TOPIC:

Given the tribunal decided that Harveys version of events ( i.e that Crowley pinched him 300 times during Sundays match- 3 times per minute in other words) was more believable than Crowley's denial that he did it at all,even though none of the 9 umpires on the ground actually saw him do it and that Ross Lyon was quoted as saying this morning "I back Ryan 100 per cent. If Ryan was out there pinching players I would have a problem with it internally", where does this leave Crowley now in terms of further disciplinary action from the club?

As you have said, the umpires didnt see it and no camera saw it, is still Harveys word against Crowleys. TRibunal took Harveys word and I think Freo and Ross Lyon will take Crowleys word, pretty hard for them not too. I dont think Ross Lyon is now going to believe that it happened. No disciplinary action from the club will happen.

Personally I think that he did it. Harvey gets tagged nearly every game, and not once has this happened, so I am more inclined to take his word than a petty tagger who shouldnt even be allowed to tie up Boomers shoelaces.

I have no idea how, if there was no further evidence rather than word against word, that he was still found guilty. Surely there had to of been somehting....maybe pinch marks on Harvey that were deemed relevant?

I agree Crowley did get the better of Harvey, but was it within the rules of the game, i would say no, i have not watched a game where crowley has used illegal tagging tactics to beat his opponent. it is exactly what needs to be eradicated from the game. The stopping of his run, the pinching etc etc.

How could they come to the decision that Crowley was guilty, common sense should prevail: There are 3 field umpires, two in goals, four on the boundaries and two reserve umpires, umpteen cameras and 33,000 spectators and no one or camera saw any of the 300 alleged pinches. Give me a break, someone told lies and it wasn't Ryan Crowley.

Boomer harvey is a po?f and a cry baby…he can take it with a pinch of shit…

I suspect what was proved beyond any doubt that Harvey is not the most gifted when it comes to mathematics. 300 pinches in at best 120 minutes represents quite a ratio. Even higher when you consider the amount of time during the game when it would have been phsically impossible for Crowley to have pinched Harvey.

What is also proved on the basis that Crowley was found guilty based on Harvey's evidence of being pinched in the vicinity of 300 times is that the three field umpires who were involved in the match should be stood down. It seems inconceivable that if, as alleged by Harvey, that he was pinched 300 times that not once did a field umpire see the alleged pinching.

As for the North Melbourne's feigned indignation it would appear that he has read from the Malthouse/Worsfold playbook where one diverts attention from one's onw failings and one's own team's failings.

swan42 wrote: I suspect what was proved beyond any doubt that Harvey is not the most gifted when it comes to mathematics. 300 pinches in at best 120 minutes represents quite a ratio. Even higher when you consider the amount of time during the game when it would have been phsically impossible for Crowley to have pinched Harvey.

What is also proved on the basis that Crowley was found guilty based on Harvey's evidence of being pinched in the vicinity of 300 times is that the three field umpires who were involved in the match should be stood down. It seems inconceivable that if, as alleged by Harvey, that he was pinched 300 times that not once did a field umpire see the alleged pinching.

As for the North Melbourne's feigned indignation it would appear that he has read from the Malthouse/Worsfold playbook where one diverts attention from one's onw failings and one's own team's failings.

After tonight's game against Geelong, Selwood even said that Crowley does his tagging the right way no mention of a pinch, Harvey is at the end of a great career and is making excuses.......

But Harvey is at the end of a great career - he does not need to make excuses. Crowley is a very annoying individual and seems to relish his role. Probably it is all he is good for. You would find more inside a football than what you would between those two ears of his.

anchorman wrote: Joan,me thinks that the only sillier things you say here is making out you are a female.
Me thinks that you are one who was on goss and has come over here with another name.Some of your comments are just plain stupid and intent on stirring.
either that or you are a female who knows JS about the game.

Troll comes to mind A/M. I think we take Joan with a Pinch of salt

Ouch troll does hurt. And just because I would dare question the tactics of Crowley or suggest he has a void where everyone else has a brain. Anchorman you have made nearly a 1000 posts, not everyone would agree with everything you have posted and you must surely have done a little stirring too. I think your a little sore because freo have been found wanting today.