I am very interested to see if Dangerfield is picked this week by the Crows. If he is he couldn't have been badly concussed as the AFL directed earlier this year that concussed players should not play the following week. That puts into question the very thing that got Jack suspended, the Crows medical report. Misleading a Tribunal would be enough to get a decision quashed as it clearly relied on that evidence.

Footnote. Teams are in by 5 PM and Appeal starts 30 minutes later.

PS. If you love conspiracy theories, could the AFL tell the Crows not to pick him to shore up their case.

Edited May 12, 201114 yr by Redleg

I am very interested to see if Dangerfield is picked this week by the Crows. If he is he couldn't have been badly concussed as the AFL directed earlier this year that concussed players should not play the following week. That puts into question the very thing that got Jack suspended, the Crows medical report. Misleading a Tribunal would be enough to get a decision quashed as it clearly relied on that evidence.

Footnote. Teams are in by 5 PM and Appeal starts 30 minutes later.

PS. If you love conspiracy theories, could the AFL tell the Crows not to pick him to shore up their case.

In a perfect world, it shouldn't mean a thing.

But the MRP/AFL/The Man created this imperfect world so it should mean quite a bit.

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

You will get over it mate!!!

I am very interested to see if Dangerfield is picked this week by the Crows. If he is he couldn't have been badly concussed as the AFL directed earlier this year that concussed players should not play the following week. That puts into question the very thing that got Jack suspended, the Crows medical report. Misleading a Tribunal would be enough to get a decision quashed as it clearly relied on that evidence.

Footnote. Teams are in by 5 PM and Appeal starts 30 minutes later.

PS. If you love conspiracy theories, could the AFL tell the Crows not to pick him to shore up their case.

This could be the elusive piece of evidence....Gallbaly will need an A & B plan, depending on whether Dangerfield is selected.

In a perfect world, it shouldn't mean a thing.

But the MRP/AFL/The Man created this imperfect world so it should mean quite a bit.

"Then the LORD Vlad made an MRP from the rib he had taken out of the player, and he brought it to bear on the player"

Here endeth the lesson, amen

"Then the LORD Vlad made an MRP from the rib he had taken out of the player, and he brought it to bear on the player"

Here endeth the lesson, amen

Amen.

Man, scripture has changed since I was at school...

This could be the elusive piece of evidence....Gallbaly will need an A & B plan, depending on whether Dangerfield is selected.

Lets hope he puts on the forward press in in the first Q before its too late

Im please the clun has got David Gallaby. He is a top lawyer and even maybe a qc. But Im glad the club has the expense to do it.

I dont know if he will get off. I thought if you appeal the tribunals decision you have to have new evidence. Anyway I hope he does get off or the very least get his weeks reduced.

I hope they spoke to the melbourne storm because they have had issues in the past with these tackles and maybe they could help the demons with a ninsight on what evidence to use to get him off.

But what I really like is how the the players have got around Jack. Not only the melbourne players but ones from the other teams. Joel Selwood tweeted, Steven Baker and mitch Robinson tweeted about the disgraceful decision. Maybe we could all protest out the front. Even Jack Watts mum tweeted about it.

Good luck Jack

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.

Vlads powers are far reaching...

Did he ask Paddy-boy Dangerfield?

Curious to hear what he thinks should happen. It could be good if we could get him to speak out.

I reckon he will get it back to 2 weeks, but i'm hoping it may get back to 1. If he gets off, which i dont think will happen, I will be stoked.

I am also very proud to be a MFC member right now, as I think it is great that we are having a crack and not just accepting of the penalty.

Great stuff from the MFC.

Well if anyone can DG QC can.

The obvious culprit in all this is the MCG after all it was its' playing surface that blatantly , and without hesitation failed to accommodate Dangerfield's desire to mimic the surface. Yes folks the ground is to blame!!

I actually am thinking the attack will utilize not any new evidence per se but to have previously admitted evidence disallowed through lack of any unbiased corroboration.

That and the notion that the judgement was flawed in both law as well as logic.

Going to be interesting to see the AFL dance this one

Lets hope he puts on the forward press in in the first Q before its too late

Still recovering from laughter courtesy of WYL mistaking you for rpfc...could only be WYL.

Right now where was I...oh yeah, it all starts in the midfield. DG will need to make some tackles stick himself. Then get a clearance.

Still recovering from laughter courtesy of WYL mistaking you for rpfc...could only be WYL.

Right now where was I...oh yeah, it all starts in the midfield. DG will need to make some tackles stick himself. Then get a clearance.

True. Its the midfield, attack first and keep the advantage

I should have said cope with the opposition's attempted forward press in the first Q

I think they will reduce it to 1 week.

Still recovering from laughter courtesy of WYL mistaking you for rpfc...could only be WYL.

Right now where was I...oh yeah, it all starts in the midfield. DG will need to make some tackles stick himself. Then get a clearance.

Glad to give out laughs HT, it does get a bit serious in here too often!!

If the AFL are genuinely concerned about head injuries, then they should not be concerned about who causes those injuries, whether team-mate or opponent. They should only be concerned that the injury happened. So from now on, if a player for example, negligently and without duty of care, goes for a screamer on his team-mate's shoulders, and in the process fractures the team-mate's jaw with his knee, then he must be reported and penalised. We have to stamp these sorts of things out of the game. It shouldn't matter who caused the injury, only that it happened due to someone's negligence or lack of duty of care.

And what do I think he'll get? Reduction to 2 weeks, because the AFL can't be seen to be backing down to the masses, but will throw them a small bone.

this is whats wrong with the game. the tribunal system. few years ago, j brown grabbed someone in a headlock from behind , flung them to the ground and fell on top of them. one of the lowest and dirtiest acts of recent times. he got off on a technicality. a qc argued he couldnt be charged with rough play because play(the quarter) had stopped. a disgraceful out come for the game. this is a game, not a court of law, yet everyone loads up with qc`s and try their best to get someone off by playing word games, and interpritations of them. the tackle didnt look good but is part of the game, the player being tackled still had one arm free. a verbal warning during the game or a fitty at best. we shouldnt even be in this position. dont think he will get off due to the afl`s arrogance. good luck jack.

Edited May 12, 201114 yr by Al`s DEMONS

Dangerfield is playing for the Crows this week.

Dangerfield named for Crows.

Perhaps that helps ...

Still recovering from laughter courtesy of WYL mistaking you for rpfc...could only be WYL.

Right now where was I...oh yeah, it all starts in the midfield. DG will need to make some tackles stick himself. Then get a clearance.

Oh, and DG should avoid using "excessive force" in his arguments as we know how touchy they can be, and avoid trying to make his arguments "stick". Lets hope he can convince Appeals commissioners that JT deserves a "duty of care" in their deliberations.

Its a miracle, its a miracle........Dangermouse listed for Crows

Edited May 12, 201114 yr by daisycutter

Really there should have been a third option,

Some common sense, some pressure, some upheld. and he would be downgraded to a week.

If a miracle happens then he will play this week.

Its a miracle, its a miracle........Dangermouse listed for Crows

"18 years of silence till you came along"

This is good news, i didn't think the crows would do it.

Worth 3 weeks now is it????

Dangerfield named for Crows.

Perhaps that helps ...

I believe it does. The AFL decreed earlier this year that no player should be played the week after getting concussion. The Crows medical staff would not ignore an AFL directive. Therefore his injury was minor and the classification of high impact ( not to be confused with high contact which did occur ) was wrongly obtained for a start. A medical report saying that Dangerfield had concussion as a result of the JT tackle was tendered to the Tribunal. It was clearly relied on to find JT guilty as the AFL QC said the tackle would have been legal but for the injury, meaning there was excessive force. The tribunal hearing has clearly been compromised especially since I believe the Doctor didn't appear to be cross examined on his report. Even Anderson said if not for the bad injury and the Medical Report the tackle was fine. The stink gets worse. Don't forget the Tribunal only gave 4 minutes to find him guilty. Therefore they must have accepted the report completely. JT should be let off as he has gone through a week of hell for a perfectly legal tackle and a botched MRP finding and Tribunal hearing.

Edited May 12, 201114 yr by Redleg

ITS STARTED