Lloyd incident set for review

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ScottH
    It's Goodes to cheer!!
    • Sep 2003
    • 23665

    Lloyd incident set for review

    Lloyd incident set for review The DH has to go. How many times can you hit opponents recklessly and late and not get suspeneded???
  • Dave
    Let those truckers roll
    • Jan 2003
    • 1557

    #2
    Just to add a bit of fuel to the fire:



    That $20000 sure is the gift that keeps on giving.
    "My theory is that the universe is made out of stupidity because it's more plentiful than hydrogen" - Frank Zappa

    Comment

    • ScottH
      It's Goodes to cheer!!
      • Sep 2003
      • 23665

      #3
      Originally posted by Dave
      Just to add a bit of fuel to the fire:



      That $20000 sure is the gift that keeps on giving.
      Twice this year , the umps have helped them,.

      Comment

      • NMWBloods
        Taking Refuge!!
        • Jan 2003
        • 15819

        #4
        Originally posted by Dave
        Just to add a bit of fuel to the fire:

        http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/r...095853355.html
        That is just abysmal!!
        Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

        "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

        Comment

        • prenda
          Suspended by the MRP
          • Apr 2005
          • 117

          #5
          Re: Lloyd incident set for review

          Originally posted by ScottH
          Lloyd incident set for review The DH has to go. How many times can you hit opponents recklessly and late and not get suspeneded???
          reckless is and understatement.this guy has to look at his style,one day he is going injure some one badly.

          Comment

          • Dave
            Let those truckers roll
            • Jan 2003
            • 1557

            #6
            Re: Re: Lloyd incident set for review

            Originally posted by prenda
            one day he is going injure some one badly.
            Or mess his hair up
            "My theory is that the universe is made out of stupidity because it's more plentiful than hydrogen" - Frank Zappa

            Comment

            • ScottH
              It's Goodes to cheer!!
              • Sep 2003
              • 23665

              #7
              Re: Re: Lloyd incident set for review

              Originally posted by prenda
              reckless is and understatement.this guy has to look at his style,one day he is going injure some one badly.
              Remember Thurgood, Rnd 2 or 3???

              Comment

              • Mike_B
                Peyow Peyow
                • Jan 2003
                • 6267

                #8
                Well, he's gotten off scott-free again. Gehrig cleared too. Lade has received a reprimand (70.3 pts) and Judd offered a one-match ban.

                Full details here.

                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

                • liz
                  Veteran
                  Site Admin
                  • Jan 2003
                  • 16826

                  #9
                  I've been prepared to give the new system a go, even after Jolly (and arguably Maxfield) appeared slightly harshly dealt with.

                  But this week's assessments are a joke and indicate that there are darlings of the competition that are judged by different rules.

                  Now I know we want to see the best players out there, not sitting on the sidelines, but how Judd's actions can be assessed as negligent and in play is beyond me. He and Baker were a fair way away from where the umpire was about to bounce the ball. How can that be 'in-play'. And surely to throw your elbow back with some force (and obviously knowing that your opponent is behind you) can be anything less than reckless is also hard to understand.

                  As for Lloyd, compare the likelihood of his action causing damage to his opponent with that of Gehrig's actions a fortnight ago. One was never going to cause any injury yet the other could have been very very nasty had Lloyd connected a little higher. Surely the whole point of suspensions is to deter players from actions that could cause injury to an opponent?

                  Comment

                  • ScottH
                    It's Goodes to cheer!!
                    • Sep 2003
                    • 23665

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Mike_B
                    Well, he's gotten off scott-free again. Gehrig cleared too. Lade has received a reprimand (70.3 pts) and Judd offered a one-match ban.

                    Full details here.
                    I resent that comment, I may be cheap but I'm not free!!!

                    The thing with the Judd incident, it was probably a culmination of being held onto continually thoughout the game and the frustration of the umpires inability, to pay him a free kick, for the infringemnt. The umpires should cop a week for being so useless.


                    As for Llloyd, he will kill someone and still get only a reprimand for being reckless. Similar to Hird/Wakelin, when Hird tried to break his spine. And as Liz said, Gehrig gets a week for a love tap.

                    Comment

                    • giant
                      Veterans List
                      • Mar 2005
                      • 4731

                      #11
                      This is surely (part of) the point. The reason we have three umpires is purportedly to stop this sort of nonsense and he was clearly being held. Spectators got to see the Judds not the Bakers.

                      Judd should cop it sweet for a reckless (not negligent) action but qns should be asked of the umpires as to why they let it get to this situation.

                      Comment

                      • ScottH
                        It's Goodes to cheer!!
                        • Sep 2003
                        • 23665

                        #12
                        Originally posted by giant
                        This is surely (part of) the point. The reason we have three umpires is purportedly to stop this sort of nonsense and he was clearly being held. Spectators got to see the Judds not the Bakers.

                        Judd should cop it sweet for a reckless (not negligent) action but qns should be asked of the umpires as to why they let it get to this situation.
                        Big White Stick!!!!

                        Comment

                        • dread and might
                          Back, strapped and intact
                          • Apr 2004
                          • 949

                          #13
                          just when i thought i couldn't despise them anymore
                          I wish my weed was EMO so it would cut itself

                          Comment

                          Working...