On 5/7/2019 at 10:22 PM, Mazer Rackham said:

Do not smite thy brother above the shoulder, for ye knoweth that the LORD hath decreed that the head be sacred.
For thy sin, the LORD assesseth high, deliberate, and lowly impact, but the LORD looketh fondly upon thee, and merely demands of ye one ox and one sheep. Cometh to think of it, [censored] that. Pisseth off, ye mischievous little scamp.

Starting to think that Dylan Shiel might be a Canaanite.

Meanwhile... Scott on Ablett:

"His health is just so good at the moment, it's more his health than his form. The reason that we think he's going to play this week is that he's bouncing around the corridors feeling really good." 

Presumably while he bounced around the corridors he had an outstreched hand at face height of the nearest person, and then follows through with an elbow to the side/back of their head, y'know, to help slow momentum.

All day at Kardinia - 'Ow! Gaz!' ... 'Sorry mate, accident' ... 'Ow! Gaz!' ... 'Sorry mate, accident' ... 'Ow! Gaz!' ... 'Sorry mate, accident' ... 'Ow! Gaz!' ... 'Sorry mate, accident' ...

I don’t really care about Ablett and any alleged bias towards him for some reason.

But if it was Bernie (my favourite ever Demon), I’m sure he would’ve got three weeks.

The tribunal clearly favours nerds over cheeky dudes with personality.

 

14 hours ago, Nelo said:

Stupid thread. Shouldn’t have even got a fine. You wouldn’t find a fairer player in 20 years of AFL. 

Can't argue against that Nelo.  The only trouble is i seem to recall the AFL threw out the good behavior records when they set the new system up along with consideration of similar incidents for precedence didn't they?

On 5/8/2019 at 9:38 AM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The Tribunal has an extra arrow in its quiver not available to the MRO. It can take into consideration a player's exemplary record. That option does not exist for the MRO who can only judge a matter on the criteria available. Whether Ablett used the "exemplary record" option or not, I don't know, but I'm just pointing out that the Tribunal and MRO can come to different results on the same incident.

And if Ablett, who has played more than 300 games over 18 years and has won two Brownlow Medals and throughout that time has never been suspended and only once been fined (for accidental contact with an umpire) can't get off on the "exemplary record" criterion, I don't know who could. In other words, Ablett was always going to be cleared to play by the Tribunal.

 

Ah...there's the answer ...tribunal can look at prior.

Thx LD

20 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Can't argue against that Nelo.  The only trouble is i seem to recall the AFL threw out the good behavior records when they set the new system up along with consideration of similar incidents for precedence didn't they?

True. I must apologise, stupid is not an appropriate word to use and people are entitled to their opinion. I just believe Gary is one of the most fairest players I’ve ever seen and wish he played for the Dees. 

15 hours ago, Nelo said:

Stupid thread. Shouldn’t have even got a fine. You wouldn’t find a fairer player in 20 years of AFL. 

This ^, fairest player, whether you like him or not he gets credit for no dog acts, never done a Hodge, Mitchell, Greene type thing and copped plenty. Credit where it's due.

'Elbowett & Geelong both confident they'll either  have nothing to answer for or will be successful again this week with an appeal.....

Edited May 12, 20196 yr by Monocology

 

13 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

boy that was quite late compared to last weeks. but he's been given licence to use the elbow "accidentally"

Jeelong have their own rules along with their own Stadium

”Nothing to see here...”

they are almost on a par with Essendrug in the hated stakes, for different reasons. 

Although you do wonder what Thompson got up to whilst down the Highway...

Looks far worse, but probably less impact

Hard to see him being suspended 

14 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

He got off last week when he shouldn't have, - now he's done it again - let's see how they get him off this time. Def a protected species like Dangerfield. 

Ball had clearly left the play,  and he went to stop the players run... deliberately got him high, off the play.

He should be gone.

Nup! again Gary St Godlike will escape with SFA protected species. I reckon this one is Worse!

If it was Rod Grinter or my half avatar Byron Pickett ... they would get 12 weeks for this!

Watch AFL Soft shoe shuffle yet again!

Edited May 12, 20196 yr by picket fence

Hocking will make sure nothing comes of it.

3 for the elbow to the cheekbone.
Another 2 for stupidity.

 I know the replay is in slow motion, but shouldn't the player have eyes on the ball, not the man? Keep your elbows to yourself, Ablett. Will not even have a case to answer, we all know what the result will be. Scott bleating again. What happened to the days when coaches and players, commentators, etc were not allowed to comment on these things? Sick of listening to the propaganda about how good a certain player is, therefore they should never be reported or suspended. BLAH.

1 hour ago, DV8 said:

Ball had clearly left the play,  and he went to stop the players run... deliberately got him high, off the play.

He should be gone.

Yes, the image in @samcantstandya‘s posts shows just how much time and  space was available to Ablett. To then go off your line and make contact with your opponents head has got to be at least a week.

1 minute ago, TRIGON said:

Yes, the image in @samcantstandya‘s posts shows just how much time and  space was available to Ablett. To then go off your line and make contact with your opponents head has got to be at least a week.

I'd like to know the stats of how many times he has been  'let-off',  at the tribunal over his career...  because two weeks in a row,  is too many.

I don't believe he hasn't been up to the tribunal before this season.  I think I can recall him visiting that establishment, before this year.

So what happens if he breaks the guys jaw? Then its a suspension? Or even more likely if he splits his eyebrow and he has to leave the field for stitches...is that suspendible? You would think so.

The system is a joke, two weeks in a row he intentionally raises his elbow to an opposition players head and he will get off because the "damage" is not there....its an intentional act to elbow someone in the head, he should be gone.

Its like if you made the decision to drive home from the pub, get pulled over as you enter your drive way, blow 0.18 then get off without losing your license because you didn't kill anyone.

Decisions have consequences!

What will happen to the North player here? A suspension due to consequence? It looked fair to me, King thinks Durdin will get suspended whilst Gazza has aimed at heads the last two weeks.

 

Ablett cleared. 

He changes angle and goes directly for the opposition player,  he jumps and hits opposition player in the head. No case to answer? I bet this is exactly how it went down:

MRO: ‘Next’ 

Assistant: ‘Ablett, Sir’

MRO: ‘Gaz? Again?’

Assistant: ‘Yes sir’

MRO: ‘Clear him’ ‘Next!’

Assistant: ‘Sam Durdin’

MRO: ‘Who?’

Assistant: ‘Sam Du..’

MRO: (butting in): ‘One week’

Edited May 13, 20196 yr by Ethan Tremblay

 

Still cannot believe it’s not worth a week. A lesser player would have got suspended.

 Head high. Off the ball.  Low impact.  

MRP gun shy after last weeks tribunal imo