Pavlich being simply unlucky to be where he was.
Misconduct: unreasonable contact
Swear man! Swear! It’s good for you!
What would you say, Jermayn, if Baker had stood on Johnson’s hand? Or kicked him on an injured calf?
If Johnson is going for a mark and Baker belts his hand in the act of spoiling, fair enough, but that’s a lot different to punching the hand a long way off the ball. Go as hard as you can in the contest for the ball, but off-the-ball attacks are — and I hate using this term, but I think it’s appropriate here — unAustralian.
aussierulesblog´s last blog ..Green whistle for go- red whistle for stop
[Reply to Comment]
June 29th, 2010 at 9:56 pm
@ARB: if what Baker was doing was that wrong, how come the umpires didn’t pay any free kicks?
They paid them to Judd the week before (3 or 4 from memory) & to say Judds elbow was accidental is an excuse for his actions is a load of croc! You can get suspended & sighted for accidental contact.
Now personally I agree Judd shouldnot be suspended for his whack & not being sighted is the RIGHT call but then the MRP blow their good work with suspending Johnson.
Yes Baker whacking Johnsons hand is unAustralian but this isn’t cricket, it’s not a gentlemans game, hasn’t been for 80+ years…
All that wouldve needed to be done was if the umpires paid a free kick. Now I hate touchy free kicks but they set a standard by paying them early.
[Reply to Comment]
June 30th, 2010 at 9:31 am
@Jermayn,
Excellent question! They can see a free kick from 100 metres, but can’t spot this?
Judd’s elbow was like being flogged with a damp lettuce leaf. BTW, the word is “cited”. Sighted means capable of seeing.
Johnson’s elbow, whether justified or not, was a venomous strike and must be cited. Provocation should be a defence for something innocuous, like jumper punching, but a viciously swinging elbow is at another level completely. Judd’s elbow didn’t have even a fraction of the same intent, or force, behind it.
Oh, so anything goes then? What about a squirrel grip? Is that OK? Kicking, eye gouging? Sorry, this is a poor justification for anything.
aussierulesblog´s last blog ..Green whistle for go- red whistle for stop
[Reply to Comment]
June 30th, 2010 at 11:26 am
@aussierulesblog, No there are boundaries but knocking a broken hand surely cant be seen in the same light as eye gouging etc.
Even in cricket they target injured players. Short balls at broken hands/ arms. Always throw the ball at the end of someone who has a suspect leg injury…
Jermayn´s last blog ..AFL Expansion – How is the …Timing
[Reply to Comment]
June 30th, 2010 at 4:13 pm
@Jermayn,
I think we’re getting confused here between what’s happening in the game and what’s happening off the ball.
Bowlers targetting an injured batsman is the same as Baker thumping Johnson’s hand while spoiling a marking attempt. No problem with that. But if the fine leg fieldsman wandered off the field between overs and whacked an opponent’s injured arm, that would be another matter, wouldn’t it?
I wasn’t suggesting an equivalence between hitting a broken hand and eye gouging, but your justification
invites the question of what is unacceptable, if anything. If you’re going to offer a justification like that, surely you should consider the ramifications?
aussierulesblog´s last blog ..Green whistle for go- red whistle for stop