Tweet
Report on AFL.com says Buchanon may be cited for his charge on Cook which resulted in a 50m penalty.
Cant see it being a suspension, but charging is big news lately.
Cant see it being a suspension, but charging is big news lately.
-
-
Re: Buchanon in trouble?
Only if you get the head and seeing as the 50 itself was very line ball I doubt that Amon has anything to worry about. But the Match Review Panel would have to look anyway but Freo would be more concerned for two of their players in Farmer and whoever hit Hall with the elbow.Originally posted by barry
Report on AFL.com says Buchanon may be cited for his charge on Cook which resulted in a 50m penalty.
Cant see it being a suspension, but charging is big news lately.Once was, now elsewhere -
I think he might get cited but shouldn't get a match.
who knows with the MRP though...Comment
-
Nothing in it, all clear!Swannies for life!Comment
-
Well, he didn't appear to change direction, unlike Chick on Malceski (
) and Chick got off!
Comment
-
Re: Buchanon in trouble?
\Originally posted by barry
Report on AFL.com says Buchanon may be cited for his charge on Cook which resulted in a 50m penalty.
Cant see it being a suspension, but charging is big news lately.
Things are crook if he gets suspended for that.Comment
-
From the perspective of the ground, I thought it was pretty dubious whether it was even a free kick. To pay a 50 was very generous to Freo.
To give him a suspension for what was a challenge to spoil the footy in a marking contest would be absolutely freakin' insane.Comment
-
Can't see him getting reporting. Thought the 50 was because there was a fair delay in handing over the ball.Comment
-
yeah, the reason for the 50 was a bit of a mystery at the time. doesn't matter now anyway - but it would be completely absurd if anything more comes out of this one.Originally posted by Lucky Knickers
Can't see him getting reporting. Thought the 50 was because there was a fair delay in handing over the ball.Comment
-
50 was given because he went the bump, was a little bit late, and he didn't have eyes for, or go for the ball.Comment
-
Disagree, he definitely went for the ball, however, definitely late. Still dumbfounded how that was 50 tho?Originally posted by Goal Sneak
50 was given because he went the bump, was a little bit late, and he didn't have eyes for, or go for the ball.Comment
-
Under the current laws it was always going to be 50. It was late contact. The replay shows it was a crude spoil at best.Originally posted by Lucky Knickers
Disagree, he definitely went for the ball, however, definitely late. Still dumbfounded how that was 50 tho?..And the Swans are the Premiers...The Ultimate Team...The Ultimate Warriors. They have overcome the highly fancied Hawks in brilliant style. Sydney the 2012 Premiers - Gerard Whately ABC
Here it is Again! - Huddo SENComment
-
IMHO the 50m was the right call, and that's where it should be left.
I'm on the Chandwagon!!!
If you cannot compete for the premiership, it's better to be young and exciting than middle-aged and dowdy.
Comment
-
Had a look at it. Definite 50m penalty. But the ball was certainly very close to where Amon came through and he didn't really make contact with Cook's head. Cook was unhurt. And there was clearly nothing malicious about it.
Shouldn't really have a case to answer. But who knows with the MRP?Comment
-
If they do site him can we go to court again to get more time to put in an appeal
Comment
Comment