Barrygate

[juliec]

Fingers Crossed for Barry, gee it going to be a long wait lets hope it will be all over and he will be free to play

Go Sydney Swans

Ps How good was that front page of The Herald Sun with Bobby Skilton on it?

[Go Swannies]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Thanks Barney!

There was still the option of pleading Not Guilty and it was floating around last night that he would. I am glad he has taken the safer route, but its all eggs in the Tribunal basket now!

The Not Guilty option was not a good one. The chance of it winning was less and it would then go to appeal on Thursday and then perhaps to the Supreme Court. So there goes Grand Final Week for the team.

This way, there's less grounds for appeal but hopefully the Swans silk can introduce enough grounds to reduce the change - or at least introduce enough element of doubt for the charges to be reduced. Then the lynch mob can go home and turn the tumbrils back into bandwagons.

Or tonight we'll be spewing - and I suspect I mean that literally.

[Bunyip]

Originally posted by boroboy
Travis - the Weagles player who's also been cited...

You're gonna have to be liberal with using the smilies Giant

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by boroboy
Travis - the Weagles player who's also been cited...

. . . for elbowing the Crows McGregor in the head before the game even started.

[dimelb]

Originally posted by barry
Theory: Hall and the swans have been told he will play on Saturday. AFL is going through the theatre of suspension, then appeal, then let off to generate greater interest in Sydney at the start of Grand final week.

Partly agree - I'm not so cynical as to think that it's all about marketing, but I suspect that the AFL (whoever that is) don't want to see Baz dropped. They are bound by their system, and imo so they should be, or why have a system at all? But once it's in place it has to be followed and all we can do is sit tight and hope for the best. I agree with Des, I think the charge is not accurate, and I hope the tribunal sees it the same way.

[Dave]

Originally posted by Go Swannies
The Not Guilty option was not a good one. The chance of it winning was less and it would then go to appeal on Thursday and then perhaps to the Supreme Court. So there goes Grand Final Week for the team.

That was always my concern cause of the stress it cause to Dunk's preparation.

[Go Swannies]

And thank god Baz is on first. I can't see how they can overturn the Gaspar hit (wasn't he meant to be the "friendly" ghost?) and it would have been harder for them to justly judge Baz after turning an opposition player down.

[Thunder Shaker]

Originally posted by Bart
To the tune of Free Nelson Mandela

Free Big Barry Hall-a

I think it rolls off the tounge a lot better if it was "Free Big Bad Bazza"

[Bart]

Originally posted by Thunder Shaker
I think it rolls off the tounge a lot better if it was "Free Big Bad Bazza"

missing a syllable there TS, but take you point. other suggestions welcome.

Indeed fine tune the ditty for me folks.

[hammo]

With any luck we'll know well before 7. The majority of 'experts', former players and fans agree that it should be a fairly simple exercise.

I made a point earlier that the match review panel should have had this completed on Sunday - is the AFL not prepared to pay these blokes overtime??

It's a disgrace that Hall has to front the tribunal 5 days after the actual incident.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Originally posted by Bart
other suggestions welcome.

With apologies to Midnight Oil

I'm an innocent victim, so says Paul Roos
I rock up to the tribunal, who take a very dim view
I can't believe they showed it on the colour TV
If I don't make it to the game it'll really stuff me

And I don't wanna be the one
And I don't wanna be the one

[j s]

IMHO because finals and the GF are so much more important than H&A games their suspension point value should be higher.

For example, a non GF should need 200 points for a suspension to apply and a GF 300 points. Any lesser point value would carry through to the first game where it is sufficient to apply (ie Baz could accept the current penalty but it would not cause a suspension till the next 100 point game - Round 1 next year).

With this in place major offences could still cause missed finals but minor ones would not! It would also remove the pressure for match review and tribunals to "let them play" in the finals.

[timbo]

The first couple of days they really only showed the actually strike. Butn now they are showing the precluding vision which shows they were both running back to the square, then barry swings around to present.

SAVE BARRY

[timthefish]

Originally posted by j s
For example, a non GF should need 200 points for a suspension to apply and a GF 300 points. Any lesser point value would carry through to the first game where it is sufficient to apply (ie Baz could accept the current penalty but it would not cause a suspension till the next 100 point game - Round 1 next year).

agree, but too high. 300 points can allow some pretty serious behaviour through.

i think "intentional" should still disqualify from a grand final as should anything reckless to the head. however, because the stakes are higher in a prelim, i think there should be understanding that things can get a little reckless below the neck quite easily.

other finals should be the same as h+a.

[giant]

Originally posted by Bunyip
You're gonna have to be liberal with using the smilies Giant

Yes, quite! Poor fella must be feeling quite left out. Bet he doesn't have a QC in his corner let alone Archer, Everitt, Voss et al.