I spoke to a level headed Collingwood (suck shit) supporter last night, I’m yet to see it but he tells me the Didak bump was nothing and how it warrants a week is beyond him yet I also spoke to a Swans supporter who says Goodes should go for elbowing James Hird.

Why is it so hard for the tribunal/match review committee to get things right. I wouldn’t care if Goodes got off or not, so long as every incident like this was treated equally and consistently. It really cant be THAT hard.

Also, since when is it a free kick against you for splashing an opponent with water? This free was given against a Geelong player over the weekend. The offending player was lucky he didn’t fart, it would have been a 50 meter penalty added to it as well!

We need more niggle on the field. From what I’ve read, Jacko would have got 6 weeks for tossing Bruce Doull’s headband into the crowd!

-snip- I wouldn’t care if Goodes got off or not, so long as every incident like this was treated equally and consistently. -snip-

Exactly – if Didak goes for this after Goodes got off, then you can just about give up on the game.

I gave up on the tribunal after the Judd incident. No matter how many more clangers they have this year, that is still the worst.

Appalling decision, couldn’t happen to a nicer bloke….

People are comparing it to Goodes on Godfrey, but the Godfrey incident was far more forceful and Goodes actually did get cited and found guilty (not eligble for brownlow) but it was his first time to the tribunal so didn’t get a week.

However, Goodes did the same thing again on the weekend to James Hird, again far more forceful that the Didak bump and it wasn’t even looked at by the match review panel, which is incredible.

If the Didak bump warrants a week, the pushing and shoving in the goal square at the beginning of each game will soon cost full forwards and full backs 6 weeks each.

I don’t expect that the filth will have too much trouble getting Didak off though, anyone in their right mind would throw the charge in the bin, and they will have some pretty good evidence in their favour. Goodes on Hird and Fevola belting Didak a few weeks ago.

The tribunal should have set the precedent with Goodes on Godfrey. It was forceful and warranted a week. Now they’re stuck in a dilemma with Didak because even though his was less forceful, Didak has a poorer record.

I don’t like snipers who hit behind the play when a player is not looking or expecting it, even if it is just a forearm to the back. Godfrey received the same treatment from West two weeks ago. To me it goes beyond niggling or a bit of hippo bumpo at the game start or in the goal square. I’d hate to see some player get kidney or vertebral damage from a hit behind like that. Tom Lonergan’s injury was terrible (although it was in the field of play) and players should be protected from the threat of serious injury if this thing is allowed to get out of hand and not reined in.

To me they’ve either got to draw a line with Didak, or now be faced with letting them all go and taking the risk.

I’m a bit shocked to hear he’s been charged, but with the new GayFL rule interpretations I’m hardly surprised. It was a stupid bump, at a crucial time of the game too, and he deserves to sit out a week for it. He doesn’t look 100% fit to me anyway, so I reckon he should just cop it and get some rest.

Publish,

The problem with Goodes was that he had never even been charged, he had to get a discount for his superb record of fair play.

However, the problem goes deeper because he was allowed to have his charge changed from a charge to a strike. This was allowed because it was deemed forecful enough to be a strike, however heres the kicker, a strike was a lesser charge, with less demerit points!

Didak’s was nothing more than a bit of a bump as he ran past, its been happening for years. I’d question the free kick downfield, let alone a suspension!?

The real inconsistency lies not in the Goodes on Godfrey strike 6 weeks ago, but the Goodes charge on James Hird on the weekend which was far more aggressive and forceful than the Didak bump on Haselby for which Goodes wasn’t even cited. I can only imagine this is because the ball was in a reasonable proximity? But it didn’t even get a free kick…..

10 Day rest between Freo and the Dees though – they should all be back up by then.

The AFL needs to get serious with the tribunal. At the moment the games ‘elite’ players are a protected species. What for, maybe Ade Anderson has a $50 on Judd for the Brownlow.

I wonder if Dean Solomon, Jeff Farmer or Cam Mooney would have got away with the eye gouge like Judd did?

Cam Mooney being free kicked for spraying water in the other guys face was a joke… and as for the Didak bump…. the guys in the WWE get hit harder!

Goodes should have gone last time, and this time to not be cited was rediculous, same type of strike/charge as previous, surely a repeat offender should be written up almost as a matter of course.

The whole thing is a joke IMHO. The AFL say that aren’t responsible for the Tribunal or the Appeal process as it is an independent body. (correct me if I’m wrong here) Anderson clearly implemented a system that had some merit on paper, but for whatever reason is not working. If it isn’t him, then who the hell is responsible for getting it sorted out?

I think the tribunal has done a complete about face. They’ve gone from a “citizen’s panel” that dished out the penalties left right and centre, but at least saw the need for consistency and the poor consequences of not establishing precedent, to an “ex-footballer’s panel” that is extremely lenient, inconsistent and doesn’t understand precedent at all.

I agree that Goodes should be having a rest this week based on his hit on Hird. I also think Didak should be having a week off, just to say to others that that sort of sniping action, even in passing, is not warranted and that players should be mindful of injury to other players when they are not around the ball.

They need to get some people who aren’t from a football background on the MRP and tribunal. Too many conflicts of interest at present. It should all be impartial. Did anyone hear Campbell Brown on SEN yesterday talking about how he had tried really hard to get Judd off? What a joke. Judd should have got at least 2 or 3 weeks for the eye gouge. As for Didak – I hope he appeals and gets 6 weeks from the tribunal. 1 week for the shove and 5 for being a tool.

As for Didak – I hope he appeals and gets 6 weeks from the tribunal. 1 week for the shove and 5 for being a tool.

Too funny… I agree, he is a tool, but still don’t think that report should get a match, so make it just 5 for being a tool

All I can say is ‘If no one is hurt having an impact on their game or future games, then play on and get on with the game’.

Stop reporting people for incidental contact. It is a contact sport, yet there is more contact in netball.

As for Didak – I hope he appeals and gets 6 weeks from the tribunal. 1 week for the shove and 5 for being a tool.

Too funny… I agree, he is a tool, but still don’t think that report should get a match, so make it just 5 for being a tool

Isn’t it funny how some guys are just knobs, yet if they’re part of your team – all is forgiven.

I hated Breraton with a passion – yet when he came to the pies I think he actually added quite a bit of value. Not by winning many games (or playing many), but I think that he helped a young Sav Rocca become a pretty good player.

Paul Medhurst is also a right royal todger, but seeing him slide into a back and win the hard ball, and pass it of you everyones mate Didak for a mighty goal, brings a bit of a tear to my eye.

I’m completely impartial, I reckon Ray and Griffen are complete tools, and so was Libba.

Didak is also a tool, so is Darren Milburn, Jonathon Brown and plenty of other blokes from all the teams are tools.

Doesn’t mean you get suspended for it.

who gives a rats? its a scumbag toothless collingwood tryhard … a week off might help him get his act into gear

who gives a rats? its a scumbag toothless collingwood tryhard … a week off might help him get his act into gear

Possibly the most underwhelming opening 7 posts ever. Keep up the good work Tiprat ;)

sanity prevails.

thrown out in 5 minutes !

Whoever cited him in the first place should now be fined for frivolous reporting.

Whoever cited him in the first place should now be fined for frivolous reporting.

I haven’t seen the Didak incident, but it couldn’t have been more farcical than Lappin getting reported for tripping against Adelaide.

Was it the same incident in the last quarter that a downfield free kick was paid to Pavlich for?

Yep, with about 3 minutes to go. Should have been left at a downfield free.

dan have read & re-read some of your rot too.

i think you have some serious anger management issues wildman. the world does not revolve around your opinion king.