Thomas found not guilty by tribunal. This makes the Goodes' suspension so unfair.
Thomas found not guilty by tribunal. This makes the Goodes' suspension so unfair.
The right decision but very inconsistent.
..And the Swans are the Premiers...The Ultimate Team...The Ultimate Warriors. They have overcome the highly fancied Hawks in brilliant style. Sydney the 2012 Premiers - Gerard Whately ABC
Here it is Again! - Huddo SEN
I don't think either should have been suspended but there was more in the Goodes one. Great decision by the tribunal.
As for a set against the Swans and Goodes, no I don't think so.
Bloods
"Lockett is the best of all time" - Robert Harvey, Darrel Baldock, Nathan Burke, Kevin Bartlett, Bob Skilton
Ruled that it wasn't rough conduct.
We should have had a better lawyer last week to argue that.
Just posted on AFL.com, Lindsay is free to play http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsartic...5/default.aspx
"We talked five times. I called him twice, and he called me twice."
Eddie McGuire
I am one of those who thinks that neither Goodes nor Thomas should have been suspended. But I began to accept the Goodes' decision when Thomas was cited and therefore it seemed the AFL was taking a consistent approach. But this outcome - Goodes suspended, Thomas not guilty - is so disrespectful to Goodes. He has effectively been told by the AFL, and explicitly told by Longmire - that he has to keep on his feet and take the risk that what happened to Rohan could happen to him. While Thomas has been given the message that it is ok to slide in past the ball even knowing that another player is contesting the ball and therefore there is a risk of taking out his legs. I am sure Thomas didn't intend to hurt Gary but surely by the precedent set by the AFL it had to be both reckless and rough conduct.
Absolutely ridiculous that this is not a suspension. This idea that leading with feet or legs is not rough conduct misses how the game works now. The sling tackle gets suspensions because of the result. - it is not illegal to a point. Likewise a player can use an elbow to a chest to fend away but if they raise it to the face this is rough conduct. I just think if they were looking at addressing this Thomas was a clear example of why it needs addressing. If rohan dived at the ball and the boot gets him then it must surely have also been rough conduct.
Alternatively if we are not worried about leading with the feet then move on...
Bookmarks