Barry Hall - Goneski reported

[BulldogBelle]

Barry Hall is looking at a BIG holiday from the tribunal gave Staker a left hook off the ball, caught on film and just shown. I reckon 6 weeks minimum - that was bad!

[The Coon Dog]

Surely players know there are umpteem dozen cameras out there!

It was stupid what Hall did, tho the way Sydney get looked after at the tribunal who knows how this will be assessed. I don't think the Grand Final defence of it was in play will work.

It was behind play, high contact & the act of a thug!!!!!!!!!

Agree BB, he should cop a six week holiday which falls into the period when we play them (round 7, so a three week ban will do for us, but to send the right message it needs to be at least six).

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Surely players know there are umpteem dozen cameras out there!

It was stupid what Hall did, tho the way Sydney get looked after at the tribunal who knows how this will be assessed. I don't think the Grand Final defence of it was in play will work.

It was behind play, high contact & the act of a thug!!!!!!!!!

Agree BB, he should cop a six week holiday which falls into the period when we play them (round 7, so a three week ban will do for us, but to send the right message it needs to be at least six).

I think he's used up all of his tribunal luck, a very cheap and unnecessary shot on Staker. 6 weeks. anything less would send a poor message to all

[LostDoggy]

Agree with everything above, it was a cheap shot and Staker's not looking too good at the moment. Anything less than 6 weeks is wrong, things like this need to be stamped out of the game (I'm all for a bit of a fight to stamp your authority, but this was just dirty).

[ledge]

Hope he is out when we play them, although i think Lake can look after himself.

[BulldogBelle]

Agree with everything above, it was a cheap shot and Staker's not looking too good at the moment. Anything less than 6 weeks is wrong, things like this need to be stamped out of the game (I'm all for a bit of a fight to stamp your authority, but this was just dirty).

Doubt Hall will get off this time I think he is enjoying his boxing hobby just a little too much - Stakers eyes were rolling after that hit. Like you I don't mind watching a biff but this was way over the top. Can't wait to hear Roos and his response no doubt he will be playing the victim and that the AFL is against the Swans.

[hujsh]

I think the way that Staker headbutted Hall's fist is a disgrace and should be looked at by the AFL. I mean he's trying to mark the ball and kick goals and these defenders are trying to hurt their hands. Disgraceful:rolleyes:

[The Coon Dog]

I can just see the headlines now:

FESTIVAL HALL

[ledge]

I can just see the headlines now:

FESTIVAL HALL

Jack Little or Gus Mercurio?

[LostDoggy]

I think the way that Staker headbutted Hall's fist is a disgrace and should be looked at by the AFL. I mean he's trying to mark the ball and kick goals and these defenders are trying to hurt their hands. Disgraceful:rolleyes:

A take from the 12th man wierd world of sports Tony locket head butt funny CD.

Back to the topic it was a disgrace min 6 but think 9 should be the penilty and he should consider himself greatful. You dont need to look back to far to see king hits can be deadly look at Davis Hooks. If he was to do that in a pub or club he would be facing the courts and a conviction.

Headline: Hall By KO in the 4th round

[1eyedog]

Get this mongrel out of the game, don't you know there are kids watching? Ban him for the season that was atrocious.

[KEN]

I think he will get a Hoildays for a while.
I require some advice my wife & two children are going to there first AFL Game on Sunday we have General Admission Tickets L3, where is the best place to sit what gate what time should we ge there to get the best seats?
How do you keep the kids entertained for the game ages of kids 5 & 7?
Thanks go DOGS 98

[1eyedog]

The iron fencing just stood up for Staker! Hall split head and broken wrist, ah karma.

[Sockeye Salmon]

The iron fencing just stood up for Staker! Hall split head and broken wrist, ah karma.

The fence had to do it, no West Coast player seemed keen.

[The Coon Dog]

I think he will get a Hoildays for a while.
I require some advice my wife & two children are going to there first AFL Game on Sunday we have General Admission Tickets L3, where is the best place to sit what gate what time should we ge there to get the best seats?
How do you keep the kids entertained for the game ages of kids 5 & 7?
Thanks go DOGS 98

Hi Ken & welcome.

You are on level 3, so I reckon either wing so perhaps aisles 15-21 on one side or aisles 29-35 on the other side.

Dont get in rows P-R as your view of the big scoreboard is obscured by the room beam.

Suggest I-Pods, colouring books & bring your own snacks for them (perhaps some treat they don't usually have).

You can enter from any gate. My kids are now 13 & 10 but have been coming to the footy since they were 6 months old.

[BulldogBelle]

Anyway, back to Barry Hall - whilst he is a bit of a hot head that split moment brain fade will cost him. No doubt the media will have a field day over it. Anyone think he will get less than 6 weeks?

[The Coon Dog]

Anyway, back to Barry Hall?

Sorry for trying to help someone out with a bit of advice & straying from the topic! :rolleyes:

mjp, interested in your view on this. If you were Paul Roos, how would you handle a player who has clearly transgressed in the manner Hall did?

Would you discuss the matter at half time & if so in what context, after the game or leave it for a day or two?

[hujsh]

I think that the regular heavy impact, intentional contact, yadda yadda yadda gets him 450 points (or 4.5 weeks) but with factors like off the ball and being an unexpected/unprovoked hit he should get more.

[The Coon Dog]

For those who haven't seen it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzN4Ly_yd9w

[GVGjr]

Hi Ken & welcome.

You are on level 3, so I reckon either wing so perhaps aisles 15-21 on one side or aisles 29-35 on the other side.

Dont get in rows P-R as your view of the big scoreboard is obscured by the room beam.

Suggest I-Pods, colouring books & bring your own snacks for them (perhaps some treat they don't usually have).

You can enter from any gate. My kids are now 13 & 10 but have been coming to the footy since they were 6 months old.


Sorry for trying to help someone out with a bit of advice & straying from the topic! :rolleyes:



We have been getting off topic a fair bit of late and given that KEN received nearly the same answer from SS on another thread, it wasn't a bad prompt to get it back on track.

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showpost.php?p=33547&postcount=20

[The Coon Dog]

We have been getting off topic a fair bit of late and given that KEN received nearly the same answer from SS on another thread, it wasn't a bad prompt to get it back on track.

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showpost.php?p=33547&postcount=20

And if I'd seen Ken had been answered on another thread first, then I would have answered there first.

Once again I'll apologise about going off topic to answer/respond!

[GVGjr]

And if I'd seen Ken had been answered on another thread first, then I would have answered there first.

Once again I'll apologise about going off topic to answer/respond!

No problems but I have requested that the mods try and get the threads back on topic where applicable. It's over so lets get back to big bad bustling Bazza Hall issue.

How many weeks does everyone think he will get?
I wonder if it will also be a big test of Leigh Matthews theory with Sydney being the preferred club?

[Topdog]

Thanks for the youtube link TCD (i think).

Preferred club or not there is nothing that can stop the man getting anything less then 6.

Personally I believe it will be 8.

Points won't come into it as it will be sent straight to the tribunal. Off the ball and all.

[BulldogBelle]

How many weeks does everyone think he will get?
I wonder if it will also be a big test of Leigh Matthews theory with Sydney being the preferred club?

As I mentioned in my opening post GVG, I reckon he will get 6 minimum. The protected species is the term they now use with the Swans. Roger Merrett also alluded in an article last week, that Sydney was perceived in that light by a few people.

[1eyedog]

I feel he may very possibly get 12 weeks for it, just to set and example and to prove the Swans are not untouchable, Goodesy getting off and causing a bit of a back lash from Lethal may put an extra 2 weeks on Hall's holiday (even though Lethal was just crying because Goodes was available to play against them). The action alone is worth 12 weeks but I think he'll get 8-10.

[westdog54]

For those who haven't seen it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzN4Ly_yd9w

:eek:Oh dear...

A question for Tribunal buffs here:

In the NRL if the MRP deem an offence to be of a highly serious nature, the player does not have the option of an early plea, he must front the judiciary.

Does the AFL tribunal work the same way?

[Sockeye Salmon]

:eek:Oh dear...

A question for Tribunal buffs here:

In the NRL if the MRP deem an offence to be of a highly serious nature, the player does not have the option of an early plea, he must front the judiciary.

Does the AFL tribunal work the same way?

Yep,

And I reckon the MRP will pass this one straight on.

If they don't, it least would have to be:
Intentional (can be nothing else)
High (no question)
High Impact (rather than severe?)
Behind Play (no question)

I make that 425 points and 4 weeks. No points hanging over his head, no good behaviour discount.

Less 25% for a guilty plea = 318 pts or 3 weeks (still enough to miss our game).

They'll pass it on for sure

[Dancin' Douggy]

I think it was a disgrace when Hall got off to play in the Grand Final after punching Maguire. The AFL has to take some responsibility for allowing Hall to get away with that low gutless act. If they had have taken a hard line then, maybe Hall would never have done what he did tonight. He could have killed Staker. Hall is an overrated thug.

[The Coon Dog]

I think it was a disgrace when Hall got off to play in the Grand Final after punching Maguire. The AFL has to take some responsibility for allowing Hall to get away with that low gutless act. If they had have taken a hard line then, maybe Hall would never have done what he did tonight. He could have killed Staker. Hall is an overrated thug.

Spot on, just wish there was a camera when Chris Grant was felled behind the play. Kinda makes you think about what did really happen. It was about 3 or 4 years ago in Sydney & Grant was prone on the ground when the cameras panned onto him, with only Barry Hall within proximity.

[BulldogBelle]

I think it was a disgrace when Hall got off to play in the Grand Final after punching Maguire.

Yes, I remember that when he got Goose - Hall and Goodes seem to come under the "The protected Species Act"

[Topdog]

Cheers Topdog, I just wasn't sure how to insert it, so just supplied the link, which I assume works?


It certainly did work. Shocking bit of footage. As for how to insert it, you must make a title (not sure why but it won't work without one), remove everything before the youtube code (the bits after v=).

If you click on quote post you can see what I have done.

TzN4Ly_yd9w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzN4Ly_yd9w

[LostDoggy]

Well, I think for what ever time Staker is out, Hall's sentence should start from when he comes back.

Whats crap about Aussie rules is Hall was allowed to play the game out(the injury was just karma) whilst WC were a man down. There is no more obvious a case for the sending off rule.
What if this happened in a GF? Say knock out the best opposition player, win the premeirship because you are getting a kick whilst the opposition are an influential man down. Next year have a 6-8 week break at the start of the season. I'd do it.

[LostDoggy]

Yep,

And I reckon the MRP will pass this one straight on.

If they don't, it least would have to be:
Intentional (can be nothing else)
High (no question)
High Impact (rather than severe?)
Behind Play (no question)

I make that 425 points and 4 weeks. No points hanging over his head, no good behaviour discount.

Less 25% for a guilty plea = 318 pts or 3 weeks (still enough to miss our game).

They'll pass it on for sure

What a stupid system. If you plea guilty you shouldn't get less. You are admitting fault.
Can't believe there is no points for his previous misdemeanours.

[westdog54]

What a stupid system. If you plea guilty you shouldn't get less. You are admitting fault.
Can't believe there is no points for his previous misdemeanours.

But you're also saving the league the trouble of organising a tribunal hearing and the circus that goes with, not to mention the expense. No problem in my book.

[LostDoggy]

I also think the most disgraceful/amusing part of this incident was Barry Hall's body language immediately after he hit Staker. Arms stretch out to say - what did I do?

[LostDoggy]

But you're also saving the league the trouble of organising a tribunal hearing and the circus that goes with, not to mention the expense. No problem in my book.

There is no need for a plea at all. It should an automatic x number of weeks. If he wanted to contest it then add to it if its a waste of time.
The possibility of him getting only 3 weeks is ridiculous.
The wording is just plain stupid x weeks for this offence, x-1 week if he pleads guilty. Well if you believe you are guilty why do you get a reduction?

[ledge]

Same as the law courts Ernie you plead guilty they lesson sentence, i suppose its regarded as you have recognized you have done wrong and wont do it again. Yeah right, Lawyers just use it for bargaining with each other.Try and keep the courts from wasting time in obvious cases.

[LostDoggy]

Same as the law courts Ernie you plead guilty they lesson sentence, i suppose its regarded as you have recognized you have done wrong and wont do it again. Yeah right, Lawyers just use it for bargaining with each other.Try and keep the courts from wasting time in obvious cases.

The wording is completely different in the AFL's case.
People should plead not guilty if they believe they aren't guilty. They make it sound/feel like OK I'll plead guilty knowing I didn't really do it just so I get less.

[aker39]

Yep,

And I reckon the MRP will pass this one straight on.

If they don't, it least would have to be:
Intentional (can be nothing else)
High (no question)
High Impact (rather than severe?)
Behind Play (no question)

I make that 425 points and 4 weeks. No points hanging over his head, no good behaviour discount.

Less 25% for a guilty plea = 318 pts or 3 weeks (still enough to miss our game).

They'll pass it on for sure


I think this will show the flaws in Angry Andersons points system.

The MRP panel will rank this the highest level in each category, and yet he will only get 4 weeks.

My understanding is that the MRP do not have the right to send it to the tribunal unless the points are over 500.

The MRP hands will be tied.

It will be then up to Anderson to show the flaws in HIS system and over rule the decision and send it to the tribunal.

[BulldogBelle]

Hall and Roos will be conducting a press conference around 5pm today so 3AW reported. No doubt an apology of sorts.

[ledge]

Heres another spin to it, can the police charge him with assault as it had nothing to do with the game, also Leigh Matthews got delisted off the AFL years ago or called something like that for an off the ball incident, isnt this much the same?
Does Staker have to put in an assault charge to police for that to happen, which i dont think he would, suppose it depends if WCE think he should.

[LostDoggy]

Very ordinary act by an out and out thug. The bloke is a boof head who relies soley on intimidating people because he was a champion boxer at some stage. Some people seem to think that these kinds of acts are acceptable if they take place on a sporting field?? I've been on the end of an unprovoked king hit and it put me in hospital. Not fun. I think if Staker has injuries he should have him charged with assult because that's exactly what it is.

I remember something happening with Granty and Hall a few years ago too that wasn't really investigated?? I'd love to see someone smack him with a hard fare bump.

[LostDoggy]

Heres another spin to it, can the police charge him with assault as it had nothing to do with the game, also Leigh Matthews got delisted off the AFL years ago or called something like that for an off the ball incident, isnt this much the same?
Does Staker have to put in an assault charge to police for that to happen, which i dont think he would, suppose it depends if WCE think he should.

Technically he could - one of the defences to assault is 'amicable contest' - that is, where you participate in an event where you are likely to be hit - basically it's what stops any hit on the football field (or boxing ring for that matter) being considered assault.

Of course what Barry did was not part of playing football and would certainly be a chance of an assault charge.

Having said that, I doubt anyone would bother, particularly if he got a fair whack at the tribunal.

And yes, Staker would need to put in an official complaint to the police for it to even start.

[ledge]

I wonder if he could be delisted by the AFL although i have no idea what that acheived with Leigh Matthews he just came back and played again.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I wonder if he could be delisted by the AFL although i have no idea what that acheived with Leigh Matthews he just came back and played again.

That was a different time. Matthews didn't get reported and there was no trial by video - it wasn't allowed for in the rules - but everyone saw it on TV so the VFL had to do something. Because they couldn't send him to the tribunal within the rules they deregistered him for 4 weeks for bringing the game into disrepute, it was the only thing they could get him for.

It's what brought in trial by video on the pretext it was to pick up behind the play incidents. Umpires were still supposed to report the 'in play' ones. It took about 1 week before the first in play hit got missed by an umpire for them to start using it for all reports (usually missing the behind the play ones it was brought in to monitor).

[GVGjr]

He should get somewhere between 8 and 12 weeks but I am tipping 8.

[LostDoggy]

I can just see the headlines now:

FESTIVAL HALL

:eek:

Now was that just a good guess? How in the world could you possibly predicted that?

[The Coon Dog]

:eek:

Now was that just a good guess? How in the world could you possibly predicted that?

It was an educated guess. Festival Hall is where the boxing used to be held in Melbourne. Barry's surname too.

[Dry Rot]

All this may a throw a spanner in the Swans' TV and online marketing program:

http://www.barryhallhall.com.au/

[LostDoggy]

Great stuff
The replay this morning on Foxtel played the Broadford u10 vs Barry Hall match commercial at the quarter time break!
Inspiration stuff for the kiddies.

[wimberga]

what did Matthews do?

[The Coon Dog]

what did Matthews do?



Top of the screen right at the start.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r81_FLjfNOg

[alwaysadog]

Is this a worse or a lesser act than was done to Montie at the first bounce. If that was a 6 week offence and no fists were involved how does this compare?

Now I know this is the Swans ... and expecting consistency from the tribunal is Alice in Wonderland stuff. But just let's dream that they were for once.

[westdog54]

Is this a worse or a lesser act than was done to Montie at the first bounce. If that was a 6 week offence and no fists were involved how does this compare?

Now I know this is the Swans ... and expecting consistency from the tribunal is Alice in Wonderland stuff. But just let's dream that they were for once.

Despite the fact that it was a dog act, Holland's 'strike' was executed with a hip and shoulder, which is essentially a skill in our game. And it was well within the vicinity of the ball. It was Holland's tribunal record that caught him out and piled on the weeks.

A punch to the face is not a football skill, and it happened away from the contest.

Much, much worse.

[Topdog]

Technically he could - one of the defences to assault is 'amicable contest' - that is, where you participate in an event where you are likely to be hit - basically it's what stops any hit on the football field (or boxing ring for that matter) being considered assault.

That is for ordinary hits, not cheap shots as shown by the Bertuzzi case.

[LostDoggy]

Staker was hanging off Hall before he got belted. Should an umpire have given Hall a free kick in the first place, before he got wound up? No excuse I know, just putting it out there.

Agree with those that think Hall will get 8 weeks. I too remember that footage of Hall walking away dusting his hands together and Grant lying flat on his back but there was no footage of the actual incident so nothing came of it.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Staker was hanging off Hall before he got belted. Should an umpire have given Hall a free kick in the first place, before he got wound up? No excuse I know, just putting it out there.

Agree with those that think Hall will get 8 weeks. I too remember that footage of Hall walking away dusting his hands together and Grant lying flat on his back but there was no footage of the actual incident so nothing came of it.

Actually there was. About 20 minutes later Hall was flying for a mark and Ryan Hargrave gave him a beauty in the mouth - and got away with it.

[LostDoggy]

Is this a worse or a lesser act than was done to Montie at the first bounce. If that was a 6 week offence and no fists were involved how does this compare?

Now I know this is the Swans ... and expecting consistency from the tribunal is Alice in Wonderland stuff. But just let's dream that they were for once.

AAD, I think the Brodie Holland one was different because Monty got lined up coming into the centre square contest, and the players had been warned about picking off guys coming into that area who were looking at the ball, especially in finals.

I was at a party on Sat night & everyone was saying, "out for 8 weeks" etc etc. Personally, I didnt believe that, I always thought 3 weeks, not that I agree with it, but that looks like that is the way it will be from what was posted above.

[GVGjr]

Staker was hanging off Hall before he got belted. Should an umpire have given Hall a free kick in the first place, before he got wound up? No excuse I know, just putting it out there.

Agree with those that think Hall will get 8 weeks. I too remember that footage of Hall walking away dusting his hands together and Grant lying flat on his back but there was no footage of the actual incident so nothing came of it.

Defenders hand off forwards all the time and even though Staker is a big boy, Hall could have shaken the tag without using his fists.

The thing that should wreck any defence of Hall is that he swung the arm around first and made contact and then his second attempt a few seconds later was with the closed fist and with a lot of force. It needs to be more than 6 weeks because I think I heard that the Swans play the Eagles again in 6 weeks and the AFL won't want it to be Halls first game back.
He should get 8 in my opinion.

[ledge]

I havent seen or heard Hall say anything, wonder how Roos and club will tackle it?
Can he plead insanity at the time? happens in courts all the time.
I like this thought , he goes in to tribunal, club play replays of all his indiscretions and say does this man act sane to you?

[FrediKanoute]

I though Rohan Connelly's piece in The Age on this was an interesting take - http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/sympathy-for-the-devil/2008/04/13/1208024993057.html

There have been a lot worse thngs done on a football field than a left hook from Barry Hall and I tend to agree that because the game is so sanitised these days an obvious hit like that tends to send the masses into hysteria. Talk of banning him for the season or legal action are just ludicrous. Something on the 4 to 6 week scale is about right. Staker's not injured and whilst the hit was high, behind play etc, anything more is an overreaction.

The one positive is that we'll have some footage for the latest edition of Hits, Biff's and Bashes.

[1eyedog]

I though Rohan Connelly's piece in The Age on this was an interesting take - http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/sympathy-for-the-devil/2008/04/13/1208024993057.html

There have been a lot worse thngs done on a football field than a left hook from Barry Hall and I tend to agree that because the game is so sanitised these days an obvious hit like that tends to send the masses into hysteria. Talk of banning him for the season or legal action are just ludicrous. Something on the 4 to 6 week scale is about right. Staker's not injured and whilst the hit was high, behind play etc, anything more is an overreaction.

The one positive is that we'll have some footage for the latest edition of Hits, Biff's and Bashes.

Have to disagree here. While I agree the conservatives have successfully applied a PC rating to the game over the past 5 years the masses have a every right to call for blood. That sanitisation has been a natural progression of our game and thus we react accordingly; it becomes an articulated response to an act the AFL has gone to great pains to eliminate. It is not the 70s or even 80s anymore and there is no tolerance for left hooking opposition players off the ball. I had a 6 year old son watching the game and there were likely thousands more watching on live. The AFL is aware that there is huge competition to this great game of ours, namely from soccer but especially from Rugby in NSW. It wants a clean cut image. Also, how do you know Staker is not injured, have you spoken to him? Last I heard he was off to the hospital for scans to see if his jaw was broken or fractured. What if Barry Hall had broken his jaw and there was lots of blood? Would you think differently then? Are there any future effects for Staker because of the concussion? If I was the WCE I would be thinking that 10+ weeks would be adequate. Personally, I don't want my son to see that kind of violence on the field, contested hard balls sure but that was pure thuggery. I don't particularly want to see Barry Hall for the rest of the year.

[LostDoggy]

6-10 wks.....but because he plays for sydney will get off.

all defenders niggle forwards, so thats no excuse to hit staker, not all forwards punch them in the head because of it, hall is playing football not boxing, a shame he broke his wrist...........means any suspension won't matter because hes out anyway

should be longer suspension because of the way he threw his arms up afterwards as if to say 'i didnt do anything'

[BulldogBelle]

They just showed the footage with Hall decking Grant on Footy Classified - was at that game in Sydney but on the other side of the ground to where the incident happened - so didn't see it.

Caroline Wilson said they tried to contact Grant but was unavailable but she doubted he would say anything anyway.

[mighty_west]

What a stupid system. If you plea guilty you shouldn't get less. You are admitting fault.
Can't believe there is no points for his previous misdemeanours.

What makes it stupid is that the camera picked up the incident extremely well, he couldn't possibly deny whacking Staker, the vision is there for all to see, yet he'd get browny points for pleading guilty....OFF COURSE HE'S BLOODY GUILTY, you couldn't possibly be innocent.

I believe his misdemeanors go back too long ago for them to be considered, he has been a good boy for the past few seasons.

6 weeks id say, makes no difference anyway, as he'll miss that time with the broken wrist - NOW THAT IS KARMA, getting injured like that.

Was it that great a punch? he whacked a player half his weight, and someone that wouldn't be used to copping blows like that, considering Hall would do boxing training, it was kind of weak, otherwise Staker would be eating out of a straw for the next few months.

He's been a weak dog ever since he put down Chris Grant behind play that time, and is still a weak dog.

Great to see Beau Waters fly the flag.

[westdog54]

Have to disagree here. While I agree the conservatives have successfully applied a PC rating to the game over the past 5 years the masses have a every right to call for blood. That sanitisation has been a natural progression of our game and thus we react accordingly; it becomes an articulated response to an act the AFL has gone to great pains to eliminate. It is not the 70s or even 80s anymore and there is no tolerance for left hooking opposition players off the ball. I had a 6 year old son watching the game and there were likely thousands more watching on live. The AFL is aware that there is huge competition to this great game of ours, namely from soccer but especially from Rugby in NSW. It wants a clean cut image. Also, how do you know Staker is not injured, have you spoken to him? Last I heard he was off to the hospital for scans to see if his jaw was broken or fractured. What if Barry Hall had broken his jaw and there was lots of blood? Would you think differently then? Are there any future effects for Staker because of the concussion? If I was the WCE I would be thinking that 10+ weeks would be adequate. Personally, I don't want my son to see that kind of violence on the field, contested hard balls sure but that was pure thuggery. I don't particularly want to see Barry Hall for the rest of the year.

Very well said.

There's a very clear line between toughness and thuggery in our game.

Scott West and Daniel Cross are tough.

Barry Hall is a thug.

If People throwing haymakers at each other is what you want to see in a sport, go and watch a local fight night. I watch football for the skill and excitement it brings, not for the fights that occur during it.

[LostDoggy]

Surely players know there are umpteem dozen cameras out there!

It was stupid what Hall did, tho the way Sydney get looked after at the tribunal who knows how this will be assessed. I don't think the Grand Final defence of it was in play will work.

It was behind play, high contact & the act of a thug!!!!!!!!!

Agree BB, he should cop a six week holiday which falls into the period when we play them (round 7, so a three week ban will do for us, but to send the right message it needs to be at least six).

Hehe, as soon as i saw it i checked when the dogs and swans played.. was pleased.. thanks staker:P
Will be disappointed if he doesn't get at least 6 weeks.. although it has made for a good watch and good talking point.. which hasn't happened in some time.

[FrediKanoute]

Have to disagree here. While I agree the conservatives have successfully applied a PC rating to the game over the past 5 years the masses have a every right to call for blood. That sanitisation has been a natural progression of our game and thus we react accordingly; it becomes an articulated response to an act the AFL has gone to great pains to eliminate. It is not the 70s or even 80s anymore and there is no tolerance for left hooking opposition players off the ball. I had a 6 year old son watching the game and there were likely thousands more watching on live. The AFL is aware that there is huge competition to this great game of ours, namely from soccer but especially from Rugby in NSW. It wants a clean cut image. Also, how do you know Staker is not injured, have you spoken to him? Last I heard he was off to the hospital for scans to see if his jaw was broken or fractured. What if Barry Hall had broken his jaw and there was lots of blood? Would you think differently then? Are there any future effects for Staker because of the concussion? If I was the WCE I would be thinking that 10+ weeks would be adequate. Personally, I don't want my son to see that kind of violence on the field, contested hard balls sure but that was pure thuggery. I don't particularly want to see Barry Hall for the rest of the year.

My point which I probably didn't explain very well was that its because we are not in the 70's and 80's when hits like this were more common, that this has been blown up into a massive hoo hah when I just don't think it was. I don't condone what Barry has done and yep he should get weeks for it, but if you use some historical precedents and try to compare what Barry has done to then asking for him to get the whole season off is a little too harsh.

For mine, for Barry to get the rest of the season off the results of his actions would need to warrant it. If Staker had a broken jaw, severe concussion etc then absolutely, Barry should get a long holiday. That said guys who have received "lengthy bans" in sport include Justin Charles - drug related; Eric Cantona - scissor kick on a Palace fan; The collingwood Reserves player - 10 years for kicking an umpire; at the end of the day was Barry's act as bad as any of these?

[1eyedog]

I appreciate and respect that you disagree. My point is/was that we cannot use historical precedents for the reasons outlined in my previous post. You raised an interesting point with your comparisons of the Hall incident with other acts of waywardness (Charles using a banned substance, kicking umpires etc). I would say yes, Hall's act was as bad if not worse than kicking an umpire (at least physically more dangerous I reckon) however, the Charles one is an interesting one. Both Hall and Charles, through their different actions, have brought the game into disrepute but how to gauge the damage they have caused is difficult to assess and (I believe) difficult to penalize because they are completely different issues. In this sense, I'll reserve the right to comment. Anyway we'll see how Staker goes, If his jaw is broken we'll cry for the season, if it's not we'll say 6-8 weeks. Thanks for replying and by the way I enjoy your posts :)

[hujsh]

Hot off the press.....

Barry Hall has received 790 points.

That equates to 7 weeks and 90 carryover points.

[BulldogBelle]

Pretty good result for the Hitman seeing he would not have been back much earlier anyway; he actually hit Staker twice so should have been two charges; and not much longer than some others which were not seen on video, eg Libba's. Not to mention previous thug type record.

[Topdog]

He was given 10 weeks and received a 25% discount. IMO it is a pretty good result for all.

He is missing 1/3 of the AFL season through suspension and has 90 carry over into any future indiscretion.

His broken wrist should not have any thing to do with his suspension.

[LostDoggy]

He should be made to serve this 7 week penalty after which ever one of these 2 things comes last.
Staker recovers from the injury or Hall recovers from his injury.

[BulldogBelle]

He should be made to serve this 7 week penalty after which ever one of these 2 things comes last.
Staker recovers from the injury or Hall recovers from his injury.

Harsh, but fair. :D

[1eyedog]

He should be made to serve this 7 week penalty after which ever one of these 2 things comes last.
Staker recovers from the injury or Hall recovers from his injury.


Seconded

[mighty_west]

He was given 10 weeks and received a 25% discount. IMO it is a pretty good result for all.

He is missing 1/3 of the AFL season through suspension and has 90 carry over into any future indiscretion.

His broken wrist should not have any thing to do with his suspension.

25% discount for what?

[GVGjr]

25% discount for what?

Frequent Fighter Points ? ;)

[mighty_west]

Frequent Fighter Points ? ;)

Well we all know he's a bit of an airhead, so you might just be right. :D

I hope the discount wasn't for pleading guilty, there was no possible way he could have been innocent, the discount with an early plea is a bit of a joke when you have clear vision imo.

[LostDoggy]

I hope the discount wasn't for pleading guilty.

unfortunately that is exactly what the discount was for.

[FrediKanoute]

I appreciate and respect that you disagree. My point is/was that we cannot use historical precedents for the reasons outlined in my previous post. You raised an interesting point with your comparisons of the Hall incident with other acts of waywardness (Charles using a banned substance, kicking umpires etc). I would say yes, Hall's act was as bad if not worse than kicking an umpire (at least physically more dangerous I reckon) however, the Charles one is an interesting one. Both Hall and Charles, through their different actions, have brought the game into disrepute but how to gauge the damage they have caused is difficult to assess and (I believe) difficult to penalize because they are completely different issues. In this sense, I'll reserve the right to comment. Anyway we'll see how Staker goes, If his jaw is broken we'll cry for the season, if it's not we'll say 6-8 weeks. Thanks for replying and by the way I enjoy your posts :)

No problems 1eyedog - always great to have good banter and debate. The 7 weeks for mine is about right I think, espcially in this day and age of football.....though in the 1970's it would have been play on and how soft is Staker ;)

[FrediKanoute]

He should be made to serve this 7 week penalty after which ever one of these 2 things comes last.
Staker recovers from the injury or Hall recovers from his injury.

I partially agree. I think any weeks Staker misses as a direct result of the king hit should be added to Hall's sentence - ie broken jaw = 11 weeks for Staker, then it should be 11 weeks + 7 weeks for Hall. The fact that Hall is injured is not relevent....unless he broke his wrist in hitting Staker!

[Bulldog Revolution]

No problems 1eyedog - always great to have good banter and debate. The 7 weeks for mine is about right I think, espcially in this day and age of football.....though in the 1970's it would have been play on and how soft is Staker ;)

I think hes certainly got off on the lighter side in the modern game

[Sockeye Salmon]

I partially agree. I think any weeks Staker misses as a direct result of the king hit should be added to Hall's sentence - ie broken jaw = 11 weeks for Staker, then it should be 11 weeks + 7 weeks for Hall. The fact that Hall is injured is not relevent....unless he broke his wrist in hitting Staker!

If that was the rule Hall would have got life in 1997 when he hit Sam McFarlane of North in the reserves.

McFarlane never played again after Hall broke his jaw.

[alwaysadog]

25% discount for what?

Being a favoured child?

[alwaysadog]

Things have got a bit more out of control than even Barry did last week end. While I was appalled about his behaviour, I think the wowser element has got itself so agitated that they too have lost the plot.
This was not a hanging offence as nasty as it was; what we should be talking about is how Barry needs to learn to control his behaviour … and what might be the repercussions for further infractions (maybe somewhat belated I acknowledge given the blind eye that has been turned to several past infractions, Grant etc), but the point needs to be made that he is a valuable player who still has a lot to offer the game, but not if he continues to act in this way.

Roos seems a pretty smart coach in many ways, but is not able to make this distinction and his recent media performances, show a lack of resourcefulness on his part.

Myself I admire Barry’s spirit and determination and hope he overcomes this blot on his career, while at the same time acknowledging that if the league fulfilled its responsibilities properly he might not be in this situation; missing a grand final would have been a salutary lesson. But then they might have compromised their investment in the Swans.

Seen from this perspective Barry is just another victim of the league’s policy of “You do no wrong until the media makes a fuss and then divine wrath will descend upon you.”

Take a week Barry, take a month, but come back with a better perspective about yourself and the game and your role in it because no on else seems able to do it for you.