Chandler Tackle

[La Dee-vina Comedia 17,059]

28 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

the mro are the arbiter, rightly or wrongly

the mro adjudicated hawkins (very similar) tackle as not even worthy of a fine. it's on the record.

there's your case for an appeal

meanwhile the afl can do a better job of defining exactly what is a suspendable tackle versus an unfortunate footy action.  and they can explain why they didn't appeal the hawkin's case if they are sincere.

It's unrelated to the Chandler matter, but I don't think the AFL should have the power to appeal. It's their MRO and Tribunal. If they don't like the decisions, change the model or the people engaged to be the MRO or Tribunal members, but don't cherry-pick which decisions to appeal and which ones not to.

[monoccular 17,676]

18 hours ago, Redleg said:

Disappointing.

Well we at least hold some records for MRO/Tribunal penalties.

Only club to have a player suspended for 4 matches for a sling tackle ( twice - ANB and Jack Trengove)

Only club to have a player suspended for rough play, without actual contact with the opposition player             ( Brent Moloney ) 

Only player to be suspended for an elbow on the throat of an opponent ( Viney )

One of few if any other clubs, to have a player suspended for 2 matches, for an otherwise legal tackle, that became illegal, only as a result of the opponent being concussed.

Only club that has had a player suspended for standing still, while a player ran into him, bounced off and got a whiplash concussion without head contact ( May ). 

I am sure I have missed a few other records we hold at the MRO/Tribunal.

First and only club to have a player suspended for wrestling - Jakovic in a practice match ?v Colonwood.  

[Redleg 41,980]

3 hours ago, monoccular said:

First and only club to have a player suspended for wrestling - Jakovic in a practice match ?v Colonwood.  

Did he get a week when he kissed his brother?

[monoccular 17,676]

3 hours ago, Redleg said:

Did he get a week when he kissed his brother?

NO

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,993]

23 hours ago, DubDee said:

being non-deliberate is irrelevant

Hawkins broke Steve May's face non-deliberately and got zero weeks.

I can understand how umpires might struggle for consistency when they need to make 'in the moment' decisions, but the MRO tribuneral, whatever it is really doesn need to do much better.

It's not rocket science.

Edited May 18, 2022 by Rodney (Balls) Grinter

[Willmoy1947 4,209]

I don't care about most umpires but I care a bloody sight less about the way the game we love is being manipulated by quite a few officials who seem intent on not having status quo for all clubs at all times

Things like Hird heading for a traineeship under a previous confidant without as much as a murmer. Another bloke who has done a terrible job in a Tribunal position of great responsibility without any public accountability and tenure time.

Just one other bug bear about who decides Friday night games prime time..

[deanox 10,046]

On 5/17/2022 at 9:25 AM, Jaded No More said:

My question is, if the Chandler tackle results in say an AC join injury similar to the Jack Steele tackle, does Chandler get suspended? Or is concussion the only outcome based ruling in the AFL? 

...

Concussion is the only bad outcome because it is the only looming court case.

[Jaded No More 68,975]

1 minute ago, deanox said:

Concussion is the only bad outcome because it is the only looming court case.

For now. Wait until someone gets a spine injury from being tunneled.