1 hour ago, Nasher said:

I was furious at the time with our penalties, but more because of the fact that the penalty is tied to the consequence and not the action.  However, with time to reflect, footy's got a long tradition of covering up thug acts.  Players saying they were fine, didn't hurt etc with hand on heart, club doctors understating the impact, resulting in light or no penalties.

If club doctors start being honest about the impact of these actions, and it results in players getting harsher penalties (with the AFL's stupid system) it might - *gasp* - make the players think twice before punching each other in the head.

Your points are largely valid, but given that both players in the Hogan and Lewis incidents played and played OK the following week one cannot help but think that the reports were "embellished" to say the least.

That is why I suggested that, if medical "evidence" is relevant in a decision regarding guilt or penalty, maybe it is time for an independent doctor to have a say.  

1 hour ago, monoccular said:

Your points are largely valid, but given that both players in the Hogan and Lewis incidents played and played OK the following week one cannot help but think that the reports were "embellished" to say the least.

That is why I suggested that, if medical "evidence" is relevant in a decision regarding guilt or penalty, maybe it is time for an independent doctor to have a say.  

Pardon me for interjecting, but I disagree about the seriousness of the Hogan 'Hit'. If you watch the 'prelims' to that incident, Rowe was all over Hogan, pushing, punching, doing what it seems a Carlton backman is trained to do - the poor chap Houli retaliated against was doing his bit of shovery and pushery as well - and, in the end, there must come a point where a player says enough is enough.

Hogan turned around and hit back, unfortunately to poor innocent Rowe's head. Rowe was so clearly damaged and hurt, why he played the next week.

I often sympathize with the retaliator, he's always made out to be have committed the original sin...

7 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-26/mrp-houli-straight-to-tribunal-eagle-banned-for-oliver-hit

The Carlton doctors strike again:

"RICHMOND defender Bachar Houli has been sent straight to the Tribunal for his strike on Carlton's Jed Lamb after the Match Review Panel graded the hit as intentional and high impact...with a medical report from Carlton crucial in the finding against the Tigers defender".

The hit on Lamb looked pretty serious so the MRP probably reached the right decision.

But can't help feel that the Carlton medical reports in this case and those on Hogan and Lewis are sending a message that any opp player that dares touch a blue boy will find themselves out on a limb.

in their defense, I haven't seen a player go down so hard before. He was instantly knocked out. Houli deserves at least 4 for that.

I love how harsh our penalties always seem to be. 

Except for Viney. Kills 2 blokes and nothing. Just give the MRP a Tony Soprano look and they nod and send him on his way. 

I am actually surprised the MRP sent Houli straight to the tribunal.  Calling that deliberate is a joke when compared to their stated approach to bumps and jumper punches.  Lamb was scragging the [censored] out of him trying to stop him from running on and providing an option.  That right there should have been a free kick.  Failing to get a free, Houli threw an arm back to try to knock his backpack loose.  To call it deliberate the MRP would have to be saying that he lined him up and deliberately hit him in the head.  This is just another case of the MRP lacking the courage to apply their own rules. 

If they adjudicated it properly, it's careless high contact with high impact and three weeks.  Given his clean record and an early plea he would only miss two weeks.  That's not unreasonable. 

4 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

I am actually surprised the MRP sent Houli straight to the tribunal.  Calling that deliberate is a joke when compared to their stated approach to bumps and jumper punches.  Lamb was scragging the [censored] out of him trying to stop him from running on and providing an option.  That right there should have been a free kick.  Failing to get a free, Houli threw an arm back to try to knock his backpack loose.  To call it deliberate the MRP would have to be saying that he lined him up and deliberately hit him in the head.  This is just another case of the MRP lacking the courage to apply their own rules. 

If they adjudicated it properly, it's careless high contact with high impact and three weeks.  Given his clean record and an early plea he would only miss two weeks.  That's not unreasonable. 

Agreed, the tribunal really should only sit for hideous acts or incidents that are difficult to judge under the MRP. They've completely handballed it to wash their hands of it. 

I would be saying given the force it should be about 3, but also given that it wasn't unprovoked 2 might well have been fair. 

Houlis attack on Lamb was not Halal.

I expect Christian will find him guilty at the MRP

37 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Houlis attack on Lamb was not Halal.

I expect Christian will find him guilty at the MRP

And so they should!!!

6 hours ago, Pates said:

Agreed, the tribunal really should only sit for hideous acts or incidents that are difficult to judge under the MRP. They've completely handballed it to wash their hands of it. 

I would be saying given the force it should be about 3, but also given that it wasn't unprovoked 2 might well have been fair. 

That would mean all cases as they have proven themselves to be incompetent to judge anything much at all, and as I recall one of their members (?Bartel) admitted as much. Pity he didn't quit. He should. 

Edited June 27, 20178 yr by monoccular

West Coast are challenging the Schofield suspension.

4 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

West Coast are challenging the Schofield suspension.

As expected...

7 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

West Coast are challenging the Schofield suspension.

So would go to two if fails?

It will be interesting to hear his defense of elbowing someone off the play, intentionally, high, regardless of injury sustained. 

Presumably Oliver, and the club doctor will get their chance to have their say. 

Edited June 27, 20178 yr by monoccular

22 minutes ago, monoccular said:

So would go to two if fails?

It will be interesting to hear his defense of elbowing someone off the play, intentionally, high, regardless of injury sustained. 

Presumably Oliver, and the club doctor will get their chance to have their say. 

Yep it will go to two.

I think thy will argue the impact to get it down from one to a fine.

Houli arguing careless not intentional, surely he's taking the Mickey?

5 hours ago, Gorgoroth said:

Yep it will go to two.

I think thy will argue the impact to get it down from one to a fine.

I reckon it all depends on the Tribunal being able to find a BS explanation for why Clarrie got hit but it was of insufficient force. A "BS explanation" means that it doesn't have to be true or honest or anything silly like that, it just has to be remotely plausible.

They'll find a way to get this dog off. After all, it's worth sacrificing the Tribunal's integrity to let off such a valuable player who got 3 effective disposals for the whole match and assaulted a kid at half time.

4 minutes ago, Akum said:

I reckon it all depends on the Tribunal being able to find a BS explanation for why Clarrie got hit but it was of insufficient force. A "BS explanation" means that it doesn't have to be true or honest or anything silly like that, it just has to be remotely plausible.

They'll find a way to get this dog off. After all, it's worth sacrificing the Tribunal's integrity to let off such a valuable player who got 3 effective disposals for the whole match and assaulted a kid at half time.

Probably concerned re his Brownlow prospects :-)))

Houli... Guilty

sentence to come

Houli hit found to be intentional!  

Now the penalty is to be determined. 

• AFL wants 4 weeks, Defence wants 2.
• Defence relays character witnesses comments: The Prime Minister says Houli is a great guy.  Waleed Aly comment apparently were he is a great guy "in the face of racial abuse, which Aly has seen time and time again."
• No evidence of the racial abuse appears to have been provided. I think the Aly reference was a general comment not related to the Lamb incident or the game on Sunday.
• Houli gets 2 weeks.

Am really surprised his defence played the 'nice guy who has to put up with racial abuse' card.  I thought we were past that. 

Maybe the Tribunal is in a lenient mood.

Wouldn't be surprised if Schofield found to be intentional and get the original 1 week.

Edited June 27, 20178 yr by Lucifer's Hero

1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Houli hit found to be intentional!  

Now the penalty is to be determined. 

• AFL wants 4 weeks, Defence wants 2.
• Defence relays character witnesses comments: The Prime Minister says Houli is a great guy.  Waleed Aly comment apparently were he is a great guy "in the face of racial abuse, which Aly has seen time and time again."
• No evidence of the racial abuse appears to have been provided. I think the Aly reference was a general comment not related to the Lamb incident or the game on Sunday.
• Houli gets 2 weeks.

Am really surprised his defence played the 'nice guy who has to put up with racial abuse' card.  I thought we were past that. 

Maybe the Tribunal is in a lenient mood.

will the afl appeal 

Just now, daisycutter said:

will the afl appeal 

I doubt it.  The nearest umpire said he thought it was 'careless'. 

And, I doubt the AFL would want one of its multicultural ambassador's out for too long.

Waleed Aly played the race card as Houli's character witness. #classy

Edited June 27, 20178 yr by Ethan Tremblay

Houli 2 weeks seems a bit light was much worse than hogans 

4 minutes ago, brendan said:

Houli 2 weeks seems a bit light was much worse than hogans 

houli is a very very lucky boy

Oliver should plead "discrimination against Gingers" to make sure Schofield gets 2 weeks!

Lewis 3, Trengove 3, Hogan 2....... Lamb carried off unconscious.... Houli 2. Wow! AFL at its mind numbing best. Tribunal bringing the game into disrepute perhaps?