holland gets two

[gossipcom]

Originally posted by robbieando
So Holland should count himself very lucky he got 2 weeks because if he broke Willo's jaw, not only would he of got more, he would of found himself in court

If he had broken Willo's jaw he wouldn't have only had to answer to the judiciary, etc but also all the angry Swans fans

[robbieando]

Originally posted by gossipcom
They're also considering legal action against HS for publishing that article about Holland being a dirty player and targeting players, etc.

I would like to know on what grounds???? Holland was already known as a dirty player before he was reported, so it can hardly damage his repretation and I thought the use of taggers is to target a player.

Eddie think he and Collingwood are above the law and if the law doesn't excist he'll make it up.

[liz]

Originally posted by gossipcom

They're also considering legal action against HS for publishing that article about Holland being a dirty player and targeting players, etc.

LOL

Maybe the Swans should consider legal action against the Magpies for their blotting of Williams' character by insinuating that it was really all his fault. This is what The Age has to say

http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/26/1061663794022.html

some selective quotes

"Holland pinned part of the blame on Williams, saying he was hit first and that he retaliated. The videotape did not support this version of events and, surprisingly, it was not put to Williams, who appeared by teleconference."

"This was the apparent contradiction in the verdict. In his finding, Collis virtually rejected the notion that Williams had been the provocateur, adding that Holland's response was "out of all proportion to what preceded it".

"Oddly enough, the most damning evidence against Holland was presented by his advocate. It was a tape provided by Channel Ten that followed the pair as they made their way around the ground after the incident occurred. It showed Holland mouthing off, goading and annoying Williams in the precise manner that gives taggers a dirty reputation."

[Ruda Wakening]

Originally posted by dawson
Maybe they were fearful of his father going on the Footy Show like David Cloke did last year and that is why it was so light.

How true . I felt embarrassed for Jason Cloke that night .

I think everyone involved, was sorry David Cloke got a guernsey on the Footy Show . Even though he's played the game himself, he reminds me of the Saturday morning, monster father from the local under 7's .

But wow, what a MULLET !

[SWANSBEST]

Magpies' slick defence key to Holland's lenient penalty

August 27, 2003
COLLINGWOOD have learned to present tribunal defences in the manner the club's president Eddie McGuire dresses ? suavely, meticulously.

As a result Brodie Holland will miss just two matches for striking Sydney's Paul Williams some 50 metres off the ball.

Holland pleaded guilty to striking Williams to the face with a well-aimed right jab. It was his third striking conviction in just 70 games of AFL football and his second this season. He will miss Friday's match against Essendon and only one game of the finals campaign.

Holland said that he had been provoked by Williams.

His player advocate Sean Carroll said Collingwood were surprised that Williams himself was not before the tribunal so dastardly were his actions in Saturday's match at Sydney's Telstra Stadium.

The club tendered enhanced video evidence of the incident which showed Williams make some contact to Holland's face before the Collingwood tagger let rip with his right.

The video also showed Holland constantly harass Williams from the moment he was ordered to play on the Sydney midfielder by coach Mick Malthouse.

In handing down the sentence, tribunal chairman Brian Collis said: "We find (Holland's action) an intentional, forceful blow out of all proportion to what had proceeded it."

Holland told the tribunal that he picked up Williams on the instruction from Malthouse.

"Williams hit me in the mouth. I was stunned, I was shocked. I threw my arm straight back at him." It all happened in less than half a second, reckoned his advocate Carroll.

The video shows Williams fall to the ground, get to his feet again to remonstrate with his opponent. Of this Holland said: "He hit me again in the mouth. I was shocked again."

Malthouse gave character evidence on Holland's behalf. The coach traced the player's career from a promising Tasmanian junior to failed Fremantle forward. It was at this stage Collingwood traded to pick him up.

Holland missed the club's finals campaign last year because he was of little influence on the field, Malthouse said. The coach said it was agreed at the start of the season that Holland would have to change his style of play altogether if he was to make something of his life at Collingwood.

"Brodie came to me. He said he really needed to do something with his life," Malthouse said.

So he became an accountable midfielder and has chased best players in the opposition ever since.

Malthouse put it nicely. Players who fail at their second club usually fall out of the system. "He changed his life. He was at the crossroads of his life skills as well as the crossroads of his football skills."

Holland told the tribunal he regretted the incident deeply.

"I'm embarrassed about what I did. I don't usually do that on the football field."

His record ? three striking convictions in 70 games ? might suggest otherwise.

However, in their deliberation on the penalty the tribunal noted that Williams was not injured nor stressed and was able to remonstrate with Holland once he got to his feet. Collis said Williams probably only fell to the ground in the first place because of surprise.

Collingwood had asked the tribunal to be aware that any penalty around finals time was severe. Collis countered that the tribunal does not set the football calendar.

Holland is a very lucky little tagger. He struck Williams when the ball was, according to field umpire Matthew James, 50 metres away. And while the video offered by Collingwood showed Williams make contact, there was no clear evidence of the manner or the force.

The tribunal thought long and hard on the penalty. Two weeks seems very lenient for Holland, who has a record and fast right hand.

Last year on the eve of the grand final Collingwood appealed a tribunal decision that ruled defender Jason Cloke out of the premiership match. That may have worried the tribunal last night.

The Magpies had run a slick, effective defence. They asked only a few questions of Williams when they had the chance. Only after the Sydney player was told he could leave the hearing did both player advocate and Holland accuse him of being the provocateur. Williams had no chance to defend himself.

The first case of the night saw Fremantle forward Paul Medhurst cleared of a charge of kicking. But not before reporting umpire Brett Allen lay on the ground to demonstrate what he had seen.

He suggested that Medhurst, who had been bumped to the ground, had kicked Essendon's Danny Jacob's right calf with his left leg. Had Jacob's calf been a football, Allen suggested, it might have gone as far as 20 metres.

Medhurst also took to the floor in front of the tribunal members and demonstrated how contact was incidental and only occurred because he was flipping back to his feet.'

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,7077847%255E12270,00.html

[TheHood]

It infuriated me that they hid behind the unwritten "player code" and then when Willo was suspended, sunk the slipper into him.

"I was provoked". boo hoo. I mean who was the tagger here?

[Glenn]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by gossipcom
[B]Apparently someone on one of the newsgroups said on the footage they showed on tv tonight they showed Willo hitting Holland first, anyone see this footage?

Also quick question, has Willo ever been suspended in his AFL career? I was doing some research on this but couldn't find any info out

Pies put blame on Williams

Holland gets two, Dockers in clear
August 26, 2003

COLLINGWOODS'S Brodie Holland escaped with a two-week suspension for an off-ball strike on Sydney's Paul Williams while Fremantle also enjoyed good fortune at the AFL Tribunal tonight.

Docker Paul Medhurst was cleared of kicking Essendon's Danny Jacobs, while fellow Freo forward Jeff Farmer will also be available for the important match with West Coast after scrutiny of his clash with Bomber Andrew Welsh came to nothing.

Holland will miss Friday night's vital game against Essendon and also Collingwood's first final, but could be considered fortunate as he was widely expected to get at least three weeks.

It was a solid punch to the face of Williams ? who was looking away at the time ? some 50 metres off the ball and was the Magpie's second striking charge this season.

However Collingwood tried to portray Williams as the villain.

The club's advocate chose not to confront the Swans midfielder with the accusations when he was being questioned, but afterwards claimed Williams had struck Holland first with a 'jumper punch' to the face.

"It was only because Paul Williams has got his back to the camera that he is not sitting alongside Brodie Holland tonight," advocate Sean Carroll said.

Holland relied heavily on that argument, pleading guilty under provocation.

"I was stunned, I was shocked, I got a blow to the mouth and jaw and in an instinctive reaction I threw my arm straight back," Holland said.

"I'm not proud of what I did but I didn't hurt the player and it was nothing too untoward.

"I am embarrassed about what I did, I don't usually do that on the footy field."

The tribunal found Holland's retaliation was "out of all proportion to what preceded it", but did take account of character evidence by Pies coach Mick Malthouse and the guilty plea in invoking the lenient sentence.


Only saw the Channel 10 footage and just saw Holland striking Willo

[gossipcom]

Originally posted by SWANSBEST
The Magpies had run a slick, effective defence. They asked only a few questions of Williams when they had the chance. Only after the Sydney player was told he could leave the hearing did both player advocate and Holland accuse him of being the provocateur. Williams had no chance to defend himself.

This is what you call playing dirty and Collingwood succeeded big time last night in the judiciary.

I'd love to see us play Collingwood in the 2nd week of the finals so someone can knock Holland's block off <g>

[sharpie]

What is with these Collingwood bastards. First you've got Collis saying that Willo took a fall out of suprise and not due to the force of the hit (standard etiquette at the tribunal to play down the incident). Next you've got Holland laying the entire blame on Willo. So that if it was Willo being accused, Holland would have been crying bloody murder.

Ah, if only Collingwood can finish 5th and lose in the first week of the finals. Then justice would be done.

[dawson]

I'm not sure what you are all worried about.
It is better that Holland returns sooner so real justice will be meted out like it always has been - on the football field.

Like Cain, he is now a marked man - a fugitive. He has created for himself a reputation from which he can not escape.

The jungle drums on the football grape vine have been beating all over the country - all 15 other teams will now be watching out for him.

[Schneidergirl]

2 weeks?

What a joke. How can anyone think that is fair? There was no play anywhere near them. Willow wasn't even looking at him.

It's just dirrrrrty Collingwood play!

[gossipcom]

I promise last article unless Willo himself comes out and talks about the incident

Below is a very good article by Martin Blake.
Holland got lucky

Holland can consider himself lucky by half
By Martin Blake
August 27 2003

Brodie Holland got lucky.

As it is, Collingwood's pesky midfielder has let himself and his teammates down and will miss not only Friday's crucial match against Essendon but the Magpies' first final.

His reputation has suffered, for the videotape says it all. There is a confrontation with his opponent, Sydney's Paul Williams, some bumping and pushing.

The Swans' onballer looks away for an instant and Holland punches him in the mouth with his right fist. The ball is 50 metres away.

But it could have been much worse for Holland had tribunal chairman Brian Collis and his panel not been in such a charitable mood.

Holland has a record that suggests he has trouble controlling his emotions. In six seasons, this is his third conviction for striking. One of those was in round one of this season. This was a cowardly act and an off-the-ball incident. He could easily have copped four matches, virtually ending his season, so don't expect an appeal from Collingwood.

We've heard about the Magpie Army, but we thought it referred to the supporters. At the tribunal last night, Holland had not only an advocate but four Collingwood heavies to back him. Mick Malthouse was there, speaking eloquently about Holland's efforts to save his career after he had "not made it as a rover". So was Neil Balme, the football operations man, and Mark Kleiman, his offsider, and Eugene Arocca, the club's legal adviser.

They tried everything. Holland pinned part of the blame on Williams, saying he was hit first and that he retaliated. The videotape did not support this version of events and, surprisingly, it was not put to Williams, who appeared by teleconference.

Malthouse told the tribunal he was disgusted with newspaper coverage of the incident, clearly angry about one article in which an unnamed Swan had called Holland "the new Libba", a reference to former Western Bulldog tagger Tony Liberatore.

This was the apparent contradiction in the verdict. In his finding, Collis virtually rejected the notion that Williams had been the provocateur, adding that Holland's response was "out of all proportion to what preceded it".

Holland looked to be headed towards a month on the sidelines, especially when the panel deliberated for 15 minutes over the penalty. But Collis said they took into account the guilty plea, the fact that Williams was not seriously hurt, and the words of Malthouse, who had told them that Holland had "changed his life" in the past year.

Oddly enough, the most damning evidence against Holland was presented by his advocate. It was a tape provided by Channel Ten that followed the pair as they made their way around the ground after the incident occurred. It showed Holland mouthing off, goading and annoying Williams in the precise manner that gives taggers a dirty reputation.

Holland may have turned his career around. But he needs to sort out which direction he is going now.

[snajik]

Not just a wanker thug, but a liar to boot.

[Dave]

Well if we keep calling him "Libba Holland" that will piss both of them (he and Liberatore) off at the same time. You can't get better value than that!

[dawson]

Maybe now, Holland would prefer to be known just for the Windsor Smith ads.