TOPIC:

I thought it was a beauty,

The best way to tell in situations like this is what was the reaction from Goddard and the other bombers, Did they remonstrate with Kelly because the players thought the hit was unfair, or did everyone just play on because they thought the hit was part of the game?????

The way i see it is if you leave the ground and make head high contact or your elbow or shoulder makes contact with the head...your out if its accidental head clash or concussion from head hitting the ground...bad luck play on,provided the said hits are within the required distance and not way off the ball...play on.

What made it look bad for Kelly was he left the ground and his elbow looked raised,was it worth a suspension who knows???

anchorman wrote: So 30 did you see it as fair or not?

To be honest i didnt think it was that bad(i just added a bit more to my previous post),i have seen worse this year.The Lindsay Thomas one was worse in my opinion.

IF there was some half DECENT consisitancy and COMMON SENSE ( Goodard was fine, no free kick, his team mates didnt remonstrate), then i would say fine..suspend him. BUT its all a joke depending on who you are, and the flavour of the week. Tell me how(in comparison) Silvia got only a week more for his snipe on Brennan from the gold coast?, as i said NO COMMONSENSE no undertsanding of the players of the game!!

The bump per se was not too bad. However, like a lot of decisions from the MRP and tribunal it is a case of 'look away now' for some and not for others. There are many and varied examples of what some players can get away with and others can't.

To paraphrase a well known saying: all people are equaul except some people are more equal than others.

With respect to the indignation from some commentators, such as Gerard Whateley, there bias is showing. If it had been a Fremantle player in Kelly's predicament it would have barely warranted a look of indignation from Whateley.

Fact is he shirt fronted him up the front not from the side which a bump is..he made contact with Goddards head so end of story he copped his ban, next time Kelly might be more willing to play the ball not the man.

swan42 wrote: The bump per se was not too bad. However, like a lot of decisions from the MRP and tribunal it is a case of 'look away now' for some and not for others. There are many and varied examples of what some players can get away with and others can't.

To paraphrase a well known saying: all people are equaul except some people are more equal than others.

With respect to the indignation from some commentators, such as Gerard Whateley, there bias is showing. If it had been a Fremantle player in Kelly's predicament it would have barely warranted a look of indignation from Whateley.

Good heavens, I agree with swannie. While I didn't see the show, Gerard is far too biased and should not be making comments about anything Geelong. He should take a leaf out of Healey's book.

58shark wrote:

swan42 wrote: The bump per se was not too bad. However, like a lot of decisions from the MRP and tribunal it is a case of 'look away now' for some and not for others. There are many and varied examples of what some players can get away with and others can't.

To paraphrase a well known saying: all people are equaul except some people are more equal than others.

With respect to the indignation from some commentators, such as Gerard Whateley, there bias is showing. If it had been a Fremantle player in Kelly's predicament it would have barely warranted a look of indignation from Whateley.

Good heavens, I agree with swannie. While I didn't see the show, Gerard is far too biased and should not be making comments about anything Geelong. He should take a leaf out of Healey's book.

Gee if we ran with that line of thought, who in WA could express an opinion on the WA teams 58?