OK, I'll be accused of having Siggy tinted glasses, but here goes.[/quote]
It's not a matter of bias. Most fans (actually, many players as well) are not that familiar with the rules.
Either way, it's Violent Conduct.
[QUOTE=Turfmoore]Probably the only grounds for an appeal is that even if an intentional punch was thrown, it could be argued that the level of pre-meditation was nowhere near that of Charlie Miller, who received a two match ban.
It's not a matter of bias. Most fans (actually, many players as well) are not that familiar with the rules.
Having watched the replay umpteen times, what appears to happen is that as the cross is delivered and Sigmund moves in to meet the cross. Leijer then intentionally or unintentionally appears to obstruct Sigmund,[/quote]
Leijer isn't facing Sigmund and doesn't appear to be body blocking him. He is ahead - and perhaps not moving as quickly - but it doesn't look like an offence to me. To put that more clearly: Leijer is not obliged to move out of Sigmund's way.
[QUOTE=Turfmoore]Sigmund frustrated (and being prone to over-enthusiasm) aggressively grabs Leijer to move him out of the way. (Not clever as it was potentially a penalty, although this stuff happens in the box often with out being pinged). Whether the connection was an intentional punch (as an aggro add-on) or just a side-effect of an aggressive action is not clear. Knowing Siggy's style, I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Leijer isn't facing Sigmund and doesn't appear to be body blocking him. He is ahead - and perhaps not moving as quickly - but it doesn't look like an offence to me. To put that more clearly: Leijer is not obliged to move out of Sigmund's way.
[QUOTE=Turfmoore]Sigmund frustrated (and being prone to over-enthusiasm) aggressively grabs Leijer to move him out of the way. (Not clever as it was potentially a penalty, although this stuff happens in the box often with out being pinged). Whether the connection was an intentional punch (as an aggro add-on) or just a side-effect of an aggressive action is not clear. Knowing Siggy's style, I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Either way, it's Violent Conduct.
[QUOTE=Turfmoore]Probably the only grounds for an appeal is that even if an intentional punch was thrown, it could be argued that the level of pre-meditation was nowhere near that of Charlie Miller, who received a two match ban.
The grounds for appeal would be that the League has tended to only apply a two-match ban for Violent Conduct and that this was not an exceptional case. Priority for the club should be giving Sigmund a stern talking-to: they were lucky that he didn't get sent off at the time, and are going to be paying for his lack of self-control.
