Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 97 to 106 of 106

Thread: Tribunal news from weekend's game - Thomas and Ted

  1. #97
    Meh North fans constantly live on edge hence why they are the way they are.

    Just laugh at their pathetic club. I just wish arden st hadnt received a crappy renovation a few years ago. The club was a sad place to drive by prior to this..with what their clubhouse burnt down but still standing all boarded up and their main stand occupied by a throng of homeless people who used to cheer the side when they train on a paddock that resembled a council park.

    I mean arden st still looks like a country suburban ground..but gee if only the derros were still living in the stands.

    So you kinda just laugh at them and don't take what they say to heart.

  2. #98
    Veterans List Big Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    7,006
    Quote Originally Posted by GongSwan View Post
    Not surprisingly I got banned by a Norf mod, I wonder if they realise how little I care about being banned from big footy, at least 2 of them had to read it, the one who reported it and the one who banned me lol, in all seriousness what's wrong with this:

    I would never hope for any clubs demise, especially Norf, since we beat u lot continuously and fairly easily in the end, even with 4 or 5 of our best 22 missing and the sub on in the first 5 minutes. Really full of yourselves, we'll get em next time, we'll stand up when it counts, well, it counted for 4 points on the weekend, and your lot bent over and took it so stfu

    I mean this is in reply to some goose calling us all kinds of foul names and wishing gazza the worst, because former Swans don't agree with him, this means WAR lmfao, damn, will I get banned fot this on here as well? That i do care about hmmmm, i'll chance it
    Your signature says it all really. Stick with the friendly sick minds here instead and leave those Norf flogs to wallow in their own clubs irrelevance.

  3. #99
    Veterans List aardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Down South
    Posts
    4,937
    Quote Originally Posted by GongSwan View Post
    I would never hope for any clubs demise, especially Norf, since we beat u lot continuously and fairly easily in the end, even with 4 or 5 of our best 22 missing and the sub on in the first 5 minutes. Really full of yourselves, we'll get em next time, we'll stand up when it counts, well, it counted for 4 points on the weekend, and your lot bent over and took it so stfu
    I really can't see what their problem is. It all sounds perfectly logical to me. Maybe you could appeal the ban. Incidental contact, low impact, surely only a reprimand.

  4. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by GongSwan View Post
    The one that really got me was the bloke hoping the rooster doesn't recover to play again,
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadlyAkkuret View Post
    That is disgusting, hoping one of their hacks stops a young gun from never fulfilling his potential. In the game day thread one of them said they hope Rohan enjoys his pethidine shot. Bloody disgraceful really.
    Credit to Lindsay Thomas though. First thing he said out of the tribunal was sorry to Gary and wished him a speedy recovery. Obviously scripted (and he kept to the script better than any politician), but credit to him and the club for coming out with it. They deserve better supporters.

    I was extremely irate about the injustice at first, but one week for Goodes and the chance to show North we can win without him is not worth the stress for me. More concerning to me now is the increasing number of horrific leg injuries we're seeing in the comp. Maybe it's just coincidence, but that's at least two in the past couple of years. If Thomas' slide was legal (and consensus seems to be that it was), then perhaps the rules need a tweak.

  5. #101
    Its one of those things that been happening for a long while. Does anyone remember, i think it was 1999, when there were a large number of knee injuries to ruckman? They even changed the rules..from memory it happened a few years later too and goodesy was injured in the ruck.

    The AFL is very image conscious..if something doesnt "look good" on tv then they will react. I guess with thomas they were forced to suspend him b/c of goodes a week before but in the cold hard light of day they realised that it wasnt a good look either to suspend a player for something like rohan.

    "Not a good look" is far more important to the AFL than consistency when it comes to MRP. Like a good corporation that they are, the AFL is very protective of their brand/image.

  6. #102
    Senior Player GongSwan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Wollongong NSW
    Posts
    1,362
    Quote Originally Posted by aardvark View Post
    I really can't see what their problem is. It all sounds perfectly logical to me. Maybe you could appeal the ban. Incidental contact, low impact, surely only a reprimand.
    You can't argue with a sick mind - Joe Walsh

  7. #103
    Just wild about Harry
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,812
    Quote Originally Posted by GongSwan View Post
    Not surprisingly I got banned by a Norf mod, I wonder if they realise how little I care about being banned from big footy, at least 2 of them had to read it, the one who reported it and the one who banned me lol, in all seriousness what's wrong with this:

    I would never hope for any clubs demise, especially Norf, since we beat u lot continuously and fairly easily in the end, even with 4 or 5 of our best 22 missing and the sub on in the first 5 minutes. Really full of yourselves, we'll get em next time, we'll stand up when it counts, well, it counted for 4 points on the weekend, and your lot bent over and took it so stfu

    I mean this is in reply to some goose calling us all kinds of foul names and wishing gazza the worst, because former Swans don't agree with him, this means WAR lmfao, damn, will I get banned fot this on here as well? That i do care about hmmmm, i'll chance it
    Too funny.

  8. #104
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    8,764
    On league teams they showed a similar incident where an Adelaide player slid across in front of Buddy Franklin in an almost identical way to Thomas and it almost looked deliberate. Just missed making contact with his lower leg. Very dangerous and clearly wasn't prepared to put his body in front of Franklin. They said a free was paid to Franklin. Brereton said if a serious injury happens in 3 weeks time from the same type of slide what will the AFL do then.

  9. #105
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    8,764
    Quote Originally Posted by WeHaveTheGoodes View Post
    Its one of those things that been happening for a long while. Does anyone remember, i think it was 1999, when there were a large number of knee injuries to ruckman? They even changed the rules..from memory it happened a few years later too and goodesy was injured in the ruck.

    The AFL is very image conscious..if something doesnt "look good" on tv then they will react. I guess with thomas they were forced to suspend him b/c of goodes a week before but in the cold hard light of day they realised that it wasnt a good look either to suspend a player for something like rohan.

    "Not a good look" is far more important to the AFL than consistency when it comes to MRP. Like a good corporation that they are, the AFL is very protective of their brand/image.
    I do recall the ruckman incidents. However this season some ruckman are consistently jumping into opposing ruckmen at centre bounces in a 2 action way to put other ruckman out of the contest. Looks plain dumb at times but a free is rarely paid.

  10. #106
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    8,764
    OTC showed Thomas doing an identical slide on Ward of GWS on the weekend. To me he didn't look like he was going for the ball, and Ward was lucky because he was a little more side on than Rohan was. Am I wrong to expect that he may have just cared a little bit about the consequences of last and corrected his style going for the ball. 2 weeks in a row tells me he doesn't like the real contest of body on body so takes the easy way out instead of holding his feet. Contrast the footage of Dangerfield where he clearly conciously keeps his feet in such contests and brilliantly won the ball time and again against Port.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO