Judd incident - 3 weeks: APPEAL DISMISSED !

grrofunger · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:57 pm

and the winner is...............SYDANEY !

bluechucky · **Joined:** Sat Feb 26, 2005 6:29 am **Posts:** 13689

bosman wrote:

Judd's lawyers now rebutting AFL's rebuttal. .......

That was so 16 minutes ago :roll:

BlueLulu · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:01 pm

Deliberating decision now according to Twitter

bosman · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:01 pm

bluechucky wrote:

bosman wrote:

Judd's lawyers now rebutting AFL's rebuttal. .......

That was so 16 minutes ago :roll:

Twitter is overloaded. too many Twitts...

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 17222

use Tweetdeck 3.0

Mil Hanna · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:02 pm

Appeal dismissed.

@#$%&! bullshit!

grrofunger · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:03 pm

FAILED !

bosman · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:03 pm

judd appeal dismissed

bosman · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:04 pm

Take it to the high court.... Flower the AFL...

Navy Blue Horse · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:39 pm **Posts:** 15848

jimmy3741 · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:05 pm

bosman wrote:

Take it to the high court.... Flower the AFL...

Here here

bluedog · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:06 pm

jimmy3741 wrote:

bosman wrote:

Take it to the high court.... Flower the AFL...

Here here

Hear Hear!

bluedog · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:07 pm

bluedog wrote:

jimmy3741 wrote:

bosman wrote:

Take it to the high court.... Flower the AFL...

Here here

Hear Hear!

Ear Ear!

Mil Hanna · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:11 pm

bluedog wrote:

jimmy347 wrote:

bluedog wrote:

Here here

Hear Hear!

Ear Ear!

Heer Heer!

DocSherrin III · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm **Posts:** 17222

Move on...amateur hour all 'round...just waiting for someone to lose their job now.

camel · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:12 pm

No real surprise.

Jayz43 · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:13 pm

to quote nathan thompson "3 weeks for a wet willy"

bluegirl72 · **Joined:** Sat May 23, 2009 8:30 pm **Posts:** 23924

Grrrrrrrr!!
1 week would have been plenty for that. :confused:

ScottSaunders · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:19 pm

take it as far as it needs to go.

this is bullshit.

there is just no justification for three weeks.

you can quote, case after case after case, of far more severe circumstances that have recieved less penalty than three weeks.

its just a joke, and to me smacks of a tribunal and an organisation "making a stand" after further incidents of people appealing and then using the tribunal etc..

again, i illustrate the stupidity of this.

there is no injury, the player didnt go off, the player didnt even leave the contest = judd gets 3 weeks
cousings is ko'd, has to leave the game, didnt come back on = franklin, 2 weeks

the afl will fight this to the hilt, but so should the club, if anything, this just simply proves that the "scoring" system doesnt work. each case should be judged on its merits.

if they can explain to me how it warrents three weeks, but then also explain to me the following.

there are two car accidents, both are travelling at 10kms more than the speed limit, both are involved in seperate incidents.
1 of the accidents sees someone die, the other nothing happens, all walk away with no injury.
now, are both charged with vehicular manslaughter? both broke the rules, both had crashes, but only one was involved in a fatality!

one could possibly go to prison (a lesson to those who think speeding is worth it) the other would get a speeding fine.

the outcome, simply must be considered when looking at the case, not the other way around.

3 weeks is just ridiculous.

@#$%&! the afl

ScottSaunders · **Posted:** Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:21 pm

Jayz43 wrote:

to quote nathan thompson "3 weeks for a wet willy"

and thats about the extent of the "altercation" too ... im furious wth this crap.

Judd incident - 3 weeks: APPEAL DISMISSED !

Who is online