Franklin / Lloyd / The Bump gone?

[mightytiges]

The Hawks have named Buddy in their 22 for this week. Wishful thinking lol.

[one-eyed]

Appeal dismissed.

Two week penalty stands.

[mightytiges]

Appeal dismissed.

Two week penalty stands.

No surprise. Hawks' appealling saying it was a flaw of law was always clutching at straws. The new rule mightn't be in the "spirit of the game" but it's the rule. There's other rules we don't like (hello guesswork on hands in the back) but they're the rules. We can thank the whinging of Nick "head over the ball" Maxwell  when he broke that young Eagles' jaw for this one.

And Finey on SEN - the point of Buddy's shoulder collected Cuz in the jaw. Cuz wasn't knocked out due to whiplash and the collision wasn't Cuz's fault either   .

[Jackstar is back]

Hawthorn were dreaming, Rule is in black and white, thanks to Nick Maxwell, LOL

[Francois Jackson]

lets hope he misses the start of next season so they start 2010 the same way this year has gone for them.

[Hellenic Tiger]

Apparently from The Footy Show Hawks considering a court injuction to the Afl ruling to get him to play...... It will be Greg Williams all over again.

[one-eyed]

Hutchy just said Hawthorn will have a meeting tomorrow about whether to go to the Supreme Court over this and take the AFL head on.

[Moi]

Just a joke
Accept the penalty like everyone else has to

[Hellenic Tiger]

I actually want him to get away with it. For him to be suspended for what happened is a slur on our game. The game is being changed forever.

[Moi]

I actually want him to get away with it. For him to be suspended for what happened is a slur on our game. The game is being changed forever.

Plenty of others have gone for less
I agree with you about the game, but you do for one you do for all
It's only because he' a champion otherwise no-one would say a word.

[Hellenic Tiger]

I actually want him to get away with it. For him to be suspended for what happened is a slur on our game. The game is being changed forever.

Plenty of others have gone for less
I agree with you about the game, but you do for one you do for all
It's only because he' a champion otherwise no-one would say a word.

I agree with you Froars that if it was a lesser type of player the decision would have been accepted and life would have moved on. However the AFL and in particular Andy D and Adrian A have treated the game and rules with such utter contempt in order to appease a minority. Under the letter of the law he should be gone but when the spirit of the game is compromised then Hawthorn or any other club has every right to fight for what they believe in. I think he should play.

[Jackstar is back]

I actually want him to get away with it. For him to be suspended for what happened is a slur on our game. The game is being changed forever.

The rule is black and white I am afraid.
All Players were given DVD at the start of the year.
He couldnt possibly have got off, poor  effort by Hawthorn I reckon.,
::rule states you cannot make contact to the head when there is an option to tackle,. Buddy=GUILTY.

[tigersalive]

I actually want him to get away with it. For him to be suspended for what happened is a slur on our game. The game is being changed forever.

The rule is black and white I am afraid.
All Players were given DVD at the start of the year.
He couldnt possibly have got off, poor  effort by Hawthorn I reckon.,
::rule states you cannot make contact to the head when there is an option to tackle,. Buddy=GUILTY.

Agree the rule is clear and I'm amazed how many people just don't get it.  I also laugh at people who say the game is now like netball and ruined.

Just take a look at the Thursty and Shiels contact or the Rance and Selwood contact for proof the game isn't netball.  And there are hundreds of other examples.

[Hellenic Tiger]

I actually want him to get away with it. For him to be suspended for what happened is a slur on our game. The game is being changed forever.

The rule is black and white I am afraid.
All Players were given DVD at the start of the year.
He couldnt possibly have got off, poor  effort by Hawthorn I reckon.,
::rule states you cannot make contact to the head when there is an option to tackle,. Buddy=GUILTY.

Just take a look at the Thursty and Shiels contact or the Rance and Selwood contact for proof the game isn't netball.  And there are hundreds of other examples.

According to the laws then shouldn't Selwood and Rance get two weeks? Both made contact with the head whether it was incidental or intentional. Buddy did not intend to get Cuz in the head either. Buddy was tried by the media from Sunday before the match review panel made their decision to issue him with a suspension yet the Rance Selwood incident is seen as an act of bravery which indeed it was yet under the laws of the game contact to the head is sacrasanct and an offence worthy of a suspension.

You cannot have a rule for one and call it negligent and then have a rule for the other and call it bravery and tough which it is but it's still contact to the head and that under the law is an offence.

[mightytiges]

The AFL will probably modify the law in time for next year when all this has died down.

In all this huffing and puffing, the media have forgotten that a free kick wasn't paid when it should've been. That's the main injustice here. We gain nothing from Buddy being suspended or not.