I'm surprised he got suspended at all. But yes it is very light for that.Also put this in the Oppo discussion.
Buddy given a week.
What a *smile* joke. Classed it as careless. If that's not intentional then nothing is.
Houli's suspension in 2017 is looking like a bigger joke with every passing week.
They have to get him over the 1000 goals although this season now unlikelyI'm surprised he got suspended at all. But yes it is very light for that.
But Buddy is the AFL's protected species love child.
Christian says he went with the lesser call of careless contact instead of intentional as the contact occurred behind his (Buddy’s) back.
True story.
Yep, Houli got charged with intentional.That didn't help Houli
And who the perpetrator is as wellYep, Houli got charged with intentional.
They rarely use it. It's got nothing to do with the incident itself and everything to do with the penalty they want to apply.
*smile* him.Considering what Shuey got away with last week, i reckon Buddy is a bit unlucky. But considering what Buddy has gotten away with in his career he cant complain.
Good, hope he gets 3. manifestly inadequateSwans challenging 1 week ban.
Swans challenging 1 week ban.
So, a $2000 fine coming up for the big fella.Swans challenging 1 week ban.
FFS, he can't break the tackle so he goes for the elbow to the face. Should get 4 weeks if the Houli case is an example, possibly more given Houli's was a first offence and this isn't.
Do the AFL seriously wonder why people question their impartiality when such huge disparities in penalties are applied?
I reckon he should probably get 3 weeks, maybe 2, for that. But if Houli's was 4 weeks then this should be 4 weeks. They set the precedent, they should have to live with the consequences.
DS
They set a precedent when they let Frisch off for an elbow to the head. Or Ablett for elbows to the head 2 weeks in a row (they were forced to suspend the little recidivist after the 3rd time).FFS, he can't break the tackle so he goes for the elbow to the face. Should get 4 weeks if the Houli case is an example, possibly more given Houli's was a first offence and this isn't.
Do the AFL seriously wonder why people question their impartiality when such huge disparities in penalties are applied?
I reckon he should probably get 3 weeks, maybe 2, for that. But if Houli's was 4 weeks then this should be 4 weeks. They set the precedent, they should have to live with the consequences.
DS
They set a precedent when they let Frisch off for an elbow to the head. Or Ablett for elbows to the head 2 weeks in a row (they were forced to suspend the little recidivist after the 3rd time).