Stephen Baker cops a 9 week ban

[one-eyed]

ST KILDA'S Steven Baker is facing the longest suspension since the introduction of the AFL’s Match Review Panel system after the Saint was hit with a potential 12-week ban arising from four different charges.

Baker can accept a nine-week ban with an early guilty plea to all charges.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/97068/default.aspx


Edit: correction - the AFL website made a mistake. It's 12 weeks.


Update: Ended up with a 9 week suspension after accepting the early plea on the striking charges but failing with the appeal of the misconduct charge.

[Chuck17]

Sucked in to the little twerp hope they give it to him

[one-eyed]

Here's the full MRP report.

Baker charged with 4 offences totalling 12 weeks. 9 weeks if he accepts an early plea.

Steve Johnson copped 4 weeks for two charges

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/97074/default.aspx

[WilliamPowell]

ALthough I am still scratching my head over the decision last week not to report & suspend Judd 

I have to say this is probably the best decision (or should that be decisions) ther MRP has ever made 

Never has one player deserved such fair and reasonable treatment from the MRP as this little sniper - well done MRP 

[RollsRoyce]

Let's hope he's sitting in the grandstand next time we play them (ie/ let's hope he's unsuccessful when the inevitable appeal come in.)

[cub]

Thing is if Steve Johnson didn't retaliate nothing would of happened.
Don't the umpires have something to answer for in regards to this.
Johnson should get off for bringing this weasel into the light.
As for Baker what goes around comes around.
I really hate aints, this stuff makes me lol

[mightytiges]

About time the hack sniper met Mr Karma. He's been doing this crap since punching Sugar in the jaw when he wasn't looking back in 2003.

[tigersalive]

Well I must be the odd one out.

I reckon he did sweet stuff all and Johnson's action was by far the worst.  Perhaps one chin jab was worthy of suspension.

But never in this world should a player be suspended for testing out the injury of a player who has decided to play on if the act to test the injury is legal.  It's a pathetic judgement by the MRP and one that would only be made because Baker is always in their sights with them looking to suspend him for anything.

Baker has done some dog things in his time but Friday night was not one of those times.

[cub]

Well I must be the odd one out.

I reckon he did sweet eff all and Johnson's action was by far the worst.  Perhaps one chin jab was worthy of suspension.

But never in this world should a player be suspended for testing out the injury of a player who has decided to play on if the act to test the injury is legal.  It's a pathetic judgement by the MRP and one that would only be made because Baker is always in their sights with them looking to suspend him for anything.

Baker has done some dog things in his time but Friday night was not one of those times.

Ever watched 'My name is Earl' - Good show 

[one-eyed]

Baker's appeal of the midconduct charge failed. So he's suspended for NINE weeks....



ST KILDA defender Steven Baker will miss the next nine weeks of football after a guilty misconduct verdict was added to his three striking charges on Tuesday night at the AFL tribunal.

In the end the Saints only contested one of the four charges laid against Baker for his clashes with Geelong's Steve Johnson on Friday night.

The club challenged the misconduct offence for unnecessary contact with an injured player but failed to overturn the verdict, adding two matches to the seven he received for early guilty pleas to three striking charges.

The Saints have not ruled out taking the matter further and will consult with the club's board on Wednesday.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/97145/default.aspx