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.
Pardon the pun,but it is intended.It was a kangaroo court.It was his word against Crowleys. What gives them the right to say there was a high level of probability it actually happened!!Where was the evidence?It is bad when a panel like that take one players word over another without proof.
Crowleys reputation has now been soiled by a kangaroo court.
I always thought the accuser had to have a body of evidence before he can win a case.
Soprano Crowley may not be the footballer that Harvey WAS,but one thing is for sure he untied Harveys laces on Sunday.As I said father time is an old Bastard.He catches up and belts you behind the ear when you least expect it.
What about all the young kids Harvey has over his career belted into after kicking goal on them.How many kids faces did he get into when they did some thing.Was ok for him,but when the wheel turn he can’t handle the pressure.
An old man who will only get grumpier the longer he plays.
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.
I guess that we have to say guilty of pinching now rather than alleged pinching because he was found guilty, but I will still refer it as allegedly pinching, as I don’t think anything was proved.
Were his tactics in the rules of the game.I would say that I saw one incident in the game where he was out of line.That was before the bounce.But lets face it we see that every week.Was it in the spirit of the game!!!maybe not.Did it have the required result~!!!you bet it did.
Watch the start of every game and see the same sort of thing happen at every game.That really has no relevance to the issue of pinching.
According to the panel,Harvey said he was pinched,so it must be true!!!Really!!!Where was the evidence?
It was interesting to watch the insider on fox sport last night and see how Chris Lewis treated David King when they were playing.They actually had footage of Lewis pinching him,and it may well have been 300 times.but there was no evidence to support Harvey and his stance.
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.
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.
[/quote]
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.
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.
Not sore at all.Obviously I am disappointed that we didn’t perform better.
I know I have posted some things to stir or get people interested in posting here.But most of my posts have been genuine attempts to get people to talk about the game.
The supposed Crowley tactics are just that,Supposed.regardless of what he was fined it was never proven that he did pinch Harvey.Not sure if you saw Ross Lyon on the tele pre game Saturday.But he was very upset with the accusations cast at Ryan Crowley.He made it clear it didn’t happen.
So tell me Joan what name did you post under on Footygoss!!!
Obviously Crowley was not going to pinch selwood…crowley got found out for being a pincher from Harvey…denied it fully, but still found guilty. The last thing he is going to do is go out the week after and pinch someone, must have decided against doing it this week to try and clear his name.
Selwood had 13 disposals…Harvey had 11, maybe Selwood would have only got 11 disposals if Crowley used his common pinching techniques…
Nothing was proven Soprano.It was taken that Harvey’s word meant more than Crowley.
If you saw Ross Lyon before the game sitting at the desk with the Seven commentators you would have seen how angry he was about things that were said about Crowley and the Fremantle Football club.
Then obviously Harvey’s word is more free from error than Crowleys. Obviously Ross is going to be like that, what kind of coach would not stick up for his players and club in these circumstances?
Crowley has a reputation (although lately so does Boomer) and it was determined that Boomers word meant more, they obviously though that given Crowleys tagging tactics, that he would and did pinch. I dont think Harvey has anything to gain by saying he was pinched when he wasnt. I also would have found him guilty.
It was a Kangaroo court in more ways than one.Not sure why Harveys word should count for more than Crowleys.Are people saying that Crowley lies?If so on what grounds.Why does a player with 350 games have more voice than a 150 game player!!!
Crowleys reputation, is only that he wipes the floor with the best payers in the game every week.Only one player has pantsed him so far this year and that is the kid from Sydney,Hannerberry.Crowley has a great reputation.Maybe thats why they all moan and groan about him.Selwood never stopped whinging the whole night Saturday night.
Harvey has never ever been the good boy all the time.He loves to when he can bully the kids and knock them over after kicking goals on them.When old age catches up them we all know what happens.He is a whinger.
The whole Nth Melb team need to take a good look at itself.Look at Lindsay Thomas.A young kid gets into him and what happens,he head butts him.A team of sooks.