Welcome to the Tigers Nathan Broad | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Welcome to the Tigers Nathan Broad

The Big Richo said:
A letter opener isn't illegal though so in this scenario that is a fair bump, play on. ;)

So am I understanding your position correctly, that you think Broad should get the same penalty regardless of what happened to the player?

If that was a 6 week act, then he should get 6 weeks regardless of if the player got up and played on?
Click to expand...
No thats not what I'm saying. Same tackle, no harm, 2 weeks. Similar tackle, bit less force or speed on the sling, no harm, 1 week, etc

Harm done should be a consideration, but not the level of weighting it currently is, which often seems like its the only factor.
 
Tigertool said:
He calls me a troll then runs off when I respond to him. It's never gets old for me.
Click to expand...
I wasn't particularly referring to you in the first instance tt. There is really only one main provocateur.

Still do not understand how or why the Stewart incident was brought into this, completely irrelevant to Broad's tackle.
 
tigersnake said:
Maybe. I got the impression you were towing the AFL line that level of harm is the be all and end all. If thats not the case I missed earlier posts or got the wrong impression.
Click to expand...

I'm on the you should get a week or two if you do something dangerous and if you do something dangerous and hurt someone then you get more train.

I look at the two tackles from Saturday and I'm happy with two for the Port guy who didn't hurt anyone and 3-4 for Broad because he did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
why do i feel like they will throw the book at him tonight...?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If he gets same penalty as Stewart or more this competition is a joke wasn't even this outrage with his incident with Prestia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
The Big Richo said:
I'm on the you should get a week or two if you do something dangerous and if you do something dangerous and hurt someone then you get more train.

I look at the two tackles from Saturday and I'm happy with two for the Port guy who didn't hurt anyone and 3-4 for Broad because he did.
Click to expand...

If thats what the outcome is, then I'd be ok with it.

Burton got 2, the action that Broad and he used were very similar, but more damage done to Parnell, so 3 weeks sounds right. 4 migth be just about palatable but 5-6 like the media are pushing for? Really, the same action but more than double the penalty.

Remember that if we are talking 5-6 weeks here that Andrew Gaff was only given 8 for a knockout roundhouse punch that broke a jaw and broke a bunch of teeth!!
 
daniel30 said:
If he gets same penalty as Stewart or more this competition is a joke wasn't even this outrage with his incident with Prestia.
Click to expand...

There was NO OUTRAGE from the media at Stewart. It was "oh poor guy, good bloke that made a slightly bad decision, if only that bloody Prestia didn't get in his way". It was a joke how so little was made about it, compared to the character assassinations that we've had over the last few years with players like Pickett and Lynch and further back 1 incident from Cotch that was borderline.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 5 users
Are we forgetting the Marlion Pickett loading…potential to cause injury. How long did marlion get …..was it two week? So a sling tackle should incur 2 weeks and if injury occurs should be whatever broad gets tonight. Oh that’s for Richmond players only. Geelong have a completely different loading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
mrposhman said:
There was NO OUTRAGE from the media at Stewart. It was "oh poor guy, good bloke that made a slightly bad decision, if only that bloody Prestia didn't get in his way". It was a joke how so little was made about it, compared to the character assassinations that we've had over the last few years with players like Pickett and Lynch and further back 1 incident from Cotch that was borderline.
Click to expand...
Yeh, it started straight away too, during the same *smile* game. Look how sad Stewart is. Look at how Joel is checking to make sure he is OK. Then the post match, Scott saying it's just not in Tom's chgaracter, the commentators saying it's not in his character. All the sympathy was directed towards that cowardly *smile*.

It's also to do with the AFL's pathetic treatment of the 1st round bumps. They *smile* up then and don't want to cop another roastying so will doubl;e down in this case. Nothing surer Broad gets at least 4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
AFL are asking for 4. Richmond want 3 due to Broad's history.

Will end up at 4 no doubt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
As long as they are consistent then no issues.

Lets see what happens when one of their favorite's turn up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
You must log in or register to reply here.
< AFL - a secretive, dodgy organisation needs a clean out | Goddard >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom