#10 St Francis de Agressi - up to 2021 round 2

I don’t think the statement has inflamed the matter. Quite likely it has made Aaron happy that he can get up for the Saints.

Talk about drawing a long bow.

I hope he pays the fine in 5c coins, or postage stamps. Just to be difficult.

2 Likes

Its a long bow to suggest that a prior conviction counts against him next time?

I just hope its Dustin Martin next time.
Tigers game would explode.

So you’re saying all fair bumps will be cited?

I’m saying the next fair bump from Francis can be cited & lead to suspension because we’ve allowed the precedent to be set - he now has a record that can be used against him for future incidents. This was clearly a fair bump but was cited so we have that as proof that what was considered a fair bump has been changed even within the course of this year. My problem isn’t that this will now be the standard, my problem is that we’ve allowed our player to be the exception not the rule & done that without a fight.

2 Likes

You actually believe the AFL subscribes to the doctrine of precedent?

I will never be Dustin Martin, I can assure you of that. For the AwFuL, he’s a protected species.

oh seriously, this is still going?

1 Like

Sorry I meant Hope Franics takes out Martin, like he did O’Meara “fairly” IMO.

Not that Martin lays that bump.

A tigers bloke broke Zakas arm/shoulder? in a forceful tackle last game.
We need to bring the heat.

I believe a players record can be used against them in future cases. As I pointed out I don’t believe Francis will now become the standard interpretation even for the remainder of this year & thats why I believe we should have fought the charge.

1 Like

Yep, you just be proud to be yourself man.

4 Likes

Base your decision on the premise learned over the last 5 years by the club.

Supporting your players on the basis of principle probably will result in a negative outcome when dealing with the AFL,

Because the AFL :

  1. Has no principles other than those which can be measured by how much money it can make,
  2. Does not care about anything much except what is a good look for the game. See 1 above.
  3. Does what makes the most money for the AFL. See 1. above
  4. Requires the subservience of all clubs and uses money to control them. See 1 above

A pragmatist would make a decision NOT to appeal, only an idealist would make a decision TO appeal
There is no place for idealists in the “Matrix” of the modern AFL competition.

8 Likes

Well if you don’t believe the Francis bump will become the standard interpretation, what in the hell are you worried about?

It wasn’t even the standard interpretation for this week!

e.g. see the double snipe on Gaff.

3 Likes

That it will be used against him & possibly against other EFC players. What I’m worried about is the fact that there are inconsistent interpretations & if one of the possible interpretations can be used to fark us over it usually is. My concern is that in the future he misses a game for a similar incident & Francis changes his game to prevent further sanctions. My concern is that next time he’s in the same situation he hesitates & rather than run through the player, as I believe he should, he stops. I want to see our players play with that attack on the man & the contest & I don’t want that taken out of Francis’ game by what i consider bullshyte & unfair interpretations.

1 Like

He would have been jailed for life if it were in Swiss jurisdiction.

Not really.

They could have said nothing at all, rather than kind of saying nothing at all.

There’s also too many “ifs”.

1 Like

He either should of been suspended or let off, the fine is a joke.

1 Like