Carlton Supporters Club

Lily Of Laguna => Ladies Lounge => Topic started by: kruddler on February 22, 2021, 06:41:46 pm

Title: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: kruddler on February 22, 2021, 06:41:46 pm
So its happened. It shouldn't of, but it has.

It has been graded as....
Careless
Medium Impact
High Contact.

She can take 1 week suspension with an early plea.

We have until 11am tomorrow to respond.

I'm not sure which angle we'd choose to attack, but considering Sarah Hosking was able to take her kick....and played out the game and would surely back up Maddie P in any tribunal meeting (They hugged after the game).....i don't know the charges can stick.


Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 22, 2021, 06:46:04 pm
https://womens.afl/video/61731/is-reigning-aflw-best-and-fairest-in-trouble-for-this-tackle-
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: rocky on February 22, 2021, 06:51:26 pm
She's in trouble. Take the week.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: LP on February 22, 2021, 08:10:44 pm
So its happened. It shouldn't of, but it has.

It has been graded as....
Careless
Medium Impact
High Contact.

She can take 1 week suspension with an early plea.

We have until 11am tomorrow to respond.

I'm not sure which angle we'd choose to attack, but considering Sarah Hosking was able to take her kick....and played out the game and would surely back up Maddie P in any tribunal meeting (They hugged after the game).....i don't know the charges can stick.
If it the one the replayed over and over how can it be high contact, the side on slow motion from the 2nd angle showed Sarah's head didn't really hit the turf it was her shoulder!

Maybe it's another incident?
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: Gointocarlton on February 22, 2021, 08:39:41 pm
Hosking came back on and wasn't concussed for what its worth.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: DJC on February 22, 2021, 10:27:55 pm
Fight it!

Any competent sports biomechanics analyst should be able to present a watertight case.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 23, 2021, 07:42:39 am
If it the one the replayed over and over how can it be high contact, the side on slow motion from the 2nd angle showed Sarah's head didn't really hit the turf it was her shoulder!

Maybe it's another incident?

I linked it above.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 23, 2021, 07:44:08 am
Hosking came back on and wasn't concussed for what its worth.

Not only that, she jumped to her feet and took the kick. Played on for another 5 - 10 minutes before prespakis buried her in another tackle....which she jumped up from.....and THEN they gave her a concussion test
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: LP on February 23, 2021, 07:57:35 am
Fight it!

Any competent sports biomechanics analyst should be able to present a watertight case.
Yes, as a sport we can't have MRP matters being decided by commentators, the kid was prosecuted, judged and executed by the jerk behind the microphone.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: Professer E on February 23, 2021, 09:34:01 am
More evidence that the AFL(W) is corrupt.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 23, 2021, 09:39:22 am
Yes, as a sport we can't have MRP matters being decided by commentators, the kid was prosecuted, judged and executed by the jerk behind the microphone.
Don't beat around the bush.....it was Kelly Underwood that got her convicted.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 23, 2021, 09:47:11 am
I don't follow the AflW closely  but given the game is in its infancy it looks over umpired and any head high contact is going to be acted on so the game remains clean and attractive as a brand to young women.
If you get a few players seriously injured with head high tackles then it's going to be highlighted and the game questioned about being safe for young women so I would be expecting it be over sanitised until it is more established.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: LP on February 23, 2021, 09:52:06 am
If you get a few players seriously injured with head high tackles then it's going to be highlighted and the game questioned about being safe for young women so I would be expecting it be over sanitised until it is more established.
But it has to be a high tackle, you can't just label an event that for political or personal purposes!

Prespakis tackle was nothing of the sort, she actually ended up underneath Sarah Hosking for the initial impact!
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: LP on February 23, 2021, 10:26:48 am
Don't beat around the bush.....it was Kelly Underwood that got her convicted.
 Next thing you'll be telling me Kelli Underwood is a Feral supporter calling her own team!
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 23, 2021, 11:15:11 am
But it has to be a high tackle, you can't just label an event that for political or personal purposes!

Prespakis tackle was nothing of the sort, she actually ended up underneath Sarah Hosking for the initial impact!
But it has to be a high tackle, you can't just label an event that for political or personal purposes!

Prespakis tackle was nothing of the sort, she actually ended up underneath Sarah Hosking for the initial impact!
Wasnt the charge medium impact, high contact..? the player went off too?
I'm not saying MaddieP was guilty but its all about the look of the game especially in a new brand you are trying to sell.....
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: DJC on February 23, 2021, 11:28:05 am
Wasnt the charge medium impact, high contact..? the player went off too?
I'm not saying MaddieP was guilty but its all about the look of the game especially in a new brand you are trying to sell.....

Maddie laid a textbook tackle on Sarah.  Sarah’s momentum caused her to somersault and land on her shoulder.  Sarah was taken off for a concussion test after a second tackle by Maddie.  She passed the test and returned to play and even spoke to the boundary rider about how she was good to go.

One camera angle does suggest that there’s intent in Maddie’s tackle but the other angle shows that there was nothing to it.

I doubt whether Maddie would have been reported if Underwood had recanted after viewing the second lot of vision.

If the AFLW was concerned about the look of the game, Marinoff would never have had her suspension overturned after fracturing Brid Stack’s neck.

Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 23, 2021, 11:41:41 am
But it has to be a high tackle, you can't just label an event that for political or personal purposes!

Prespakis tackle was nothing of the sort, she actually ended up underneath Sarah Hosking for the initial impact!

For the purposes of sling tackles or double movement tackles (Maddie did have a slight second movement to ramp up the force) the contact in question includes contact made by the ground.

The logic behind that is you could essentially spear tackle/pile drive people without a penalty because all the force and damage was made by the ground.

....and the duty of care is on the tackler
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: Baggers on February 23, 2021, 11:45:09 am
I'm glad the club is challenging the suspension.

Momentum played a big part in this. It was not careless as Maddie cannot be expected to factor in momentum... medium impact is again not Maddie's responsibility as momentum again played a major role, most tackles result in medium impact and the high contact was not from Maddie but from her opponent's momentum in the tackle. For mine the tackle was made 'dangerous' by the angle of tackle and momentum of the opponent, not from any carelessness, dangerousness or malice. Mind you, I am not a lawyer and am heavily biased!
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: sandsmere on February 23, 2021, 11:53:30 am
Nothing wrong with that tackle.

I thought it was a beauty.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 23, 2021, 12:06:34 pm
Maddie laid a textbook tackle on Sarah.  Sarah’s momentum caused her to somersault and land on her shoulder.  Sarah was taken off for a concussion test after a second tackle by Maddie.  She passed the test and returned to play and even spoke to the boundary rider about how she was good to go.

One camera angle does suggest that there’s intent in Maddie’s tackle but the other angle shows that there was nothing to it.

I doubt whether Maddie would have been reported if Underwood had recanted after viewing the second lot of vision.

If the AFLW was concerned about the look of the game, Marinoff would never have had her suspension overturned after fracturing Brid Stack’s neck.


Fair point on the Brid Stack tackle, my issue is more how the AFL see the look of the game and a series of high contact/tackles what ever you want to call it each week with high profile players reported isnt a good look. You wouldnt have many parents pushing their kids into playing AFLW when they can choose basketball/netball or Cricket for example if that stuff is appearing on the sports reports on TV on a regular basis.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: LP on February 23, 2021, 01:20:00 pm
Maddie laid a textbook tackle on Sarah.  Sarah’s momentum caused her to somersault and land on her shoulder.  Sarah was taken off for a concussion test after a second tackle by Maddie.  She passed the test and returned to play and even spoke to the boundary rider about how she was good to go.

One camera angle does suggest that there’s intent in Maddie’s tackle but the other angle shows that there was nothing to it.

I doubt whether Maddie would have been reported if Underwood had recanted after viewing the second lot of vision.
Further the second angle actually looks like Sarah pushed off trying to launch over Prespakis to release the footy. To me it looked the same in the second tackle, like Sarah's reflex is to jump into the tackler to free her arms, but it leaves her vulnerable to tipping, and nobody says anything about contacting the tackler high.

To me they can't let this happen, if they reward that technique they'll set a precedent that increases risk as players will milk the penalty, it is very similar to ducking the head and disturbingly there was an incident in which that was rewarded in the game as well.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: DJC on February 23, 2021, 02:50:31 pm
Further the second angle actually looks like Sarah pushed off trying to launch over Prespakis to release the footy. To me it looked the same in the second tackle, like Sarah's reflex is to jump into the tackler to free her arms, but it leaves her vulnerable to tipping, and nobody says anything about contacting the tackler high.

To me they can't let this happen, if they reward that technique they'll set a precedent that increases risk as players will milk the penalty, it is very similar to ducking the head and disturbingly there was an incident in which that was rewarded in the game as well.

There was one where Stahle got a free kick after she headbutted Mua Laloifi.  There was another where the Tigers player "slipped" as she was trying to avoid a Breann Moody tackle and Breann's arm made contact with her neck.  Mua certainly felt the effect of the headbutt and, if anything, she should have been awarded the free.  The Moody free should have been play on.

Rewarding players for disregarding their own safety is not the answer.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: Gointocarlton on February 23, 2021, 03:52:54 pm
A travesty if she doesn't get off.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 23, 2021, 04:47:11 pm
The Tribunal hearing will take place at 5.15pm AEDT on Wednesday.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: DJC on February 23, 2021, 06:07:42 pm
I just had a look at the replay and noted the following:

Kelli Underwood, after watching a replay of Maddie's tackle says, "That is dangerous ... almost a spear tackle Dicko."
Ben Dixon responds, "It was, it was ... the momentum ... it looks worse than it was."

Later in the quarter, Underwood is trying to blame Sarah's absence for the Blues getting back into the game and says "Quite dangerous spear tackle." to which Dixon responds, "... nothing untoward."

A spear tackle involves lifting one's opponent in the air, upending them and throwing them into the ground.  Maddie was actually half sitting when she tackled Sarah and Sarah's feet did not leave the ground until she somersaulted over Maddie's body, her momentum and Maddie's tackle both contributing to the somersault.

Commentators should have a responsibility to call the game accurately, and making up a "dangerous spear tackle" does not do justice to the game or the player involved.  Returning to EB's point about the look of the game, the AFLW should have a quiet word in Underwood's ear and let her know that sensationalising minor incidents is not on.

The other thing I noticed is that nearly four minutes went by before Sarah came off.  That suggests to me that Richmond's doctor wasn't concerned initially but only decided that Sarah should have a concussion test after watching a couple of replays of the incident - with or without Underwood's commentary?
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: Baggers on February 23, 2021, 06:58:48 pm
I just had a look at the replay and noted the following:

Kelli Underwood, after watching a replay of Maddie's tackle says, "That is dangerous ... almost a spear tackle Dicko."
Ben Dixon responds, "It was, it was ... the momentum ... it looks worse than it was."

Later in the quarter, Underwood is trying to blame Sarah's absence for the Blues getting back into the game and says "Quite dangerous spear tackle." to which Dixon responds, "... nothing untoward."

A spear tackle involves lifting one's opponent in the air, upending them and throwing them into the ground.  Maddie was actually half sitting when she tackled Sarah and Sarah's feet did not leave the ground until she somersaulted over Maddie's body, her momentum and Maddie's tackle both contributing to the somersault.

Commentators should have a responsibility to call the game accurately, and making up a "dangerous spear tackle" does not do justice to the game or the player involved.  Returning to EB's point about the look of the game, the AFLW should have a quiet word in Underwood's ear and let her know that sensationalising minor incidents is not on.

The other thing I noticed is that nearly four minutes went by before Sarah came off.  That suggests to me that Richmond's doctor wasn't concerned initially but only decided that Sarah should have a concussion test after watching a couple of replays of the incident - with or without Underwood's commentary?

Well said. 👍 👌🏾
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 23, 2021, 07:48:59 pm
I just had a look at the replay and noted the following:

Kelli Underwood, after watching a replay of Maddie's tackle says, "That is dangerous ... almost a spear tackle Dicko."
Ben Dixon responds, "It was, it was ... the momentum ... it looks worse than it was."

Later in the quarter, Underwood is trying to blame Sarah's absence for the Blues getting back into the game and says "Quite dangerous spear tackle." to which Dixon responds, "... nothing untoward."

A spear tackle involves lifting one's opponent in the air, upending them and throwing them into the ground.  Maddie was actually half sitting when she tackled Sarah and Sarah's feet did not leave the ground until she somersaulted over Maddie's body, her momentum and Maddie's tackle both contributing to the somersault.

Commentators should have a responsibility to call the game accurately, and making up a "dangerous spear tackle" does not do justice to the game or the player involved.  Returning to EB's point about the look of the game, the AFLW should have a quiet word in Underwood's ear and let her know that sensationalising minor incidents is not on.

The other thing I noticed is that nearly four minutes went by before Sarah came off.  That suggests to me that Richmond's doctor wasn't concerned initially but only decided that Sarah should have a concussion test after watching a couple of replays of the incident - with or without Underwood's commentary?

I did point out that it was just Kelli Underwood that called for Prespakis head. She was the first female commentator and IMO is by far the worst one. She calls the wrong players. Gets the rules wrong. Barracks. ....and she is just plain annoying to listen too IMO. Other female commentators or special comments girls are good. But i can't stand her.
/end rant.

When you rewatched...did you see the second hard tackle by prespakis on Hosking? She went off soon after that from memory.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: DJC on February 23, 2021, 07:57:44 pm
When you rewatched...did you see the second hard tackle by prespakis on Hosking? She went off soon after that from memory.

It was a solid tackle but probably not as hard as a couple that Maddie copped.  Sarah wasn’t inconvenienced in the slightest but was called off by the runner shortly after that tackle.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 23, 2021, 07:59:30 pm
It was a solid tackle but probably not as hard as a couple that Maddie copped.  Sarah wasn’t inconvenienced in the slightest but was called off by the runner shortly after that tackle.
Exactly.
She was called off AFTER the 2nd tackle.

Use that as evidence. She was fine until the 2nd tackle.
They can't charge her for the 2nd tackle now.....they've missed that window.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 23, 2021, 08:02:48 pm
....and yes Maddie copped a tackle just before the Hosking one from a sling that went unnoticed, despite her appealing to the umpire.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: Baggers on February 23, 2021, 08:27:47 pm
I did point out that it was just Kelli Underwood that called for Prespakis head. She was the first female commentator and IMO is by far the worst one. She calls the wrong players. Gets the rules wrong. Barracks. ....and she is just plain annoying to listen too IMO. Other female commentators or special comments girls are good. But i can't stand her.
/end rant.

When you rewatched...did you see the second hard tackle by prespakis on Hosking? She went off soon after that from memory.

I could not agree more. I always turn the sound off when she commentates. Dreadful commentator.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: Mav on February 23, 2021, 08:35:37 pm
Probably the best expert-comments commentator, male or female, is Daisy Pearce. Very knowledgeable and concise.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: PaulP on February 23, 2021, 09:04:35 pm
Probably the best expert-comments commentator, male or female, is Daisy Pearce. Very knowledgeable and concise.

Yes, agree.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: Gointocarlton on February 23, 2021, 09:14:47 pm
Probably the best expert-comments commentator, male or female, is Daisy Pearce. Very knowledgeable and concise.
100%
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: capcom on February 23, 2021, 09:33:21 pm
She was a complete disaster at 3AW when Rex Hunt gave her a free shot ... stuck up nobody
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: capcom on February 23, 2021, 09:38:02 pm
She was a complete disaster at 3AW when Rex Hunt gave her a free shot ... stuck up nobody
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: DJC on February 23, 2021, 10:04:30 pm
Probably the best expert-comments commentator, male or female, is Daisy Pearce. Very knowledgeable and concise.

Daisy is OK, and several AFLW players, Lauren Arnell for one, are pretty good.  However, the likes of Parkin, Matthews and Malthouse are hard to go past.

Gilbert Macadam provides a different perspective and I think that Tony Armstrong will forge a great media career.

However, none of that detracts from the fact that Kelli doesn’t understand AFL rules, is inaccurate with her commentary, sensationalises incidents, creates her own narrative that doesn’t reflect reality, passes judgement on matters beyond her understanding, and has a grating voice.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: LP on February 24, 2021, 07:51:01 am
It was a solid tackle but probably not as hard as a couple that Maddie copped.  Sarah wasn’t inconvenienced in the slightest but was called off by the runner shortly after that tackle.
 That's tackle by the Nthmond MC, to make sure that nobody misses the Sarah tackle.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 24, 2021, 06:41:18 pm
https://twitter.com/_sjblack/status/1364477037277155329



https://twitter.com/_sjblack/status/1364479716833456129



Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 24, 2021, 06:57:58 pm
https://twitter.com/_sjblack/status/1364482582381953025

Jury of Richard Loveridge, Stewart Loewe and Stephen Jurica are now deliberating
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking.
Post by: kruddler on February 24, 2021, 07:29:42 pm
https://twitter.com/_sjblack/status/1364491489120710656
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: Baggers on February 24, 2021, 07:55:43 pm
Who is this Sarah Black? And what qualifies her to understand motion, momentum and so on?

"This vision is uncomfortable to watch," this is not the comment of a purely objective individual. Plenty of tackles are 'uncomfortable to watch,' and not reportable.

Disagree. And not impressed.

Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: kruddler on February 24, 2021, 08:04:04 pm
Who is this Sarah Black? And what qualifies her to understand motion, momentum and so on?

"This vision is uncomfortable to watch," this is not the comment of a purely objective individual. Plenty of tackles are 'uncomfortable to watch,' and not reportable.

Disagree. And not impressed.


lol.....Sarah Black is reporting on what is being said at the tribunal.

None of that was her personal opinion.

FWIW, she is the #1 reporter on all things AFLW.
She does the top 30 ala Mike Sheehans Top 50.
She has a few shows/podcasts.
She is the one that gets the AFLW stories.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 24, 2021, 09:08:29 pm
Who is this Sarah Black? And what qualifies her to understand motion, momentum and so on?

"This vision is uncomfortable to watch," this is not the comment of a purely objective individual. Plenty of tackles are 'uncomfortable to watch,' and not reportable.

Disagree. And not impressed.


I still think its about the look of the game, thats not what the AFL want to see on TV with young women and their parents watching and the womens game will be a very sanitized version of the male game until its established.
Maddie got unlucky and it wasnt malicious but its more about sending a message that a player in a vulnerable position requires a duty of care to be shown. You send a real message when you suspend the best player in the comp and I think thats what this case was more about.
Potential Head injuries in all sports are coming under scrutiny more and I believe international cricket will have a new set of rules regarding short pitched bowling soon. With all the research into concussion and later effects in life I can see a lot of contact sports being affected as governing bodies look to protect themselves by reducing the legal repercussion risks of head injuries even at the cost of making the game over sanitized.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: Professer E on February 24, 2021, 09:18:29 pm
Sorry,  but this is bulls hit. The message it sends is.... Lay a good strong tackle and you're in trouble. What message is that sending?  Don't play hard?

I can remember Bryce Gibbs getting nailed for a sling tackle - fair enough too - but there were two just as bad the following week and they both got off. Surprise surprise....not.

If they AFL is truly worried about "the look",  how the F does Marinoff get off after practically putting a player into the spinal unit?

Mark my words,  the next hard tackle won't be cited,  of course it won't.   This is the deadset crappiest tribunal decision ever,  and there's been some crap ones. It verges on rampant Carlton bashing.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on February 24, 2021, 09:47:17 pm
Sorry,  but this is bulls hit. The message it sends is.... Lay a good strong tackle and you're in trouble. What message is that sending?  Don't play hard?

I can remember Bryce Gibbs getting nailed for a sling tackle - fair enough too - but there were two just as bad the following week and they both got off. Surprise surprise....not.

If they AFL is truly worried about "the look",  how the F does Marinoff get off after practically putting a player into the spinal unit?

Mark my words,  the next hard tackle won't be cited,  of course it won't.   This is the deadset crappiest tribunal decision ever,  and there's been some crap ones. It verges on rampant Carlton bashing.
Consistency of message isnt a AFL strong point and agree the Marinoff case is bewildering  if you are seeking to protect the brand.
Do the AFL want a good hard game or a pretty game?
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: Professer E on February 24, 2021, 09:54:52 pm
Consistency.... Pfft. That word isn't in the AFLs lexicon.

It was a hatchet job from start to finish.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: Thryleon on February 25, 2021, 09:31:10 am
Put her in a different jumper and the outcome would be different.

Its an anti carlton thing.  The sooner you accept it the more comfortable you are with being screwed over.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: LP on February 25, 2021, 09:37:58 am
Put her in a different jumper and the outcome would be different.

Its an anti carlton thing.  The sooner you accept it the more comfortable you are with being screwed over.
I lobby strongly for Carlton to use more of the "us versus them" perspective, like the Filth do, then those actions become a motivation even if they are not deliberate! Coaches do not really like it, because it introduces unpredictable behaviour, but to me you need a bit of random to obtain ultimate success, being too predictable eventually serves an opponent more than it serves yourself.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: Baggers on February 25, 2021, 09:55:24 am
I still think its about the look of the game, thats not what the AFL want to see on TV with young women and their parents watching and the womens game will be a very sanitized version of the male game until its established.


Sadly, I think you are absolutely right. 'The look' is paramount -- just look at the CEO, all about appearances/fluff and entertainment. It will be interesting to see just how far they sanitize the game based on appearances only, and what it will look like at the other end. Makes Maddie something of an 'example'... a scapegoat, and that offends me at every interpretation of fairness.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: DJC on February 25, 2021, 07:29:07 pm
Next time we appeal a MRP stuff up, we should request to have Curly, Larry and Mo as the tribunal.  They couldn’t be any worse than the three stooges who suspended Maddie  >:(
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: LP on March 25, 2021, 03:32:46 pm
I wonder how our fans and Prespakis feel right now following the Bowers decision?

When will the media put some real heat on the AFL over this MRP bullsh1t!
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: Thryleon on March 25, 2021, 04:11:01 pm
I wonder how our fans and Prespakis feel right now following the Bowers decision?

When will the media put some real heat on the AFL over this MRP bullsh1t!

The afl run their propaganda machines not the other way around.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: DJC on March 25, 2021, 04:32:25 pm
I wonder how our fans and Prespakis feel right now following the Bowers decision?

When will the media put some real heat on the AFL over this MRP bullsh1t!

Bowers has got away with three fines this season; two for dangerous tackles  ::)

There is a bit of media angst:

Quote
Fremantle 200-gamer Paul Hasleby said the tackle “deserved weeks” on the sidelines and called for consistency.

7NEWS chief football reporter Mark Stevens urged league officials to appeal the tribunal’s decision, as it did in 2017 when Bachar Houli received a ‘manifestly inadequate’ two-match ban for striking.


Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on March 25, 2021, 04:56:07 pm
Obviously the Pile Driver tackle has been sanctioned by the AFL.....what a joke, the head is sacrosanct but no worries about damaging someones neck and crippling them for life, thats fine.
That was a dangerous tackle with zero care factor for the player, whoever made that tribunal decision has no idea and should be sacked. The AFL powers at be need to appeal and demand a penalty, as if you would allow your daughter to play a game that allows that type of play to go unpunished.
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: capcom on March 25, 2021, 05:03:10 pm
I don't watch AFLW but I did see that incident.  Bloody joke.  Who in the "f" runs this show? 
Title: Re: Prespakis charged for tackle on Sarah Hosking - Appeal fails - 1 week suspension
Post by: kruddler on March 25, 2021, 05:33:05 pm
I wonder how our fans and Prespakis feel right now following the Bowers decision?

When will the media put some real heat on the AFL over this MRP bullsh1t!

I'm pretty happy.

We need Bowers playing to ensure Freo win.....and by as much as possible.
It helps our finals chances.