Sean
Well-Known Member
dibo said:Guns of Melbourne said:keensy said:Why is it inconsistent, there is only one other spitting incident to compare with and that recieved 5 weeksGuns of Melbourne said:keensy said:agreed, being suspended for spitting directly into someones face would be a farceGuns of Melbourne said:I'm pretty sure he will be rubbed for 6 weeks at least.
Farcical Federation Australia.
It's inconsistent, and I'm still not convinced that he spat intentionally. Why would you hand a lengthy suspension for an accident?
How many violent conduct charges have there been in the history of the A-League (not including the sackwhack, which was farcical in itself)? A few.
How many have been close to 5-6 weeks? None.
So the message to kids in grassroots football should be - go nuts and hit your opponent, just make sure you don't spit on them.
Djulbic getting 5 weeks was inconsistent with the standards that FFA have set themselves over the past few years. To give MORE weeks for an accident, where the Djulbic incident was sheer petulance, IS farcical.
...unless FFA are not convinced it was an accident. it would be farcical *if* it were clearly accidental, but it's not. spitting in somebody's face should be treated the same way as punching them in the face.
for that reason i disagree with perm and scottmac too - i don't really care if he didn't take a big windup or anything, he gobbed in cornthwaite's face. it looks too big to me to be accidental. when was the last time anyone here sent half a mouthful over somebody's head accidentally, swollen lip and excitement or otherwise?
My arguement on this is that there is a variation on this incident depending on either camera angle. One says that he should be slapped a huge suspension, whereas the other (which would definately decide his fate) is rather strange and hard to tell where the spitting incident occurs.
couldnt care less how long he will get or if he gets off as he will still be unavailable next week anyway.