Will he get off?

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Just wondering what people are expecting. Cheers.

[Akum 2,660]

Just wondering what people are expecting. Cheers.

The AFL are so desperate to nail this issue that they'll do absolutely everything within their power to make sure he's made an example of. It would do the same for any player in this situation, it's just unfortunate that it's JT. If we really want to get him off, I reckon we'll have to go outside the jurisdiction of the AFL.

[BAMF 4,350]

So much of a big deal has been made of it now that I cant see the pig headed AFL backing down.

To overturn the decison now would be to admit they were wrong in the first place.

[trudders 0]

does the penalty get worse if he appeals a second time... and fails?

[hardtack 10,537]

does the penalty get worse if he appeals a second time... and fails?

No, as stated elsewhere, he already received the maximum for the charge.

[Samsara 65]

I agree, he should get off but the AFL won't backflip on their decision. The sooner they remember that it is OUR game and not theirs, the better.

[No16 1]

Out of curiosity, would the same media coverage be made if for example it was James Strauss making the tackle?

[Guest 36DD]

The each way bet would be to see an admission that the severity of the penalty was excessive and reduction of one, possibly 2 weeks if our stars are aligned.

[daisycutter 29,613]

The each way bet would be to see an admission that the severity of the penalty was excessive and reduction of one, possibly 2 weeks if our stars are aligned.

Won't be two weeks because that was what he originally could have settled for

so it will be

not guilty or

reprimand or

1 week or

no change

[beelzebub 23,353]

I have faith in DG

[Redleg 40,902]

Sam Mitchell in Sun says that all AFL players are behind Jack and hope he gets off. Says it was a perfect tackle.

[Tim 3,418]

Sam Mitchell in Sun says that all AFL players are behind Jack and hope he gets off. Says it was a perfect tackle.

Did he ask Paddy-boy Dangerfield?

[daisycutter 29,613]

21 to 9 in favour of shafting us

pessimistic bunch of pricks

good luck Jack, we all know you are not a thug and this blight on your character will be lifted

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

Probably shafted but I'm damn impressed the club and players are not taking it lying down.

[Tricky 341]

I'm going for a reduction to 1 week.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

I am amazed the MFC have taken this further...and i am very happy about it. Because the AFL want this charge to stick...so does KB.!!!

Negligence & Head High Contact are the 2 points the AFL will continually bring up...

Now if we appeal this decision we must attack it from a different angle otherwise it is a waste of everybody's time.

Maybe Gallbaly has informed the MFC that he can crack this case....I am intrigued.

If we win this case, and Trengove plays on Saturday-The AFL are going to look very stupid.

I hope he gets off, but i will be satisfied with a 1 week penalty.

3 weeks is a disgrace.

[daisycutter 29,613]

I hope he gets off, but i will be satisfied with a 1 week penalty.

3 weeks is a disgrace.

I won't be. He is innocent. Full Stop. For Gods sake WYL stop [censored] footing about.

An innocent verdict will actually be good for the AFL because they can then redraft this rule so that it is more sensible and understandable and enforceable

[jayceebee31 760]

Sam Mitchell in Sun says that all AFL players are behind Jack and hope he gets off. Says it was a perfect tackle.

We should get him or a member from the players assoc to be a witness.

[Lost Highway 31]

I'm going for a reduction to 1 week.

I think you could be right; if so, we'll be thankful in the end that it's the North match he's missing.

[reynolds46 1,237]

unfortunately Jack won't benefit from the public backlash and commonsense as the appeal will be based on the interpretation of the rules. The rules themesleves will probably be addressed though at seasons end, good for the game, not for Jack.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

I won't be. He is innocent. Full Stop. For Gods sake WYL stop [censored] footing about.

An innocent verdict will actually be good for the AFL because they can then redraft this rule so that it is more sensible and understandable and enforceable

You may be right, but we are dealing with the AFL. I am a realist, not pussyfooting around at all.

The words negligent and head high contact will be continually used, which is exactly what the AFL wish to stamp out.

I would love JT to get off, but downgrade is i fear our best option.

If JT plays on saturday i will buy you a few beers rpfc..happily.

[daisycutter 29,613]

You may be right, but we are dealing with the AFL. I am a realist, not pussyfooting around at all.

The words negligent and head high contact will be continually used, which is exactly what the AFL wish to stamp out.

I would love JT to get off, but downgrade is i fear our best option.

If JT plays on saturday i will buy you a few beers rpfc..happily.

what about accidental versus negligent???

and I don't even look or sound like rpfc....hmmmph

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

what about accidental versus negligent???

and I don't even look or sound like rpfc....hmmmph

My apologies DC!! Similiar intelligence to rp, take it as a compliment.

Can it be proved accidental??? I suppose that is why you pay top $$$ for a beak.

I cannot answer that now, and will be intruiged with what Gallbaly presents as his evidence.

[daisycutter 29,613]

My apologies DC!! Similiar intelligence to rp, take it as a compliment.

now you mortally wound me....i think i'll slit my wrists

[rpfc 28,391]

I've enjoyed the last few posts.

I'll leave it at that.