Contact between Carlton's Chris Judd and an umpire from the third quarter of Sunday's match was assessed. The umpire had bounced the ball and was heading backwards when he deviated away on an angle, rather than move in a direct straight line. Player Judd held his position and it was the view of the panel that the change in path by the umpire had contributed to the contact. No further action was taken.

from http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/115651/default.aspx

So I assume you've looked at the footage of both incidents and made an educated, rational call?

I haven't seen either of them. I would assume the umpire runs into Judd, but Trengove runs into the umpire.

Get over it.

Yehhhh ummm, and what's handy for them is:

No Grimes, no Garland, no Jamar, no tagger (Bail), no Tapscott, no Aussie, and POTENTIALLY no Sylvia and/or Bartram...

They will also get to potentially front up against a team with 5-6 players who have played less than 5 games and around 8 who have played less than 20!

Our relative inexperience may show...

Well duh...

Trengove's was a clear case to be honest.

na i havent seen either i was just taking the [censored]. they usually get the umpire ones right...

So I assume you've looked at the footage of both incidents and made an educated, rational call?

I haven't seen either of them. I would assume the umpire runs into Judd, but Trengove runs into the umpire.

Do you have to look at the footage to know that Judd's gonna get off?

na i havent seen either i was just taking the [censored]. they usually get the umpire ones right...

Pretty spot on IMO.

Trengove's was a clear case to be honest.

It was about as straight forward as you can get.

Umpire was running backwards as normal. Trengove glances him running past. The moment it happened you knew he was going to be fined.

Judd should have got off. Common sense prevails.

if he doesnt get 2 weeks minimum then theres only one logical conclusion. In all seriousness corruption is rife in the AFL.

There is corruption in the AFL reguardless of weather Thomas gets weeks...

As long as i live i will never understand the Trengove decision - Selwood has hit Ablett miles off the ball. Thomas has hit Jones after the ball is gone. I semi understand the MRP classifications of impact but as far as I am concerned what Campbell Brown, Selwood and Thomas did was off the ball and considered "dirty" to varying degrees. What Trengove did was deliver a brutal tackle that in itself was not aimed at damagingthe head ( as opposed to jumping off the ground with hip and shoulder to the head)

Just shaking my head in disbelief

The AFL's treatment of Chris Judd makes me want to projectile vomit.

It's as if everyone has one set of rules, and Judd has his own set of special rules. Dirty eye gouger can do no wrong. Disgusting!

Good news re: Thomas. I think the penalty is reasonable for the level of offense, but is obviously an utter joke compared to Trengove's penalty for a far less deliberate/out-of-play incident.

The AFL's treatment of Chris Judd makes me want to projectile vomit.

It's as if everyone has one set of rules, and Judd has his own set of special rules. Dirty eye gouger can do no wrong. Disgusting!

This could hardly fit this situation any less.

Well, AFL.com says he got a week. No Swan or Daisy for the QB Clash.....interesting.

No Jolly either.

This could hardly fit this situation any less.

45HG is one of the only people on this forum who actually seems to have seen the Judd incident.

The Judd one was nothing like the Trengove one.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/clean-record-cant-save-thomas-20110606-1fp9q.html

no swan, daisy and jolly...hopefully this keeps a few filthy pies supporters from coming to the game.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/clean-record-cant-save-thomas-20110606-1fp9q.html

no swan, daisy and jolly...hopefully this keeps a few filthy pies supporters from coming to the game.

It's our home game, we want as many people and Collingwood supporters as possible.

Edited June 6, 201114 yr by Deestroy All

It's our home game, we want as many people and Collingwood supporters as possible.

I take my words back! Lets hope pendles can't hanlde a heavy tag with swan and daisy out!

Article on HS indicates that Collingwood may appeal. I doubt it though, cannot get of punching someone in the face.

Article on HS indicates that Collingwood may appeal. I doubt it though, cannot get of punching someone in the face.

Collingwood might try to get it downgraded from "intentional" to "reckless" to reduce the penalty from two weeks to one week. Then, with a guilty plea and his good record, that one week would become no weeks.

Collingwood might try to get it downgraded from "intentional" to "reckless" to reduce the penalty from two weeks to one week. Then, with a guilty plea and his good record, that one week would become no weeks.

If that is not intentional, then nothing ever is. Bologni.

This was fun to put together:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNu-fztgC5E

That is brilliant, i had goosebumps!

He's contesting it...

oh it was reckless the left hook i gave you while i was looking at the ball down the field.

It wasn't my intentions to split your lip.

[censored]

Edited June 7, 201114 yr by Friday

This is a croc of s***. In fact it's what Mick might call *cheating*. He went to punch someone and connected, now they're saying that's not what he did.

If they successfully appeal, Connolly, Schwabb, or someone else should talk up. Trengove played footy and hurt someone - It seemed the hurting someone part was the issue.

Daisy doesn't play footy (rather he does something completely off play), and hurts someone - Seriously...If Leigh Matthews had played in a black and white jumper he probably would have got off for the Neville Brunns punch

Barry Hall played in (and won) a grand final after his punch to McGuire's was deemed reckless, not intentional.

And Campbell Brown's elbow to Ward's head was deemed reckless, not intentional.

The combined brains of Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking and Yahoo Serious would struggle to solve the riddle that is the Match Review Panel.