Jako wacko does it again

[jackfrost]

Looks like he gets to whack Ballantyne again.

Don't know much about him other than he's a bit of a maverick mouth, niggler and sniper type isn't he ?

OK, he can clean his clock then, but after that its "eye's for the ball" only. :fing32

 

[jackfrost]

Great that he only gets 1 , but the AFL :spin

Its unbelievable isn't CC !!!

Just NO consistency at all.......

 

[Baloo]

a query, jackson's suspensions last year, 1 was for rubbing his head on brown whilst running off the ground after brown run thru him, and the other was his hit on the ballantyne? the one where many reckon ballantyne run into him? are those 2 correct? was he rubbed out much before last year?

his elbow on sunday was stupid but im not sure his reputation for silly suspensions is totally warranted.

I think he got reported against Melbourne as well early in the season but it didn't activate enough points to give him a rest.

 

[Rosy]

Glad some of the not so astute judges of the incident on here aren't on the MRP. Talk about eat our own.

 

[Mr Brightside]

Its unbelievable isn't CC !!!

Just NO consistency at all.......

It is ....look I think Jacko was very stiff with the length of his suspensions last year so this evens it out a bit IMO, however simply the bigger picture is the inconcistency of the MRP, no doubt we all have varing opinions in these clashs as we do with footballers in general, its just mindboggling at how you can wack a bloke with elbow in the head get 1 week :spin or kick a bloke in the jatzcrackers and get 0, yet then Waite runs into Rance an he gets 3 an so on

 

[Tigerbob]

Glad some of the not so astute judges of the incident on here aren't on the MRP. Talk about eat our own.

LOL a lot of judges here have more of an idea than the MRP. Most people with half a brain would.

That was a clueless, selfish and gutless act by Jackson. It deserved 3 weeks. Happy that this clueless bunch only gave him the one.

 

[Mr Brightside]

Glad some of the not so astute judges of the incident on here aren't on the MRP. Talk about eat our own.

I wouldnt think judging the incident as a 3 or 4 weeker is eating there own Rosy, personally thought he would go for a tleast 3 with his record, considering Dawes got 1 for absouloutly nothing because of a bad record. Intrested in what you thought he'd get Rosy

 

[Rosy]

I wouldnt think judging the incident as a 3 or 4 weeker is eating there own Rosy, ..... Intrested in what you thought he'd get Rosy

I was more referring to some of the comments. The 3-4 weekers were obviously off the mark just the same. I didn't have an opinion on what he'd get.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Glad some of the not so astute judges of the incident on here aren't on the MRP. Talk about eat our own.

Geez if an opposition player did that to e.g. Cotchin, there'd be a riot here.

 

[bowden4president]

a query, jackson's suspensions last year, 1 was for rubbing his head on brown whilst running off the ground after brown run thru him, and the other was his hit on the ballantyne? the one where many reckon ballantyne run into him? are those 2 correct? was he rubbed out much before last year?

his elbow on sunday was stupid but im not sure his reputation for silly suspensions is totally warranted.

even he knows he has a bit of a rep. he joked about it on one of the roar vision vids last week

1 week is probably about right, maybe 2 because it did look intentional . No doubt the intent was pretty bad, but he only just connected.(initially I thought he just missed) impact would have been low, they must have been kind and said it was reckless not intentional. I'm just glad Nahas ducked under it because he was more in the firing line than the North player.

 

[Rosy]

Geez if an opposition player did that to e.g. Cotchin, there'd be a riot here.

And if Cotch did it to an opposition player we'd be talking it down. We usually do when our players are reported.

 

[Mr Brightside]

And if Cotch did it to an opposition player we'd be talking it down. We usually do when our players are reported.

Speaking for myself Id be very dissapointed in Cotch, Lids, King anyone in the team did what Jacko did, Cotch of course got 4 weeks last year for a silly act, though personally think he was stiff , problem is with Jacko as King said on Radio today he does dumb no affect on the contest things like this an a leader cant be doing that, also on the radio they all said he'd get a big holiday for what its worth. Anyway Jacko getting himself in any position where he can be suspended is dissapointing, however we dodged a bullet here an good luck to us

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

And if Cotch did it to an opposition player we'd be talking it down.  We usually do when our players are reported.

If we can read some doubt into it, we will, but using an elbow has traditionally been regarded as a low act on the footy field, even in the rough-and-tumble days.

FWIW I'm rapt with the verdict and reckon Jacko's more important than some give hiom credit for.

 

[Spirit of Jack]

Jackson is one very very very lucky boy. Wow, we don't normally get these types of favourable calls at the MRP.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

interesting stat their score assists. our 1st goal came from a jackson long kick to jack. he marked and goaled. surely that is an assist?

The Age must have got it wrong?

What about the 3 goal asissts from 30 I50's? We have the best contested mark in the game to kick to you'd think he would have done better?

Do you have an opinion on his discipline issues?

 

[Big Cat Lover]

I was more referring to some of the comments. The 3-4 weekers were obviously off the mark just the same. I didn't have an opinion on what he'd get.

Not surprising Rosy as most times you never offer an opinion, you merely question others :

Using elbows is extremely dangerous and gutless IMO, wouldn't care who the player was they deserve severe punishment for using them

 

[TigerForce]

Great that he only gets 1 , but the AFL :spin

The MRP all had a roll of the dice, they summed the result and then averaged it to 1............

 

[Rosy]

Not surprising Rosy as most times you never offer an opinion, you merely question others :

Others would say I offer too many opinions.  I'm sure most here would be aware of my opinions on Jacko as a player.  I've stated a couple of times I was disappointed with his elbow. Not all comments here are related to the actual incident.

Maybe you can tell me, considering others want him traded at years end, has Dan's contribution to the team so far this season been mainly positive or do you think we should turf him on the scrap heap?

My opinion is he's had a very good season and shows great leadership overall. He has been in good form and his strong body is a welcome asset on an immature list.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

Others would say I offer too many opinions. I'm sure most here would be aware of my opinions on Jacko as a player. I've stated a couple of times I was disappointed with his elbow. Not all comments here are related to the actual incident.

Maybe you can tell me, considering others want him traded at years end, has Dan's contribution to the team so far this season been mainly positive or do you think we should turf him on the scrap heap?

I think he has been very good and is an important part of the midfield, provides a great contest and is one of the few to block/shephard etc, always puts his body on the line. WOuld be better for the side if he was giving the ball off to others to deliver I50 but it reflects his ability to work hard both ways. I have posted previously this year that he is winning me over, I have always thought he lacked too much polish and made too many poor decisions to be a key midfielder. But as part of a midfield with some real blue chip stock he does provide some grunt and presence.

His ill discipline is costing the side. And throwing an elbow is akin to kicking IMO.

 

[Rosy]

So why do you make personal judgements about me, embellisheded with rolly eyes, because I think comments about getting rid of Dan are way off the mark. Why shouldn't I "question" (your claim) them? Some are quick to sink the boots in but not balance it with credit for the positives. My "opinion" is that it's very disappointing, especially when Dan's brownie points for the year are in credit...despite him letting himself and the team down by being suspended for a week.