Bombertalk

Just sit back Filth and think about what would happen if he was in a black & red jumper instead of that faggy white and red one?

Filthy wrote:

bomberdonnie wrote:Just sit back Filth and think about what would happen if he was in a black & red jumper instead of that faggy white and red one?

Still can't stand him Donnie.

No nor can I filth my point is that he would have been given 3 weeks for daring to disagree with the tribunal...

I'm not sure I agree it's the Jumper colours in this case. I think he just like Judd are one of the select few who are a protected species by the AFL. Judd gets off for obvious eye gouging, Goodes gets off last year and now this year.

How does he get off?

That his business, and his business only!

The only important thing to take out of this is for Essendon to hire his defence council. Whoever represents him at the tribunal must be good and what they do. It was a blatant elbow to the head and I don't care how hard the SCG was......

Gatsid wrote:I'm not sure I agree it's the Jumper colours in this case. I think he just like Judd are one of the select few who are a protected species by the AFL. Judd gets off for obvious eye gouging, Goodes gets off last year and now this year.

So you seriously think that if he was playing for Essendon on Sunday and elbowed Bartel in the face like that then he still would have gotten off?

I doubt it!!

bomberdonnie wrote:

Gatsid wrote:I'm not sure I agree it's the Jumper colours in this case. I think he just like Judd are one of the select few who are a protected species by the AFL. Judd gets off for obvious eye gouging, Goodes gets off last year and now this year.

So you seriously think that if he was playing for Essendon on Sunday and elbowed Bartel in the face like that then he still would have gotten off?

I doubt it!!

Don't get me wrong BD I know exactly where you are comming from, but the thing is he is a one a few who are definetely a protected species in the AFL. Maybe I didn't get across properly what I mean't, yes I agree with you that we have been harshly dealt with at the tribuneral and therefore colours may have come into it, but I personally think the protected species comes above the colours and he is one that the AFL just love to protect. It's like they look upon him as one of their great "sellers" of the game, so they can sit there and show him off like a prized horse, they can't do that if he is scrubbed out so he is easily excused.

Gatsid wrote:

bomberdonnie wrote:

Gatsid wrote:I'm not sure I agree it's the Jumper colours in this case. I think he just like Judd are one of the select few who are a protected species by the AFL. Judd gets off for obvious eye gouging, Goodes gets off last year and now this year.

So you seriously think that if he was playing for Essendon on Sunday and elbowed Bartel in the face like that then he still would have gotten off?

I doubt it!!

Don't get me wrong BD I know exactly where you are comming from, but the thing is he is a one a few who are definetely a protected species in the AFL. Maybe I didn't get across properly what I mean't, yes I agree with you that we have been harshly dealt with at the tribuneral and therefore colours may have come into it, but I personally think the protected species comes above the colours and he is one that the AFL just love to protect. It's like they look upon him as one of their great "sellers" of the game, so they can sit there and show him off like a prized horse, they can't do that if he is scrubbed out so he is easily excused.

Agreed

So great "sellers" of the game are protected?

I wonder why Lloydy wasn't protected during his prime when facing the tribunal, surely Matthew Lloyd is full flight would have brought people to the ground.

robrulz5 wrote:So gret "sellers" of the game are protected?

I wonder why Lloydy wasn't protected during his prime when facing the tribunal, surely Matthew Lloyd is full flight would have brought people to the ground.

I revert back to my point about the colours that he wears

robrulz5 wrote:So great "sellers" of the game are protected?

I wonder why Lloydy wasn't protected during his prime when facing the tribunal, surely Matthew Lloyd is full flight would have brought people to the ground.

Even though he may be a great seller of the game Rob he isn't one of the AFL's favourite sons whom they look upon as the great sellers, this was the point I tried to put across however it's taken my three posts to do it effectively haha

There you go Filth, even Lethal agrees with you
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/b ... 31279.html

Still amazes me that Goodes has won two Brownlow medals. He is not anywhere near being in the class of other who have won two and not even in the class of some who have won one.