One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on July 31, 2006, 04:30:51 PM
-
Just announced on SEN:
Staff - level 3 striking charge on Goddard. Can't be reduce below 2 weeks becuase of poor past record. Negligent, high contact, in play, high impact. 3 weeks but 2 with early plea.
Raines - tripping on Fiora. Reprimand 93 points with early plea. Cleared on Harvey incident.
Simmo - level 3 striking charge on Riewoldt. Intentional, low impact, in play, high impact. 2 weeks but down to 1 week with early plea - 168 points.
Baker - Level 4 attempting to strike on Stafford. Intentional, low impact, behind play, high impact. 1 week with early plea.
So we lose Staff for 2 weeks and Simmo for 1 week unless we contest.
-
Does raines lose RS Award if he pleads guilty but doesnt get suspended. Id contest all of them. There innocent! They didnt do it! Really there all innocent I tell yas!
-
Does raines lose RS Award if he pleads guilty but doesnt get suspended. Id contest all of them. There innocent! They didnt do it! Really there all innocent I tell yas!
I believe he actually has to be suspended to be knocked out of the RS award.
-
I believe Simon Goodwin got a reprimand a couple of weeks ago and is still in contention for the Brownlow
Considering that i think Rainsey should be fine.
-
They reckon on SEN it'll be reduced to a reprimand for Rainsey - does a reprimand still mean he'll miss RS?
-
I cant believe that Staff got done.
3AW said during the game that they didnt see anything wrong with it, just a good old fashioned shirt front.
-
I cant believe that Staff got done.
3AW said during the game that they didnt see anything wrong with it, just a good old fashioned shirt front.
Gotta say I am not surprised - don't think it's right but not surprised. I think he copped it because it's Stafford.
Seriously what is our game becoming :banghead
-
I cant believe that Staff got done.
3AW said during the game that they didnt see anything wrong with it, just a good old fashioned shirt front.
Mark Robinson on SEN earlier today also said there was nothing wrong with it and Staff shouldn't even get sighted. It was a fair plain ordinary shirtfront ::).
-
Mark Robinson on SEN earlier today also said there was nothing wrong with it and Staff shouldn't even get sighted. It was a fair plain ordinary shirtfront ::).
As I said what is our game becoming :banghead :banghead :banghead
-
Star fades for Raines
4:45:42 PM Mon 31 July, 2006
Paul Gough
Sportal for afl.com.au
Richmond youngster Andrew Raines and No.1 ruckman Troy Simmonds could be ruled out of AFL NAB Rising Star and Brownlow Medal contention respectively after being booked by the AFL match review panel on Monday.
But it is the booking of Raines and Simmonds that is the biggest cause for concern given that Raines - the son of the Tigers' 1980 premiership centreman Geoff - is one of the favourites to win this year's Rising Star Award while Simmonds is considered an outside chance in this year's Brownlow Medal following a stellar season in which he is considered a prime candidate to be named in the ruck in this year's All-Australian team.
While Raines can accept a reprimand from the match review panel after being charged with tripping St Kilda's Aaron Fiora, that would still rule him out of winning the Rising Star Award because the charge carries a base tally of points of 125 - above the 100 point cut-off for a one-match suspension.
But Raines can accept a reprimand and 93.75 points towards his future record with an early guilty plea.
But the Tigers are likely to challenge at least the Stafford decision given that coach Terry Wallace was adamant after the game that his clash with Goddard was nothing more than a solid but fair bump.
Full article here: http://richmondfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=285380
-
We must challenge all 3 decisions. Club must stand behind its players!
-
The Staff one is ridiculous. There's no rule against how hard you hit a player provided it's fair, within 5m of the ball and not head high. Staff's shirtfront satisfies all those >:(.
Has anyone here seen vision of this alleged trip by Rainesy? There was no mention of it during or after the game yesterday. It's just be plucked out today ::).
-
Like I said before, if Staff even sneezed at an opponent he'd get a week :banghead
Surely the club must appeal these decisions. I'd hate for Rainsey to be out of contention for the Rising Star.
Not happy Jan! :banghead
No wonder those rugby league supporters call it "AFL".
-
Raines misses out on being in the running for a well-deserved award because of 25 points compared to a dog who got a week after hitting someone in the nuts, and an interstate player (can't remember the game) didn't even get cited for tripping only a couple of weeks ago.
Not happy :banghead
-
It's a farce........... :banghead :banghead
Like I said before, if Staff even sneezed at an opponent he'd get a week :banghead
Couldn't agree more Julz - poor bloody Stafford - I mean it was Goodard for crying out loud - you could tap him with a feather duster and he'd need to be carried off on a stretcher. :banghead
Then there's Andy Raines - I mean fair bloody dinkum Aaron Fiora who's most likely fallen over his boot laces he's always been unco-ordinated - where's the vision
And Simmo - well actually Simmo probably deserves one for getting sucked in by that twit Nick :'( :'( Reiwoldt - seriously that was dumb :banghead
-
The Stafford decision is a joke. Honestly, two guys going for the ball, Staff has better awareness than Duddard, so he protects himself from a possible head collision.
He tucked the shoulder and made unavoidable contact!!!
-
The club must NOT send the wrong image to its younger players by not challenging the Raines decision. The club must challenge, even if we lose, you gotta make sure the kids believe the club administration will go into bat for them when the time comes. Failure to challenge this one infact failure to challenge all 3 will be a dereliction of duty by the administration.
-
Since when was a trip by hand in a tackle reportable ???. It's not like sticking your foot out a la Goodwin ::).
LOL @ unco Fiora WP :thumbsup
-
Anyone who has Fox Footy, take note of the ad that features Ric Flair and Trish Stratus from the WWE. They say "We have the Brain Buster, and the Figure 4 Leglock, but we don't have this..." as it shows hip and shoulders and body clashes...WE DON'T FUGGIN HAVE THEM EITHER now apparently... FFS this game is getting soft! :banghead
-
Tigers' rising star is worth the risk
01 August 2006 Herald-Sun
Mike Sheahan
RICHMOND has a major dilemma. Does it put the club first, as usual, or does it fight for Andrew Raines and his hopes of winning the NAB Rising Star Award?
If Raines takes an early plea on a tripping offence from Saturday's game against St Kilda, he will be free to play against the Bulldogs on Saturday.
The admission of guilt would disqualify him from the $20,000 award for which he shares favouritism with Magpie Heath Shaw.
The incident drew 125 activation points and a one-game sanction, instantly ruling him out of both the Rising Star and Brownlow Medal.
If Raines and Richmond challenge the decision and lose, he will remain out of Rising Star contention and will lose the benefit of an early plea, forcing him out of next Saturday's game.
The issue rekindles memories of Corey McKernan's misfortune in 1994, when he was denied the Rising Star award after being found guilty of tripping by hand.
Raines, like McKernan, was charged with tripping by hand.
The third-quarter incident, involving Aaron Fiora, was deemed by the match review panel to be intentional, of low impact, in play and to the body.
If he could have the charge downgraded to negligent, he would finish under the 100-point threshold, enabling him to play on Saturday and stay eligible for the Rising Star.
The Tigers must make their decision this morning.
It was a black day for Richmond, losing Greg Stafford for two matches and Troy Simmonds. The Simmonds incident was assessed as intentional, Stafford's negligent.
Hard to believe Raines, who lunged at Fiora while on the ground, acted with more deliberation than Stafford. Despite the risk, the Tigers owe Raines an appeal.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,19977184%255E20322,00.html
-
Surely the club must challenge the decision on Raines and Stafford. Even Spida Everitt, who has a bit of a beef against Staff, said he should get off. As for the Simmo one, Riewoldt didn't look too worried about it. By the looks of it, Simmo hardly made a mark.
-
Tigers to risk Raines
11:07:46 AM Tue 1 August, 2006
Paul Gough
Sportal for afl.com.au
Richmond will risk Andrew Raines copping a one-match suspension in a bid at the AFL tribunal on Tuesday night in a bid to keep alive his hopes of winning this year's NAB Rising Star Award.
Raines will plead guilty to intentionally tripping St Kilda's Aaron Fiora but the Tigers will attempt to have the charge downgraded from an intentional action to a reckless one……
And further on:
The Tigers will also challenge the three match ban handed down to ruckman Greg Stafford for rough play on St Kilda's Brendon Goddard.
Full story:
http://richmondfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=285516
And they are not contesting the Simmo penalty
-
Tigers to risk Raines
11:07:46 AM Tue 1 August, 2006
Paul Gough
Sportal for afl.com.au
Richmond will risk Andrew Raines copping a one-match suspension in a bid at the AFL tribunal on Tuesday night in a bid to keep alive his hopes of winning this year's NAB Rising Star Award.
Raines will plead guilty to intentionally tripping St Kilda's Aaron Fiora but the Tigers will attempt to have the charge downgraded from an intentional action to a reckless one……
And further on:
The Tigers will also challenge the three match ban handed down to ruckman Greg Stafford for rough play on St Kilda's Brendon Goddard.
Full story:
http://richmondfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=285516
Correct decision :clapping
-
Correct decision :clapping
Yeah, but will the tribunal make the right decision.
I don't usually get involved in discussing the tribunal stuff or umpires mistakes when it comes to the Tiges, cuase it can look like sour grapes.
BUT FAIR DINKUM - There was one from another game that was barely different from staffs and nothing said. cant recall which game atm......
Rainsy was just reckless and Simmo oh well they seem to change their mind every few weeks about that one - Should know better not to tempt fate.
And besides I really want Rainsey to win so I can watch the colonwood supporters squeel like pigs because KB is on the rising star panel :lol
-
The end decision is out of our hands, but the club backed its player/s today. It would have been a very bad look indeed (for our youngster) if they (the administration) squibbed it on Andy Raines.
-
BUT FAIR DINKUM - There was one from another game that was barely different from staffs and nothing said. cant recall which game atm......
The Ben Johnson hit on Trent Croad perhaps? I mean Croad ended up in hospital where as Goddard ended up going off and then coming back anf playing the entire 2nd half :banghead :banghead
-
BUT FAIR DINKUM - There was one from another game that was barely different from staffs and nothing said. cant recall which game atm......
The Ben Johnson hit on Trent Croad perhaps? I mean Croad ended up in hospital where as Goddard ended up going off and then coming back anf playing the entire 2nd half :banghead :banghead
Nah - Contact between Geelong's Jimmy Bartel and the Kangaroos' Shannon Grant from the second quarter of Sunday's match at Manuka Oval was reviewed. It was the view of the Panel that Bartel makes contact with Grant in an attempt to spoil but his action was not deemed to be a reportable offence.
If you can find it post the link and lets play spot the difference. :thumbsup
-
Good on the Club :clapping.
I think with the Rainesy one they will try to get the points for the original charge knocked down below 100 so he stays eligible for the RS award despite a reprimand.
As for Staff it seems the tribunal will nail him on running past the footy ::).
-
Mark Robinson on SEN earlier today also said there was nothing wrong with it and Staff shouldn't even get sighted. It was a fair plain ordinary shirtfront ::).
As I said what is our game becoming :banghead :banghead :banghead
The umpires, tribunal and the media are all trying to change our game. I hate it HATE IT >:( >:( >:(
-
And Simmo should get off too
I need him for my supercoach squad :help
-
mmm - I had a little flutter e/way on the brownlow - not much of a chance but interesting to see how he goes especially earlier on.
TOLD you I was a jinx
-
Mark Robinson on SEN earlier today also said there was nothing wrong with it and Staff shouldn't even get sighted. It was a fair plain ordinary shirtfront ::).
As I said what is our game becoming :banghead :banghead :banghead
The umpires, tribunal and the media are all trying to change our game. I hate it HATE IT >:( >:( >:(
The decisions come down from the top Andy D and AA and Geisch with the umps :banghead. The bump within 5m of the ball is part of the game.
-
Raines got off!
Baker upgraded to 2 weeks.
There is justice. :) Sometimes.
-
Raines got off!
Baker upgraded to 2 weeks.
There is justice. :) Sometimes.
:rollin
Great stuff FF :clapping.
Any news on Staff?
-
Raines got off!
Baker upgraded to 2 weeks.
There is justice. :) Sometimes.
Excellent stuff - Lucky simmo didn't appeal he would of got 2 also - Very interesting to see what happens with staff and how future cases compare.
-
Staff to play this week, he got off.
Suffer Baker
-
At least the tribunal panel got it right :thumbsup. Ridiculous that he even got charged for a fair hip and shoulder.
Well done RFC :clapping.
-
Staff to play this week, he got off.
Good thing the tribunal viewed it differently to the match review panel and another panel. 8)
ps I see the umps copped stuff in a couple of posts about the Stafford incident. They didn't report him. ;)
-
ps I see the umps copped stuff in a couple of posts about the Stafford incident. They didn't report him. ;)
Umps got it right with Staff :clapping but not in Jordan Lewis's free against on Friday night. Anyway who cares about Hawthorn ;).
-
:clapping
excellent result for all. The club did what it had to do.
-
Serves Baker right too for his cheap shot on Sugar off the pack a couple of years ago. Suffer :wallywink :rollin.
-
Stafford triumphs at tribunal
The Australian
August 1, 2006
RICHMOND ruckman Greg Stafford expressed relief tonight that the AFL remained a collision sport after his successful visit to the tribunal.
But earlier today, his coach Terry Wallace called on the league to give clearer guidelines on its definition of acceptable contact in the game.
The Tigers enjoyed a successful night at the tribunal, with Stafford cleared of his rough conduct charge and Andrew Raines remaining eligible for the Rising Star award.
Stafford is now free to play his 200th senior game this Saturday against the Western Bulldogs, a must-win assignment for Richmond if it is to keep its slight finals hopes alive.
Earlier the Tigers accepted Troy Simmonds' one-match ban for striking.
"I'm very happy with the result and just glad we're still playing a collision sport as opposed to a contact sport – that was perhaps the way it was going," Stafford said.
"In the context of our season, where we're at and what the game means, (that) means more to me than 200 games."
Stafford collided heavily with Saints defender Brendon Goddard last Saturday as the ball landed between them.
Richmond produced as evidence timed video footage of the incident, which showed Stafford had just five tenths of a second to react once he saw Goddard.
"I rolled my shoulder to protect myself – I was through the contact before I knew it, it was a blur," Stafford said in evidence.
Under cross-examination, Stafford said every player had been taught "since you're knee-high to a grasshopper" to protect himself and go in hard for the ball.<> "What we saw in this incident, there is a clear message that we no longer have a collision sport, we have a contact sport," he argued.
"We would like the AFL to give a stronger determination of what are the options a player has when those circumstances occur."
Raines meanwhile pleaded guilty to tripping Aaron Fiora, but successfully argued it was reckless rather than intentional and escaped with a reprimand.
It also reduced his initial activation points from 125 to 75 – anything above 100 makes a player ineligible for the Rising Star and the Brownlow Medal.
Raines said the main reason he contested the classification of the charge was not to protect his Rising Star eligibility, but because he felt it was not intentional.
http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,19990379-23211,00.html
-
The Tribunal had a good week. The snipers appeal was rejected ;D.
-
The Tribunal had a good week. The snipers appeal was rejected ;D.
Seriously the Saints were just plain DUMB and it warms my heart I must say :clapping ;D
Simmo got 1 week for a jumper punch
Baker basically did the same thing but for whatever reason the review panel called it "attempting to strike" ::) and he got offered one week
Baker has a shocking record (fact) but none the less they decide to contest it - DUMB - result 2 weeks
They then try and appeal it DUMBER than DUMB
-
Just heard on the 1.00pm news that Staffy been pinged again by those at the Match reveiw panel for an elbow on whoever the Bulldog player was.
Poor Staffy he's marked man :help
-
It would've been the one where he tried to fend off Scotty West in our forward line. It was a free kick but don't the Match Review Committee take into account like last week that Staff is a foot taller than either Baker or West. Whatever happens we get Simmo back this week so we have a handy replacement on hand if Staff gets rubbed out.
-
Staff should do an Alistair Lynch and announce his retirement immediately just to stick it to the Match Review Committee.
-
I wonder if Neitz would have had nothing to answer to for his knees into Goodes back if his name was Greg Stafford ::).
-
Did anyone see when Hall put his foot into Hooper(?), it was around the time when the goal fiasco was going on.
Does anyone think that will get looked at?
-
Did anyone see when Hall put his foot into Hooper(?), it was around the time when the goal fiasco was going on.
Does anyone think that will get looked at?
No mention of it by the match review panel so he's safe.
-
:thumbsup
*mimics* Excellent