If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Both players can accept 1 game, Goodes obviously cleared. Nathan Gordon also cleared but I thought his was worse than Tippett's.
1 week for Buddy was what I suspected. I thought that Tippett would get a fine based on the Firritto incident. Forward line will be interesting this week.
Can't believe Gordon got off. They said "glancing contact"...what a load of rubbish.
Will be interesting to see if they appeal the Tippett decision...bit of a free hit given that we have Brisbane following the Port game. Having said that though I'd be shocked if we did challenge it.
1 week for Buddy was what I suspected. I thought that Tippett would get a fine based on the Firritto incident. Forward line will be interesting this week.
Can't believe Gordon got off. They said "glancing contact"...what a load of rubbish.
I wonder if we might challenge the Tippett one and take the chance he gets 2 weeks. He is very important in terms of the Ruck - especially with Pyke struggling with injury. We need him for Thursday against Ryder and Lobbe. Given however we only have the Lions next week - who won't have Stefan Martin in all likelihood (given 3 down to 2 games), then we might just roll the dice, seeking a downgrade to a fine.
I know our forward line will be stuffed for the Port game, but hopefully a bit of variation up there might open Longmire's eyes as well and help ensure we have a bit more unpredictability in the forward line.
On the back of the MRP (assuming we accept both) and assuming Pyke isn't right, changes I'd say will be:
Out: Buddy, Tippett
In: Nankervis, Towers.
Nankervis to play the Tippett Role, and Towers to play off the half forward line - with Derricx to rest up forward.
If Pyke is fit, I'd say he will come in for Derricx as well.
- - - Updated - - -
Originally posted by Conor_Dillon
Will be interesting to see if they appeal the Tippett decision...bit of a free hit given that we have Brisbane following the Port game. Having said that though I'd be shocked if we did challenge it.
It certainly is an interesting conundrum. Really silly play from both of them, and could be very costly if we get knocked off on Thursday (indeed Buddy's incident one could argue had a significant impact on us dropping the game against the Tigers too, as it did seem to be a catalyst for our performance to swandive south very quickly.)
"You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."
I thought that Tippett would get a fine based on the Firritto incident.
That's the comparison that makes me cross. The Tippett decision is probably right. But Firrito's hit on Buddy was clearly intentional ("oh dear ump, so sorry I meant to thump the ball") but the MRP chose to view it otherwise. And Buddy simply got up rubbing his head (and looking unhappy) and got on with the game. So all Firrito got was a fine.
Buddy extraordinarily lucky to only miss one week. 'Experts' on social media going into meltdown rolling out the predictable 'protected species' tag....
Both players can accept 1 game, Goodes obviously cleared. Nathan Gordon also cleared but I thought his was worse than Tippett's.
Agree, I thought the same. It seems it's insufficient force, unless you're wearing red and white. Common sense at least prevailed with Adam's slip-'UP'!
Comment