Page 32 of 47 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... LastLast
Results 621 to 640 of 925

Thread: 2021 National Premier League thread

  1. #621
    Senior Member Thomas477's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Lambton, Novocastria
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung View Post
    https://northernnswfootball.com.au/w...mpionships.pdf

    Maybe an outdated form, but it didn’t change for years so doubt it’s much different.
    I think Stanley’s point is why it wasn’t severe etc and 2 weeks sounds like it was in the minimum end of the scale.

    Imo, I see that point in junior, ID and maybe lower zone leagues.
    But I doubt in this day and age where video footage is available to review that they would even look at the send off report.
    What’s it going to say? “Player struck opposition off the ball”. A punch is a punch.
    It’s up to NNSWF to to decide the penalty. We managed to find the video and have a look for ourselves, I don’t doubt NNSW had a look as well.

    This one ain’t on the refs. Was sent off within 5 seconds of the incident without second thought.
    Pretty much spot on, except we use google forms and the severity gets scaled to what the offence was, ie R7 is always low, whereas R1/2 start at medium.

    And Stanley, how many times do I have to say it, referees don’t have any input into the sanction. But you’ve obviously got a bee in your bonnet about this, so I give up, you have clearly no idea what you’re talking about.
    Middleby Gone

    Lawrie Out

  2. #622
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    300
    I would have thought that the incident last week, that can be seen by anyone who wishes, is as much bringing the game into disrepute as two featherweights throwing airswings in a car park.

  3. #623
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    637
    Poor old Joel Woods gets 7 weeks for hand passing a ball and Sessions gets 2 weeks for hand punching a kids head. Seems logical

  4. #624
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas477 View Post
    Pretty much spot on, except we use google forms and the severity gets scaled to what the offence was, ie R7 is always low, whereas R1/2 start at medium.

    And Stanley, how many times do I have to say it, referees don’t have any input into the sanction. But you’ve obviously got a bee in your bonnet about this, so I give up, you have clearly no idea what you’re talking about.
    "Refs don't have any input into the sanction" - That seems weird. Don't they have to report why a player is sent off? I wouldn't expect them to have a vote or even attend the hearing, but surely the judiciary would be guided by a report or a scaling of what happened from the ref. I find Stanley's questioning about what happens quite reasonable.

  5. #625
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,809
    Quote Originally Posted by Texas Ranger View Post
    "Refs don't have any input into the sanction" - That seems weird. Don't they have to report why a player is sent off? I wouldn't expect them to have a vote or even attend the hearing, but surely the judiciary would be guided by a report or a scaling of what happened from the ref. I find Stanley's questioning about what happens quite reasonable.
    Ok let’s play a game.
    Which red card offence?
    And what does your report say?

  6. #626
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by mge61 View Post
    I would have thought that the incident last week, that can be seen by anyone who wishes, is as much bringing the game into disrepute as two featherweights throwing airswings in a car park.
    100% disrepute is damaging the reputation of something in this case Football in the public’s eye. Which incident has done more damage to the game a scrap in a car park witnessed by say 20 people maximum or a dog shot by a player in a game with form on a young player off the ball witnessed by say several hundred at the game and countless more online. I rest my case Northern.

  7. #627
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung View Post
    Ok let’s play a game.
    Which red card offence?
    And what does your report say?
    I didn't question card or sanction, I'm not involved in the process and am not in a position to judge the sentence handed down and I don't particularly care. I am, however, witnessing some comments that don't appear to make sense. I was pointing out that Thomas477 was misinterpreting a reasonable question/comment by Stanley. To say a ref has no input in the sentencing would mean the refs report and grading is totally ignored by the judiciary, therefore why have a refs report at all. It seems T477 is not the only one that gets "triggered" by a simple comment.

  8. #628
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,809
    Quote Originally Posted by Texas Ranger View Post
    I didn't question card or sanction, I'm not involved in the process and am not in a position to judge the sentence handed down and I don't particularly care. I am, however, witnessing some comments that don't appear to make sense. I was pointing out that Thomas477 was misinterpreting a reasonable question/comment by Stanley. To say a ref has no input in the sentencing would mean the refs report and grading is totally ignored by the judiciary, therefore why have a refs report at all. It seems T477 is not the only one that gets "triggered" by a simple comment.
    Not triggered at all.
    See my above comment where I also clarify Stanley’s question.
    I can definitely see the point he makes. But without anybody seeing the report, it’s hard to know.

    I was just curious how other people would grade the incident and how they would objectively describe the incident. It’s easy to call out something like that, and say the ref didn’t do enough, but their role isn’t to determine suspension. They apply and enforce the laws of the game. Which the ref did, send off straight away, defused the situation. They file a send off report and describe the incident objectively. Yes, they may grade the incident from low (second yellow, DGSO), moderate (bad tackle, altercation) to severe (really bad tackle or incident causing severe damage).
    Regardless of what the referee puts down, it does guide to some extent but not much I wouldn’t think, and nor should it. I daresay NNSW would have a set of predetermined sentences for common actions.


    I just think the criticism of the sentence, should be directed to NNSWF. They are the ones who can review footage, call witnesses and compare to previous incidents.

  9. #629
    Senior Member Thomas477's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Lambton, Novocastria
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung View Post
    I just think the criticism of the sentence, should be directed to NNSWF. They are the ones who can review footage, call witnesses and compare to previous incidents.
    TR this is the point. A ref writes the report, and sends it off and that’s it. Northern makes the decision based on the incident and what the referee writes (unless it’s a major incident, then they might be called to appear at the judiciary as a witness). At no point do the refs say old mate should get 4 weeks, if that was the case, for example, Joel Woods wouldn’t be playing ever again (refs don’t take kindly to being assaulted).
    Middleby Gone

    Lawrie Out

  10. #630
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    637
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas477 View Post
    TR this is the point. A ref writes the report, and sends it off and that’s it. Northern makes the decision based on the incident and what the referee writes (unless it’s a major incident, then they might be called to appear at the judiciary as a witness). At no point do the refs say old mate should get 4 weeks, if that was the case, for example, Joel Woods wouldn’t be playing ever again (refs don’t take kindly to being assaulted).
    Please don't compare what Sessions did to what Woods did.

    While I am definitely not condoning what Woods did, he hand passed a ball towards a linesman that any 10 year old boy could have side stepped. As I said I'm not condoning what Joel did.
    Sessions blatantly punched another player in the face with enough force to make his nose bleed and should have been charged with assault

  11. #631
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas477 View Post
    TR this is the point. A ref writes the report, and sends it off and that’s it. Northern makes the decision based on the incident and what the referee writes (unless it’s a major incident, then they might be called to appear at the judiciary as a witness). At no point do the refs say old mate should get 4 weeks, if that was the case, for example, Joel Woods wouldn’t be playing ever again (refs don’t take kindly to being assaulted).
    I know it's just semantics, but you say a ref has "no input into the sanction" when in fact everything is based on the refs grading and report of the incident. Unless the judiciary has ignored or over ruled the refs report then he has a huge input. I'm not sure NNSWF allow footage from BarTv to be used by the judiciary. I did hear it wasn't allowed in the past. So the question is, do you put responsibility for the sentence on ref report, Northern or both. I'm not suggesting it was right or wrong, or who, if anyone should be blamed. But people can ask the question without being shouted down or incorrectly called wrong.

  12. #632
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,809
    I think it’s a no win situation for anybody here.
    We don’t know what the report said.
    We don’t know if northern agreed or disagreed or what.
    We don’t know how they came to the decision.

    We do know, the ref sends him off, NNSW deliver the sanction.

    Yes, I see Stanley’s point, and agree that it is a consideration when deciding a sanction, BUT it is not the only thing and nobody knows how much, if any, weighting NNSW give to the refs “grading” of the incident. To Thomas’ point, if it were up to the referees, there would be very harsh penalties for anything directed towards referees whether it be physical or verbal etc.


    This is from football NSW. https://footballnsw.com.au/wp-conten....03.2020-2.pdf

    Page 59, I think, has a list of recommended sanctions. I imagine NNSW have a similar document.
    I’m not entirely sure who determines where it sits on this table and there is an awful lot of subjectivity as to what is minor or severe injury.!
    My understanding would be that the report says something along the lines of “punch to players face. Player sustained a bleeding nose from the strike” or something to that extent and the powers that be, would decide where this incident fits. I imagine everyone has a right to appeal the severity and produce accounts.

  13. #633
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    637
    Back to the Football. Maitland go temporarily to the top of the table with a 4 2 win over Adamstown

  14. #634
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    242
    Another brilliant performance from Olympic. That’s now 7 loses in 8.
    Macarthur may as well send there under 14 SAP team up.
    Last edited by Blueboy; 01-08-2021 at 04:27 PM. Reason: Mistake

  15. #635
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnno View Post
    100% disrepute is damaging the reputation of something in this case Football in the public’s eye. Which incident has done more damage to the game a scrap in a car park witnessed by say 20 people maximum or a dog shot by a player in a game with form on a young player off the ball witnessed by say several hundred at the game and countless more online. I rest my case Northern.
    doesnt matter how many see it. Scrap in the car park is worse and becomes a public police issue and hurts the game as much.
    Quote Originally Posted by Newysports2.0 View Post
    The name is obviously a pisstake if you can’t tell
    Quote Originally Posted by Jardelsimage View Post
    the pisstake is on, who would call themselves after a pedo.....

  16. #636
    Quote Originally Posted by Blueboy View Post
    Another brilliant performance from Olympic. That’s now 7 loses in 8.
    Macarthur may as well send there under 14 SAP team up.
    Also, not a good look when the Olympic head coach is trying to fight someone on the Azzurri bench at the half time break

  17. #637
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    291
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFourHorsemen View Post
    Also, not a good look when the Olympic head coach is trying to fight someone on the Azzurri bench at the half time break
    Joel’s out of his depth on the coaching front - not surprising really.

  18. #638
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    637
    Magic out of the premiership race after losing to Lambton today

  19. #639
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFourHorsemen View Post
    Also, not a good look when the Olympic head coach is trying to fight someone on the Azzurri bench at the half time break
    Italian diving team not in Tokyo!

  20. #640
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim View Post
    doesnt matter how many see it. Scrap in the car park is worse and becomes a public police issue and hurts the game as much.
    Definitely my last comment on the matter, if what Sessions did was reported to police (civil law suite) which I believe the Edgeworth player has the right to do, would that constitute bringing the game into disrepute and then would the suspension be 12 months or more ??

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •