40 minutes ago, thevil1 said:

I want an enquiry into why MC hates the MFC so much!!

Ex-Collingwood.

Unfortunately Clarry has become the first victim of the new MRP, MC if you like, cracking down on the jumper/gut punch. It appears that force plays a part only in the severity of the penalty. Love taps obviously fall into the fine category. 

Having said that I'm sure that some AFL favourites will get off scott free. *cough* Dusty *cough*

Well this would want to be a consistent ruling! Very!!

 

13 hours ago, daisycutter said:

i can't believe it wasn't appealed

absolutely nothing in it

sets a terrible precedent for the season if not contested

dc, I think the club is trying to teach players to be disciplined and take responsibility for their behaviours so they won't appeal this and unless there is a lot at stake (eg key player missing finals) they won't appeal future decisions. 

It is a fair position by the club but I also think there are times when we should stand up for our players.  

 

 

What annoys me is the MRP has not stated what the 'incident' was so if it was a punch or a strike why not say so?  If this fine is intended to deter others, it won't happen if the MRP doesn't say what the errant behaviour was.  Crikey, the umpire was right there - I wonder what he had to say to the MRP?  Poor performance by MRP on all fronts

 

Edited February 26, 20187 yr by Lucifer's Hero

Does anyone know if the 'accussed' or their club can view the other club's medical report or submit info to the MRP before the decision is handed down? 

It seems not and their only course is to appeal the decision and risk a higher penalty...

Tough spot for a player if the other club decides to go after him and submits evidence and medical reports that put mayo on the incident.  I have vivid memories of how Carlton doctor's ensured the book was thrown at Jesse last year (with the delayed concussion claim) so he got the maximum rap when a lesser one (or none) was more appropriate.

Edited February 26, 20187 yr by Lucifer's Hero

if that little fairy tap was worth $2500 reduced to $1500

What should Dusty get with all his don't argues?

18 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:

What should Dusty get with all his don't argues?

I guess it depends on whether the fist is open or closed.

Clarry just received a smack in the jewels from the North player. He responded whilst obviously in pain, by quickly, but gently, tapping the North player's mid-abdomen, silently stating that '...anyone can do that to another and there is no room for it in our game.' Watch the video - that is what you see. It was more a case of Clarry pushing the North player's arm out of the way as it looked like another [censored]-smack was on its way. There is plenty of time for the AFL to repeal this atrocious decision against Clarry and appease his honour and dignity.

22 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Clarry just received a smack in the jewels from the North player. He responded whilst obviously in pain, by quickly, but gently, tapping the North player's mid-abdomen, silently stating that '...anyone can do that to another and there is no room for it in our game.' Watch the video - that is what you see. It was more a case of Clarry pushing the North player's arm out of the way as it looked like another [censored]-smack was on its way. There is plenty of time for the AFL to repeal this atrocious decision against Clarry and appease his honour and dignity.

Having looked at the video about 50 times I can't believe that this is the actual incident he was fined for.

If this sets the precedent for the season then this will be ole Gil at seasons end.

 

most ridiculous fine ever

22 hours ago, deespicable me said:

I think that's the softest tribunal decision ever.

Two decisions in and it's already a joke. Geez

Im going to get this story wrong but I’m relatively sure the broad outlines are correct. 

The softest tribunal decision ever was when Colin Sylvia got suspended for something along the lines of ‘rough conduct’ when he didn’t actually physically come in contact with the opposition player. I believe the tribunal said he had ‘intent’. 

Some weeks later Sylvia had his jaw broken and the other bloke got off!!

On 2/26/2018 at 3:31 PM, Robot Devil said:

He needs to win the Brownlow first then he can go around chicken winging, elbowing and eye gouging people without repercussions  

Sad, but actually very true.

 

19 hours ago, Males said:

I think it's a joke to get fined for that, but in saying that, I believe it was a closed fist he used. The issue of Jacobs pushing him in the back first doesn't obviously matter to the AFL.

Now the AFL has to show itself to be consistent for this sort of "incident". Considering the amount of little jabs in the side and back that taggers use, I'm expecting the AFL to register their biggest profit at the end of the season. ???

robbie gray appealed and currently before the tribunal

us accepting offer was very disappointing given the circumstances

14 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

robbie gray appealed and currently before the tribunal

us accepting offer was very disappointing given the circumstances

Pathetic

46 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

robbie gray appealed and currently before the tribunal

us accepting offer was very disappointing given the circumstances

And port lost.

7 minutes ago, biggestred said:

And port lost.

as he should have. once he elected to bump all the onus was on him to avoid the head. been that way for a few years. 1 week was a minimum sentence anyway. i never thought he should have appea;ed even if it was just $10k risk (to club).

Medical Report from North: 

Dear MC, what would you like us to put on the report. All our players obey instructions to the letter from their coach. In closing we know you will look after us for the year. Lovingly  #@%?

2 hours ago, fndee said:

Im going to get this story wrong but I’m relatively sure the broad outlines are correct. 

The softest tribunal decision ever was when Colin Sylvia got suspended for something along the lines of ‘rough conduct’ when he didn’t actually physically come in contact with the opposition player. I believe the tribunal said he had ‘intent’. 

Some weeks later Sylvia had his jaw broken and the other bloke got off!!

That was done to Beamer against Geelong

9 hours ago, DemonAndrew said:

most ridiculous fine ever

YEP and so the ANT ( Auatralian No Touch) have appealed this decision on the basis that our game is now less Physical and more akin to this hybrid code where if you go past someone very fast, it is  deemed a serious serious assault!

WTF

14 hours ago, daisycutter said:

as he should have. once he elected to bump all the onus was on him to avoid the head. been that way for a few years. 1 week was a minimum sentence anyway. i never thought he should have appea;ed even if it was just $10k risk (to club).

Unless you're playing in a Grand Final next week

Looks like the AFL are going to come down tough on [censored] slaps. 

11 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Looks like the AFL are going to come down tough on [censored] slaps. 

they picked a poor example then

they would have sent a better message if they pinged the mongrel who dangerously pushed him into the pack 

nfi

45 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

they picked a poor example then

they would have sent a better message if they pinged the mongrel who dangerously pushed him into the pack 

nfi

It’s a strange decision. You can push someone in the back into their team mate and no penalty whatsoever but you can’t retaliate with a slap to the stomach. 

So the AFL are happy with players pushing players in the back off the ball. Righteo. 

What

the 

Fritsch?