Wood's Shaw gets 8 weeks!

[royboy42]

For punting on a game!!
Shaw suspended for betting on Pies match - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-15/shaw-banned-for-gambling/2796450)

[Sauce]

And he only gets 8 weeks while Maxwell gets only a fine.

I would like to see it happened to a lesser team and see what the outcome would have been.

Didn't an NRL player get sacked and virtually suspended for life for doing the same last year?

[nomae]

Someone please move this to general AFL forum.

[jono2707]

And he only gets 8 weeks while Maxwell gets only a fine.

I would like to see it happened to a lesser team and see what the outcome would have been.

Didn't an NRL player get sacked and virtually suspended for life for doing the same last year?

I think 8 weeks is fair enough given the apparent size of the bet. I don't know why the team he plays for has any bearing (conspiracy theories aside) - if anything given Collingwood's profile and large supporter base, I'd say the punishment might be more severe to make sure he's made an example of.

The NRL situation was quite different as the player was not only betting on the first scoring play, but he also made an active attempt to influence that play in the game. There seems to be no proof that Shaw tried to exert any such influence.

This sort of thing really needs to get stamped out of all forms of professional sport in this country. And yes - general footy thread please - thankfully it's that Shaw...

[Melbourne_Blood]

And he only gets 8 weeks while Maxwell gets only a fine.

I would like to see it happened to a lesser team and see what the outcome would have been.

Didn't an NRL player get sacked and virtually suspended for life for doing the same last year?

The outcome would have probably been the same mate. No, wait, they would have been hung, drawn and quartered ?

[Swansongster]

There seems to be no proof that Shaw tried to exert any such influence.

It could be influenced. I'd love to see the replay to see if he is drifting forward and looking for Shaw.

Against lowly Adelaide, he'd have to feel he might just get away with that. From memory, Adelaide were all over the Pies that day until an 11-straight-goals spree late in the game.

[Swansongster]

P.S. What's this all about?

"Shaw was suspended for 14 matches, six of which have been suspended."

[Kirkari]

Silly boy. What is the obsession with betting?

[Lucky Knickers]

What a moron!
"I've been in this situation before ..um..and two pretty hard lessons I've learnt".....uh I don't think so.

[Jewels]

P.S. What's this all about?

"Shaw was suspended for 14 matches, six of which have been suspended."

They had to suspend the last six or he would have missed finals and Eddie wouldn't allow that!

[stellation]

Very, very, very silly.

[Cpt. Kirk]

They had to suspend the last six or he would have missed finals and Eddie wouldn't allow that!

They shouldn't have done that imo, should have been a straight out 14 weeks, now the afl has tried to stamp it out the should have given him the appropriate punishment for doing so and not allow him to play a game again in 2011, there is a lot of other issues that could have come of it, such as him passing maxwell the ball for a goal which would be matchfixing, and his mates telling adelaide how they were going to play maxwell during the game.

Soft punishment for what is unacceptable in this sport.

Yes i know that kieran jack did it but this was before the new rules were imposed.

and yes he is in my supercoach team so i have to trade him out. :(

[ShockOfHair]

They had to suspend the last six or he would have missed finals and Eddie wouldn't allow that!


Yes, rather convenient. But I like the 'suspending the suspension' concept.

Rhyce Shaw must be breathing a sigh of relief.

[ernie koala]

The guy is a dead set cretin.
And yes it could be argued that even this small bet could change the game.
If Shaw has the ball on the wing and he looks up and sees Cloke and Maxwell both leading....who does he kick it to???
With no bet I'd say Cloke every time . With the bet on, it's a good chance it's Maxwell.
He should of been suspended for the season with no reductions.
I mean what a joke to hear Anderson saying that his "clear and honest response to questioning" influenced his punishment.
What else could he do when they had clear evidence of the offence.
As for Maxwell, once he decided to tell his family he should of warned them off making any bets.
If he didn't, which it seems he didn't, then he too has got off very lightly.

[Lucky Knickers]

Without knowing all the ins and outs of his evidence I am really surprised the AFL haven't been tougher on this given his involvement in the game he was betting on.

[GongSwan]

Without knowing all the ins and outs of his evidence I am really surprised the AFL haven't been tougher on this given his involvement in the game he was betting on.

yes

[ScottH]

P.S. What's this all about?

"Shaw was suspended for 14 matches, six of which have been suspended."

I don't get that either.
If you're going to suspend someone do it. Shaw would have to be a complete moron to gamble on a game again to incur the rest of the suspension.

[Wardy]

They had to suspend the last six or he would have missed finals and Eddie wouldn't allow that!

right on sister - I was thinking exactly the same thing! Amazing that he will be available from week 2 of the finals.

[Lucky Knickers]

Looks like Rhyce got the brains and the looks.

[Kirkari]

... Shaw would have to be a complete moron to gamble on a game again to incur the rest of the suspension.

True, but you'd have to say he's provided pretty compelling evidence that he IS, in fact, a complete moron. It would be moronic enough whatever team you're in, but when you've got an excellent chance of getting back to back flags, and you take the chance of missing out on that...???


Looks like Rhyce got the brains and the looks.

Bless his red and white socks.

[ernie koala]

After reading the paper this morning, this saga gets worse and worse.
To quote.."The AFL had considered banning Shaw for the rest of the season but settled for a shorter ban"...wait for it....."AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE MAGPIES".
What an unbelievable admission from the AFL...simply disgraceful!

Added to this for Maxwell to miss no games...A self appointed players spokesman and club captain...again it's unbelievable and simply disgraceful.

[Sauce]

I would like to see it happened to a lesser team and see what the outcome would have been.



"The AFL had considered banning Shaw for the rest of the season but settled for a shorter ban"...wait for it....."AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE MAGPIES".
What an unbelievable admission from the AFL...simply disgraceful!


heh.

This code is so compromised. I don't know why i bother with it these days.

[ScottH]

True, but you'd have to say he's provided pretty compelling evidence that he IS, in fact, a complete moron. It would be moronic enough whatever team you're in, but when you've got an excellent chance of getting back to back flags, and you take the chance of missing out on that...???

Well you've got me there.
It was running through my head as I was typing it.

[Kirkari]

Well you've got me there.
It was running through my head as I was typing it.

Then again, maybe he'd just taken his daily dose of the "Collingwood are above the law" cool-ade. Seems like the tribunal took a little sip when making their ruling.

[Wardy]

Its certainly the "one rule for Collingwood to hell with everyone else" scenario. You can only hope that because of the leniency of the fine - that it will make Eddie think twice before opening his fat trap again anytime soon in having pot shots at other clubs - his club has got away with this really with just a slap on the wrist - if he dare says another word against anyone - the media should give him such a hard time that he wont know if its day or night. Maxwell cant lie straight in bed either. Not a good look for the captain thats for sure.

[ShockOfHair]

I think what saved them was that they weren't in it for their own benefit, ie, not like Lillee and Marsh.

Even though Shaw will be available for the finals, he won't have the match fitness. Unlike Sherman, he can't play in the VFL over the next eight weeks, so he's not going to be a big finals contributor.

Lethal and Tom Harley last night were puzzling over him revealing that he always tells his family where he's going to play. Amazing lack of commonsense.

[BeeEmmAre]

I think we all saw at least two others today who seem to be placing bets on the football.........

[Jesse Richards]

A situation where a player can't ring his family and say excitedly "they're putting me up forward this week"? Watch out Gary Rohan (or any other player) Make sure you begin every sentence with "you must not use the information I am about to impart ..." Hey Jesse White, get it tattooed on your other arm....

My view is this: the presence of betting permeates the game and imposes onerous burdens on players. Don't do this, don't do that: players, families and friends.

Yes, I understand very well the need for these rules and their observation when there is betting involved. What I don't understand is the need for the AFL to sanction betting on aspects of each game other than win/lose and by how much. When will we be able to bet on who gets knocked out first in a game?

[Triple B]

Lethal and Tom Harley last night were puzzling over him revealing that he always tells his family where he's going to play. Amazing lack of commonsense.

This one I don't see at all.

So Heath is sitting around the dinner/breakfast table having a chat with Dad (himself played a @@@@load of games and obviously knowledgable) but as part of that conversation/chat about opponents etc., he can't mention he's having a stint forward/back/midfield/wherever???

Sorry, that's just crap.

[Sauce]

So why isn't the third pies player not suspended?

What a farcical year for the code, so much integrity gone.

But the AFL doesn't care..they know that next week another 80k sheep will turn up at the G for their hit of footy.