City of Moorabbin Cricket Association 2010/11

Top Contributors
staight bat said:
Union, you are without doubt the best team in "D" Grade and the rightful Premiers, no one disputes this.
Its is your behaviour of players and spectators that has the other CMCA club off side, it's not just me, read the posts, all are fed up with your bully boys tactics and threats.
Take it on board and surprise us next year with a new attitude.
Click to expand...

meh, i dont take advice from anonymous keyboard warriors
 
Uncle Mick said:
That's not what I said. I think the Execs have been proactive on the whole. They may not get it right all the time, but from my point of view they seem to listen to the general consensus and make their decisions. The tribunal is one area that needs a complete overhaul because I cannot fathom how quite clearly an individual initiates physical contact on the field via a headlock, pleads guilty and receives 2 weeks, with 1 week suspended. That's just absurd.
Click to expand...

Mick, it wasn't a headlock, it was bear hug, to prevent the incident escalating and we fell to the ground on the edge of the pitch...... in retrospect it was wrong, I should have grabbed my player not the Omega player, hence I pleaded guilty. It was an unfortunate and embarrassing incident for which I apologised and was out of character for me..... can we just drop it now?????
 
Mancat said:
The suprise is we contiue to let these half wits control our comp
Click to expand...
I believe that the people running the comp do a great job and put in hours uncounted to get the best results that can be and I have nothing but admiration for the effort that they all put in. I wouldn't be able to do all that i have watched them do and i commend them. Any perceived mistakes seem to be of interpretation not malice.

The tribunal took over 4 hrs does that mean it was just a whitewash for Brighton Union

I don't think so.
 
Nez Daou said:
Mick, it wasn't a headlock, it was bear hug, to prevent the incident escalating and we fell to the ground on the edge of the pitch...... in retrospect it was wrong, I should have grabbed my player not the Omega player, hence I pleaded guilty. It was an unfortunate and embarrassing incident for which I apologised and was out of character for me..... can we just drop it now?????
Click to expand...

Fair play, Nez. It seems quite ridiculous that any of it escalated to that point, but moreso that even as an out of character incident the tribunal went soft on something they should have made an example of. I can accept that it was a one off incident, but there's no place for players making contact with another player in a game of cricket and the tribunal should've acted accordingly. For someone to receive a penalty of 1 week and 1 suspended says the tribunal are either very soft and need a swift changing of the guard or that Union have them in their pocket - particularly when an Omega player had no physical involvement in the incident yet copped the worst of the penalties handed out.
 
Unionite said:
meh, i dont take advice from anonymous keyboard warriors
Click to expand...

Please do not take the moral high ground.
You hid behind your anonymity till you were outed by Vinnie.

Due to threats continually made by players of a certain team , some of us feel we must remain anonymous to ensure our personal safety. Such is the general view of others of your team. sad
 
Uncle Mick said:
Fair play, Nez. It seems quite ridiculous that any of it escalated to that point, but moreso that even as an out of character incident the tribunal went soft on something they should have made an example of. I can accept that it was a one off incident, but there's no place for players making contact with another player in a game of cricket and the tribunal should've acted accordingly. For someone to receive a penalty of 1 week and 1 suspended says the tribunal are either very soft and need a swift changing of the guard or that Union have them in their pocket - particularly when an Omega player had no physical involvement in the incident yet copped the worst of the penalties handed out.
Click to expand...

I am respectful enough to know that you are only stating an opinion.....
 
Glad to hear it, Nez. This is by no means a personal attack cos I wouldn't be foolish enough to target someone I don't know. I'm merely stating that if the tribunal genuinely wanted to protect the integrity of our game then they should've made an example of this incident. It's borderlining on pathetic when you consider some of our young players would've witnessed it and now know a slap on the wrist is all you'll get if you show a bit of remorse and plead guilty.
 
Uncle Mick said:
Glad to hear it, Nez. This is by no means a personal attack cos I wouldn't be foolish enough to target someone I don't know. I'm merely stating that if the tribunal genuinely wanted to protect the integrity of our game then they should've made an example of this incident. It's borderlining on pathetic when you consider some of our young players would've witnessed it and now know a slap on the wrist is all you'll get if you show a bit of remorse and plead guilty.
Click to expand...

with all due respect Mick i would have thought the tribunals job is look at each case on its merits, ask for all three sides of the story and make a decision based on the information presented to them. if the player is found guilty they penalise the player a number of matches proportionate to the offence committed.

staight bat said:
Please do not take the moral high ground.
You hid behind your anonymity till you were outed by Vinnie.

Due to threats continually made by players of a certain team , some of us feel we must remain anonymous to ensure our personal safety. Such is the general view of others of your team. sad
Click to expand...

if i wanted to hide i wouldn't have a profile name of Unionite and give strong opinions in a style thats hard to hide. ive had phone calls from plenty of mates and all of them knew it was me. i volunteered my ID to when i asked and even when i wasn't.

i have no reason to hide, i'm just me
 
Unionite said:
with all due respect Mick i would have thought the tribunals job is look at each case on its merits, ask for all three sides of the story and make a decision based on the information presented to them. if the player is found guilty they penalise the player a number of matches proportionate to the offence committed.
Click to expand...

Spot on. But you can't tell me that 1 match with a 1 match suspended sentence is proportionate for a player manhandling an opposition player. It's a disgrace. Even though Nez claims it was a 'bear hug' one of the photos clearly indicates the contact was high and that the force was enough to cause the players to go to ground. Good on Nez and Union for coming up with a plausible excuse to get the penalty down to what it was, but if the tribunal had any common sense they would've given him at the very least until after Xmas to let him think about the consequences of manhandling another player and tacked on a 1 season suspended sentence. 1 match and 1 match suspended is not the sort of example you want to send to the kids out there.
Anyway, what's done is done. Nothing can change it now. Time to move on from this.
 
Uncle Mick said:
Spot on. But you can't tell me that 1 match with a 1 match suspended sentence is proportionate for a player manhandling an opposition player. It's a disgrace. Even though Nez claims it was a 'bear hug' one of the photos clearly indicates the contact was high and that the force was enough to cause the players to go to ground. Good on Nez and Union for coming up with a plausible excuse to get the penalty down to what it was, but if the tribunal had any common sense they would've given him at the very least until after Xmas to let him think about the consequences of manhandling another player and tacked on a 1 season suspended sentence. 1 match and 1 match suspended is not the sort of example you want to send to the kids out there.
Anyway, what's done is done. Nothing can change it now. Time to move on from this.
Click to expand...

i think 23 years 300 games and an impeccable history and record during that time may have helped Nez and anyone that knows him will tell you it's out of character. he was the 3rd man in and was trying to separate the two players but it appears you and others have made up your minds regardless of the facts.

agree, lets move on

ps: do you know Dave Sheahan ex hampton united
 
I recall Cedric Jansz getting 2 matches at the end of last season simply for sledging, and then Mikko got 2 matches also because as skipper he failed to control Cedric in being quiet. Compared this to what happened a few weeks ago, I have to agree with Mick that the tribunal decisions do baffle sometimes.
 
Putting in my 2 cents worth. Al Manning missed 2 games including a GF for questioning an umpire's decision. So it's less a crime to manhandle someone? Can't believe that. The AFL hands down harsh penalties to those who transgress in the GF, and while at no stage do I compare the CMCA with the AFL i see merit in the comp following the same road. Baffling is quite an apt description.
 
Sugar said:
I recall Cedric Jansz getting 2 matches at the end of last season simply for sledging, and then Mikko got 2 matches also because as skipper he failed to control Cedric in being quiet. Compared this to what happened a few weeks ago, I have to agree with Mick that the tribunal decisions do baffle sometimes.
Click to expand...

cedric would never sledge :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top