Was the Jack Trengove hearing fair?

[Jaded No More 67,687]

Its obviously now time to take court action for unfair restriction of trade.

Jack has been denied natural justice

His means of earning an income have been affected

Sue the [censored] AFL to reverse the decision and a large compensation amount

Include an injunction to prevent them enforcing any ban (Its been done before in the VFL days)

What is the world of sport coming to

In my absolute rage I agree with you.

I hope we take this further. This hearing was a joke, it was pretty much paper stamping, and took no new evidence on board. WTF?!

You'd get a fairer hearing in North Korea.

[dee-luded 2,959]

[censored] joke.

Screw you AFL I hope we kick up a MASSIVE stink about this and take this further somehow.

Agree!

[The Great One 99 125]

Does this also effect Jack in the future? If he gets another incident, is he now looked at as having a bad record?

[Guest Thomo]

Sounds like we stuffed up at the first hearing, and had our hands tied by the rules not allowing new evidence at this one, unsuccessfully trying to change the defence. Should have bought in the big guns at the start.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Does this also effect Jack in the future? If he gets another incident, is he now looked at as having a bad record?

of course it does

[Kiss of Death 732]

Does this also effect Jack in the future? If he gets another incident, is he now looked at as having a bad record?

Of course it does. He's now a thug in the eyes of the AFL. At least i'm all fired up for tonight's gig.

Later guys, going to scream out my frustrations in the mosh pit.

[Deestroy All 14,262]

Does this also effect Jack in the future? If he gets another incident, is he now looked at as having a bad record?

Yep and there's 25 carry over points.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Sounds like we stuffed up at the first hearing, and had our hands tied by the rules not allowing new evidence at this one, unsuccessfully trying to change the defence. Should have bought in the big guns at the start.

They've refused to use common sense. So lets go outside their rules and take it through oue judicial system.

And after that, No more wearing away strip jumpers!

[daisycutter 29,338]

Does this also effect Jack in the future? If he gets another incident, is he now looked at as having a bad record?

not only that but he has 45 activation points just sitting there waiting to turn a dismeanour into another layoff

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

Does this also effect Jack in the future? If he gets another incident, is he now looked at as having a bad record?

...and no Brownlow this year....

[Jaded No More 67,687]

Sounds like we stuffed up at the first hearing, and had our hands tied by the rules not allowing new evidence at this one, unsuccessfully trying to change the defence. Should have bought in the big guns at the start.

We had all the evidence we could get on Tuesday. The friggin medical report has changed since Tuesday and the corrupt panel won't take that on board, because apparently nobody in the AFL gives a sh*t about fairness.

WTF how can we just accept that Brown gets 2 weeks for a deliberate punch to the head and our boy has to get 3 weeks off for a tackle, plus have a terrible record going forward?

God this is such a joke, there is just no way we should let this go. It's sick how corrupt and unbalanced the AFL is. This would NEVER happen to a Collingwood player, or Chris Judd. Enough said.

[beelzebub 23,200]

Message to the MFC

Much harder to appeal than to get it right the first time !!!

Why didnt you get Galbally in the first f-ing place ?? he got Richards off..gets many off.. but we tried to do it by ourselves.

Hope weve all learnt a valuable lesson here....besides the AFL being a bunch of pricks that is !!

[Disco Demons 92]

I think Melb totally underestimated the afl. We have had our pants pulled down.

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

We had all the evidence we could get on Tuesday. The friggin medical report has changed since Tuesday and the corrupt panel won't take that on board, because apparently nobody in the AFL gives a sh*t about fairness.

WTF how can we just accept that Brown gets 2 weeks for a deliberate punch to the head and our boy has to get 3 weeks off for a tackle, plus have a terrible record going forward?

God this is such a joke, there is just no way we should let this go. It's sick how corrupt and unbalanced the AFL is. This would NEVER happen to a Collingwood player, or Chris Judd. Enough said.

Well said Jaded...

[dee-luded 2,959]

I think Melb totally underestimated the afl. We have had our pants pulled down.

I think the MFC rolled over at first, till we fair dinkum, spewed up! Keep it Rollin'.

[Jack son 5 162]

[censored] joke.

Screw you AFL I hope we kick up a MASSIVE stink about this and take this further somehow.

Jaded, I say We, the players and the MFC, just let it go. It's obvious the AFL wanted to make a stand regarding the appeal. The players need to focus on the job at hand on saturday. I hope none of them Twit or Tweet or whatever. The MFC will let it go and move on.

Shitty as it is, but no point crying over spilt milk.

[AllenIsLord13 1]

Mark my words - there will be a highlight package made by Footy Classified/ Whoevers, which will show at least 16 "Trengove Tackles" laid this weekend...

NONE of which will receive a ban

Yet, theoretically, half the league should be suspended this time next week!

Top precedent there AFL - maybe we should bring that "whoever touches it out of bounds last" free kick rule midyear just for gags too!

[Guest Thomo]

In my absolute rage I agree with you.

I hope we take this further. This hearing was a joke, it was pretty much paper stamping, and took no new evidence on board. WTF?!

You'd get a fairer hearing in North Korea.

Someone with better knowledge of these things will probably explain this, but an appeal can only be made on certain grounds, such as incorrect procedure, errors of law, excessive punishment. I don't think you can appeal just because you don't agree with the verdict. So Melbourne have to appeal on certain grounds, which they did. It’s not a re-trial, they can't just create a new defence, they have to argue facts that happened in the original appearance. There are restrictions on what can be done, and what new evidence can be introduced. Melbourne were unable to introduce a video showing the AFLs definition of a fair tackle, because that was never bought up in the original hearing.

As I said earlier, unfortunately we stuffed up the first hearing, so this one was always in trouble.

[daisycutter 29,338]

Well I've just sent my email to the club expressing my outrage and urging them to take civil action.

I promised my support emotionally and financially

I urge you all to do likewise

GO THE MIGHTY DEEs

[beelzebub 23,200]

natural justice has been disallowed.

Another part of footy dies today

[Suzanna 72]

Wow, the Tribunal took 6 minutes to make their decision - that is SO much more fair than the 4 minutes the MRP took! I bet Trengove is feeling so good that it took a bunch of morons a combined 10 minutes to decide his fate!

[Nasher 33,607]

Sounds like we stuffed up at the first hearing, and had our hands tied by the rules not allowing new evidence at this one, unsuccessfully trying to change the defence. Should have bought in the big guns at the start.

That's how I feel too. I'm not going to make a big stink about it, but I feel that the club has let the player down by its initial meek defence.

I'm not going to labor the point though. Time to just move on I think.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Well I've just sent my email to the club expressing my outrage and urging them to take civil action.

I promised my support emotionally and financially

I urge you all to do likewise

GO THE MIGHTY DEEs

What would an action cost Daisy?

[Guest 36DD]

Someone with better knowledge of these things will probably explain this, but an appeal can only be made on certain grounds, such as incorrect procedure, errors of law, excessive punishment. I don't think you can appeal just because you don't agree with the verdict. So Melbourne have to appeal on certain grounds, which they did. It’s not a re-trial, they can't just create a new defence, they have to argue facts that happened in the original appearance. There are restrictions on what can be done, and what new evidence can be introduced. Melbourne were unable to introduce a video showing the AFLs definition of a fair tackle, because that was never bought up in the original hearing.

As I said earlier, unfortunately we stuffed up the first hearing, so this one was always in trouble.

yep, second you on that one, dropped the ball bigtime, galbally should have been there from day dot, bit too much to ask of Craig Notman taking on Vlad and his political bent

[daisycutter 29,338]

Wow, the Tribunal took 6 minutes to make their decision - that is SO much more fair than the 4 minutes the MRP took! I bet Trengove is feeling so good that it took a bunch of morons a combined 10 minutes to decide his fate!

that shows you how much interest they took to see that justice was also served rather than just process

i always knew secretly that The Castle was just a crock of shyte, but I did want to believe it.