None of this is anywhere near as bad as Taylor Adams.

What that decision says is that you can intentionally knee someone in the head and, if you plead guilty, be suspended for just one week.

Read that again.

Intentionally. Knee. Head.

If that's what the points system is serving up, the system is horrendously, fatally, flawed.

None of this is anywhere near as bad as Taylor Adams.

What that decision says is that you can intentionally knee someone in the head and, if you plead guilty, be suspended for just one week.

Read that again.

Intentionally. Knee. Head.

If that's what the points system is serving up, the system is horrendously, fatally, flawed.

To be fair he was found guilty, the consequences weren't bad so he gets 2 downgraded to one? Not perfect but what would you do?

Id like to see Mitchell sorted out the old way. Kicking/Kneeing is a disgrace. Taylor Adams as well what a coward

To be fair he was found guilty, the consequences weren't bad so he gets 2 downgraded to one? Not perfect but what would you do?

I know he was found guilty, that's my complaint. You can be guilty of intentionally kneeing someone in the head and only get one week.

The consequences ought to have nothing to do with it. Yes, Westhoff was fine. So what? One knee strike to the head could break a cheekbone, damage an eye socket, concuss someone - the risk of serious damage is obvious.

It's the action that is the problem, but the MRP is far too weighted towards consequence. How can we possibly allow someone to intentionally knee someone in the head and only miss one week?! Intentionally kneeing someone in the head!!! What a dog act!!

it's pretty obvious to anyone the mrp is all over the place

their procedural processes are broken

they have [censored] it up

expect mrp mk3 for 2016

I know he was found guilty, that's my complaint. You can be guilty of intentionally kneeing someone in the head and only get one week.

The consequences ought to have nothing to do with it. Yes, Westhoff was fine. So what? One knee strike to the head could break a cheekbone, damage an eye socket, concuss someone - the risk of serious damage is obvious.

It's the action that is the problem, but the MRP is far too weighted towards consequence. How can we possibly allow someone to intentionally knee someone in the head and only miss one week?! Intentionally kneeing someone in the head!!! What a dog act!!

I agree with your premise about intent thus my issue with Mitchell running around leading with his knee and finally getting a fine believe it or not.

The Mitchell incidence is amazing. I had a look again today and you just can't do that. What everytime I run into a contest I put my knee into the opposing players thigh at full pace? I did that once as a player instinctively, knew I did the wrong thing and copped heaps from the opposition for it. The MRP got this wrong big time.

this is equally what we Do Not want creep-ing into our game; just like the kneedrop to the face, & the spitting incident last week.. some values moust be maintained.

The AFL is allowing all sorts of shyte to happen since the game went professional.

So Fyfe, in a year that he will probably win the Brownlow, has been found guilty twice, and fined twice, to avoid a suspension.

Just happens to play for the wealthiest club in the comp.

Great player, but SUCH a protected species. He makes Selwood look hard-done-by, and he's beginning to give me the irrits.

Outrageously inconsistent.

Mitchell - repeat offender deliberately trying to corkie an opponent - fine. (top contender team, big following)

Adams - deliberately, multiple times, knee (big heavy object) to the temple and jaw (relatively fragile, vital body parts) - 2 weeks down to 1 (big club, big mouthed president)

Both these acts are cowardly considered attempts at injuring an opponent - in Mitchell's case becoming a regular facet of his game.

In Adams case a high risk of causing a very serious injury - brain hemorrhage, eye injury / blindness. But that ok, got lucky so one week.

Pathetic process

I did predict a very lenient penalty given the make up of the tribunal / MRP and the total lack of integrity at the AFL

Edited July 13, 201510 yr by monoccular

Scrap the whole thing and start from scratch. The inconsistency is laughable.

That they actually came out one week after the Schultz non-suspension to say it actually should've been a suspension sums it all up.

Evans is a complete moron.

Intent is so difficult to identify and punish

What was the intent of Essendon again?????

The whole MRP situation has got completely out of hand.

I hear tonight that Mark Evans now says the MRP got the Schultz / Richards case all wrong.

Who is he to second guess the MRP?

I think it may have been wrong but for him to come out publicly criticising his MRP's decisions is just plain crazy.

If even he doesn't have confidence in this amateurish panel. how can the general public believe in its decisions?

Especially Brownlow favourites being fined for what most players would serve time for, and for a very soft penalty for kneeing repeatedly to the head. Does Evans agree with that one?

Outrageously inconsistent.

Mitchell - repeat offender deliberately trying to corkie an opponent - fine. (top contender team, big following) > disgracful dog act by mitchell & the AFL

Adams - deliberately, multiple times, knee (big heavy object) to the temple and jaw (relatively fragile, vital body parts) - 2 weeks down to 1 (big club, big mouthed president) pissweak AFL

Both these acts are cowardly considered attempts at injuring an opponent - in Mitchell's case becoming a regular facet of his game.

In Adams case a high risk of causing a very serious injury - brain hemorrhage, eye injury / blindness. But that ok, got lucky so one week.

Pathetic process

I did predict a very lenient penalty given the make up of the tribunal / MRP and the total lack of integrity at the AFL

exactly Mono

* the afl continue to make the game a Joke (Integrity dept') Hah!

* Spitting at players or officials

* taking a fall, ah-la soccer

just disappointing the way the game is run.

And Robbo reveals a third incident with Mitchell and another player, this time Ryan Griffen (who gave him plenty of lip after it happened).

Dirty little [censored]. He's rapidly running out of the credits he earned for jab-jab-gate vs. Essendon.

The whole MRP situation has got completely out of hand.

I hear tonight that Mark Evans now says the MRP got the Schultz / Richards case all wrong.

Who is he to second guess the MRP?

I think it may have been wrong but for him to come out publicly criticising his MRP's decisions is just plain crazy.

If even he doesn't have confidence in this amateurish panel. how can the general public believe in its decisions?

Especially Brownlow favourites being fined for what most players would serve time for, and for a very soft penalty for kneeing repeatedly to the head. Does Evans agree with that one?

Has a very interesting take on "independence" I believe.

Just drops by for a chat and to see what's going on...

And Robbo reveals a third incident with Mitchell and another player, this time Ryan Griffen (who gave him plenty of lip after it happened).

Dirty little [censored]. He's rapidly running out of the credits he earned for jab-jab-gate vs. Essendon.

SEN's Andy Maher this morning brought up an article from 2008 where I think he said it was Mike Sheehan outed Mitchell and Hodge for deliberate use of the knees to, he claimed to debilitate opposition players. Hmmm interesting how the Dawks have always pushed violent actions to the limits. I think of Brereton's antics in the late 80's. you know where he would run straight into a centre bounce and target someone with a shirt front and get away with it week after week. Nothing to do with the ball just intent to maim an opponent to the point where the AFL had to change the rules. And lets not discuss Lethal and the damage he perpetrated, the ulimate sniper.

This year we have had the Hawks for some reason believing they had to make a statement physically because they had dropped a couple of matches, so we had the Hodge flying elbow to the head, the Lewis coat hanger and now Mitchell and the lifting knee that he claims has something to do with self protection. Yeah sure. I just wish a few teams would give it back to them in spades but it never happens.

Edited July 14, 201510 yr by Earl Hood

Nat Fyfe gets away with just a fine again, big name = protected species.

The changes are proving to work, after all they were brought in to look after Fyfe.

The changes are proving to work, after all they were brought in to look after Fyfe.

True. How many Charlies would Leigh Matthews have won under these standards?

Ted Richards one week for this.