The_Celebrant said:
You have to do it now, by law. Slow down to 40 where there's an emergency vehicle. Huge fine if you don't.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
You have to do it now, by law. Slow down to 40 where there's an emergency vehicle. Huge fine if you don't.
tigersnake said:
Thought Robbo won the tribunal debate. Six weeks or nothing is spot on. It has to be more intent based as opposed to outcome. Ablett could’ve broke that blokes jaw so easily. Fyfe left his elbow hanging out. Could’ve easily KO’d Lynch.
You should get weeks for trying to ping blokes.
Just watched Ablett's again. Unbelievable.
He both changed direction AND raised his arms (and elbow) WELL AFTER the ball had been legally disposed of by the North player.
Absolutely no action was warranted from Ablett in any context at all.
The question I would ask Ablett is not only what did you do, but why?
Jake King or Barry Hall do that and they get at least 5.
But I'm not unreasonable ... I think the previous one against Shiel was just a bit careless and lazy and more in the play.
Robbo raves on like a goose but he was right and made Whateley look like the biassed idiot that he is.
He both changed direction AND raised his arms (and elbow) WELL AFTER the ball had been legally disposed of by the North player.
Absolutely no action was warranted from Ablett in any context at all.
The question I would ask Ablett is not only what did you do, but why?
Jake King or Barry Hall do that and they get at least 5.
But I'm not unreasonable ... I think the previous one against Shiel was just a bit careless and lazy and more in the play.
Robbo raves on like a goose but he was right and made Whateley look like the biassed idiot that he is.
Absolutely! 100%. Robbo is 100% right on Ablett and Fyfe. Whateley (who retired from playing the game aged 11 when it got a bit rough) argues:SCOOP said:
Whateley: It's a flawed technique (Technique?! Technique for what? Hitting people in the head? Is there a correct technique?). That's not a reportable incident, and neither was Fyfe's. It's emotive to say these were elbows to the head (no Gerard, it's factual), but they aren't-
Robbo: Yes they are
Whateley: -and the players get straight up-
(they show Fyfe elbow)
Robbo: How can you say that's not??
Whateley: -there has to be a level of force. I think most of it is between the wrist and the forearm (What? WHAT???), and it's a contact that knocked him off his feet and he gets straight back up. There has to be some - that's a free kick, a free kick for high contact-
Robbo: I don't think so.
Whateley: -that's not a suspension-
Robbo: I don't think so. He deli- he intentionally put his elbow up as he was going past - I know it happened quick, but Gerard, you can actually think quick and not have instinctive raising of your arms.
Whateley: Yeah, yeah, and so that's a free kick, but it has to be more than a free kick to be a suspension. (Robbo sighs in exasperation) There are thresholds here-
Robbo: Yeah, the threshold's-
Whateley: -or we'll put blokes out-
Robbo: -we need to break people's jaw-
Whateley: -we'll put 30 blokes out a week-
Robbo: -No but we need to - that doesn't- you cannot tell me-
Whateley: You don't have to break his jaw-
Robbo: -that the Nathan Fyfe and the Gary Ablett stuff-
Whateley: -if you cause any harm-
Robbo: -happens every week-
Whateley: -if you cause any harm-
Robbo: -it doesn't-
Whateley: -you're suspended.
Robbo: Aggh. If it's a millimetre and a half, a centimetre away, it can break someone's JAW, Gerard.
Whateley: That's right.
Robbo: And, "oh, no, no, it’s insufficient-"
Whateley: -No, no
Robbo: "-it didn't break his jaw-"
Whateley: -no, at that stage you're sitting six weeks.
Robbo: But-but, we're going six weeks to NOTHING. Six weeks to NOTHING, mate.
Whateley: If he legitimately flushed him with the elbow, then that's a suspension. That's not what happened though.
Robbo: Mate. I may be in the wrong. I may be in - I don't think I am. I don't think I am.
Whateley chuckles because he thinks he's 'won' the argument. But Robbo isn’t finished.
Robbo: But we can’t continually have people doing this, in our game, and just calling it head-high tackle, head-high: “head-high – oh, free kick!” W-we just can’t. W-we just can’t do it. And this, this, this, “insufficient force”, or “low impact” – goodness – we need people KNOCKED OUT – and then when someone-
Whateley: No-no-
Robbo: No-no, but SAM DURDIN-
Whateley: -If you cause any harm whatsoever – Sam Durdin gets dudded on strict liab-
Robbo: -I know that-
Whateley: -ility. We’ve spoken about that before-
Robbo: -I know that-
Whateley: -Strict liability is a poor policy-
Robbo: -We know that-
Whateley: -but that’s the path we headed down, and Sam Durdin is a really unfortunate victim.
Strict liability is a poor policy, Gerard. You just said it, seconds after arguing that because no jaws were broken, all’s cool. (He retired at 11. Game got too hard. But forearms to other people's heads are ok as long as they're not flush elbows and don't break jaws.)
Someone posted recently that some of us don't like Whateley because he's smart. He's smart compared to Robinson, who gave up because Whateley can argue better than him. This exchange highlights (partly) why I don't like Whateley. He's partisan, he has an agenda, he's an AFL lackey, and he hides it all behind this mystique of intellectualism that ordinary footy dummies bestow on him. He's a cretin. And I guarantee you: he's never been elbowed - or wrist/forearmed - to the head. It shows.
E
easy_tiger
Guest
spook said:
;D
and the mystique is like a pissweak *smile* contrived venis boys choir version of a stupid blight/malthouse type mystique
spook said:
Spot on. GW knew he'd lost the argument morally even if he might have won on the scoreboard. Robbo 6 weeks v nothing was spot on. The level of damage done as the primary factor is *smile*. Illogical *smile*. Interesting discussion on the couch too, all the ex-players said they respect what Durdan did but not what Fyfe or Ablett did. And who gets off? As I've said before, by this logic, nobody would have ever got suspended for hitting Des Tuddenham.
E
easy_tiger
Guest
tigersnake said:
:hihi
Im almost certain Ablett's hammy will go off like a .308 pretty soon, so its kind of academic.
spook said:
How that *smile*er can sit there and laud Hawthorn after his carry-on throughout 2018 about the "state of the game" is beyond belief. The three quarters I saw were downright painful and befitted the sparse crowd of 14K.
Hang on a second. Didn’t Wheatley get all high and mighty about the Dusty one? He didn’t do any damage but we have to get that out of the game? Now his narrative has changed. No damage no problem.
spook said:
Given most of us need a translator to understand Robbo, I'd imagine quite some time.
bowden4president said:
This is why he's a self interested AFL lackey.
