Are Collingwood getting preferential treatment by the match review panel | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • 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.

Are Collingwood getting preferential treatment by the match review panel

Are Collingwood getting preferential treatment by the match review panel

  • Yes

    Votes: 34 91.9%

  • know

    Votes: 2 5.4%

  • Don't know

    Votes: 1 2.7%
  • Total voters
    37
gustiger12

gustiger12

Its Tiger Time
Jan 22, 2003
9,933
3
www.thaigerpics.com
After Buckleys "push" to the face of Harvey, does anyone believe that the Wobbles are being treated differently to other clubs.

I thought the head was sacrosanct and to be protected at all times. Certainly looked to me more like a forearm jolt that a push to me.

Wonder what would have happened if contact had of been slightly higher and opened up the upper eye. These sort of blows can easily break a Jaw if they connect right.

Would any other player have been cited for the same thing.

On the back of Didak not being cited the question has to be asked.

Thought I noticed Buckely deliver a couple of gut punches a couple of times as well. Is the old man getting frustrated????
 
I disagree the Buckley & Didak incidents were correct decisions in IMO.

The first time i saw the Buckley incident i thought it was soft not much in it.
Didak gave a fair bump, But the fact he opened up Scotland made it worse than it was.
 
Jukes Extended said:
I disagree the Buckley & Didak incidents were correct decisions in IMO.

The first time i saw the Buckley incident i thought it was soft not much in it.
Didak gave a fair bump, But the fact he opened up Scotland made it worse than it was.
Click to expand...

In isolation yes you are right but on precedence no you are wrong.
 
More of a sign that the current review and tribunal system is flawed then Collingwood having a advantage but when one of the most powerful people in the media is your head figure these arguments will always arise.
 
FoxFooty tonight showed side-by-side footage of Buckley's incident and the Vandenberg hit on Robertson earlier in the year. Vandenberg got 3 weeks and the only difference was he didn't have a fistful of jumper. You'll never see more conclusive evidence than that. The answer is a resounding yes.
 
With the inconsistancy of the tribunal it could have easily gone the other way for sure.
But with all things even (which they never are) i though the correct decision was made.....More so the Didak one.

With my passion of hatred for the Collingwood FC i was hoping for the worst.
But my heart was saying he's gone, But my head was saying he's safe.
 
hopper said:
FoxFooty tonight showed side-by-side footage of Buckley's incident and the Vandenberg hit on Robertson earlier in the year.  Vandenberg got 3 weeks and the only difference was he didn't have a fistful of jumper.  You'll never see more conclusive evidence than that.  The answer is a resounding yes.
Click to expand...

Even Tony Shaw admitted Buckles should have been charged.
 
hopper said:
FoxFooty tonight showed side-by-side footage of Buckley's incident and the Vandenberg hit on Robertson earlier in the year. Vandenberg got 3 weeks and the only difference was he didn't have a fistful of jumper. You'll never see more conclusive evidence than that. The answer is a resounding yes.
Click to expand...

Agree.

The $ rules the game in so many ways imo.
 
TIGEREXTRA said:
hopper said:
FoxFooty tonight showed side-by-side footage of Buckley's incident and the Vandenberg hit on Robertson earlier in the year. Vandenberg got 3 weeks and the only difference was he didn't have a fistful of jumper. You'll never see more conclusive evidence than that. The answer is a resounding yes.
Click to expand...

Agree.

The $ rules the game in so many ways imo.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt the tribunal need to have a good hard look at themselves. Be consistant & they will be never be questioned. Just like the umpiring, there is a trend at certain times of the year for some rule or type of incident to be treated a certain way then 2 months later WHAM another interpretation.

LIKE WTF ARE THEY ON??!!!

We all can't be that blind?!

There is a peRception that McChins influences things as much as I hate to say this I do not think it plays a role & he would not interfere (no other club will allow it). Firstly Ch9 don't have the rights anymore & I am glad we have gone back to Ch7 to move to an independant non-aligned (to any team) network as compared the the Collingwood Show on Thursdays that was broadcast for years.
 
hopper said:
FoxFooty tonight showed side-by-side footage of Buckley's incident and the Vandenberg hit on Robertson earlier in the year.  Vandenberg got 3 weeks and the only difference was he didn't have a fistful of jumper.  You'll never see more conclusive evidence than that.  The answer is a resounding yes.
Click to expand...

The tribunal system is crap hopper, Brock McLean's bump was the same as Ray Hall's, McLean got off with 93 points and Ray got 2 weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< And now for something completely different.... | ruckmen >
Top Bottom