Sydney Appealing Buddy Ban

[Mazer Rackham 14,969]

1 minute ago, Scoop Junior said:

I believe the guidelines say as follows:

Guidelines are for sporting competitions that aren't arbitrary and borderline corrupt.

[drdrake 3,038]

No question he gets off, there was nothing in that.

[loges 6,088]

1 hour ago, Wodjathefirst said:

“We are just going to challenge the MRO's view of whether it's an intentional strike," Swans coach John Longmire told reporters on Monday.

Are they serious?  If he sort of missed hitting him the first time he certainly did better the next try!

laughable

[sue 8,441]

1 hour ago, Wodjathefirst said:

“We are just going to challenge the MRO's view of whether it's an intentional strike," Swans coach John Longmire told reporters on Monday.

Are they serious?  If he sort of missed hitting him the first time he certainly did better the next try!

I thought this was a joke.   I even went to the AFL site just in case it wasn't.  Talk about parallel universes.

[Fork 'em 6,524]

He'll get off on the "Buddy clause".

[Steamin Demon 370]

Replace the name Franklin with Chandler and it's a three week sanction.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Steamin Demon

[sue 8,441]

1 hour ago, DubDee said:

Sydney will argue his intention was to hit him again in the chest. in addition to the intention, the force was minimal with Cotchin hardly bothered by it

I reckon he will get off

Cotchin hardly bothered ?!  Then Cotchin should be fined for overacting since he acted as if he was hit with enough force to knock most of us over. 

[forever demons 1,852]

if he gets off i will give the afl the flick,for gods sake Bugg got life for a back hander

[forever demons 1,852]

cotchin should have dived

[daisycutter 28,569]

is the tribunal tonight?

[Lucifers Hero 37,090]

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

is the tribunal tonight?

Usually Tuesday night.

[Demon Dynasty 15,550]

1 hour ago, sue said:

I thought this was a joke.   I even went to the AFL site just in case it wasn't.  Talk about parallel universes.

Probably the only option and one suggested to them from somewhere (cough*).

In all seriousness how did they arrive at that as the point of difference!!??  Astounding.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Demon Dynasty

[sue 8,441]

I suppose if his appeal fails he will be out for 2 weeks automatically?  If so, I have no doubt they will get him off.

[sue 8,441]

BTW I note that the AFL site states that he hit him with an open hand both times.  Has anyone seen any video which shows that or is the AFL up to its usual tricks?  Seemed to me the video was unclear , but that Cotchin's reaction made fist most likely.

edit:add missing words

Edited May 30, 2022 by sue

[daisycutter 28,569]

4 minutes ago, sue said:

I suppose if his appeal fails he will be out for 2 weeks automatically?  If so, I have no doubt they will get him off.

nah, suspension was 1 week......not 2 down to 1.......and it's buddy appealing not the afl

no risk to him. $ charge to swans for appeal though

[loges 6,088]

9 minutes ago, sue said:

BTW I note that the AFL site states that he hit him with an open hand both times.  Has anyone seen any video which shows that or is the AFL up to its usual tricks?  Seemed to me the video , but that Cotchin's reaction made fist most likely.

Couldn't tell on the replay so don't know how they came to that conclusion

[Fork 'em 6,524]

13 minutes ago, loges said:

Couldn't tell on the replay so don't know how they came to that conclusion

Which will be their defence.
"Tried to push him in the chest .... But was clumsy and got him on the chin instead. .... Oops."

[picket fence 15,229]

1 hour ago, Steamin Demon said:

Replace the name Franklin with Chandler and it's a three week sanction.

My alter ego Byron would have got 10 weeks, Rugged Rod Grinter ........... Season!!!!

[Deemania since 56 6,153]

4 hours ago, Dwight Schrute said:

Massive chance he gets off. the AFL would want Buddy playing in a blockbuster Sydney vs Melbourne game. he will be playing.

That would lead, most likely, to the end of the competition. Cotchin the Headbutter deserved it but not so gently. Buddy's response to receiving a sly headbutt was hot-head stuff and avoidable. I'd reckon the umps might have just paid him a free for the headbutt had he made a simple 'fake-agony protest and collapse' to the wilful, facial contact from Cotchin. It's a pity the match reviewers do not take into account what the Headbutter did, how he did it and question if that was just a once-off opportunity from Cotchin to seek advantage.

[Megatron 834]

3 hours ago, Dwight Schrute said:

Let me make it simple for you, all the AFL cares about is $$$$$$ and their integrity is 000000 a top of the table clash between Melbourne and Sydney makes them more $$$$$ if as many of the best players possible, are playing. the integrity of the incident and what the punishment should be, do no matter to the AFL. 

So you’re saying the AFL cares nothing more other than making more $$ when in actual fact it was the AFL that suspended him for 1 match!! Gotcha.

The tribunal is an independent body. If Buddy does get off, the AFL has the ability to appeal as they have done in previous tribunal decisions. 
Is that simple enough for ya?

[Deemania since 56 6,153]

2 hours ago, sue said:

Cotchin hardly bothered ?!  Then Cotchin should be fined for overacting since he acted as if he was hit with enough force to knock most of us over. 

Watch the Cotchin headbutt. Buddy was eyeing the ball behind him in its trajectory, head turned away as he approached Cotchin. The latter noticed this and delayed normal contact (bump, leap towards ball - at which time Franklin would have the pill marked, jostle for the best incoming pozzie). Cotchin sized-up Franklin's turned head - took the split second delay instead of bodily contact for Franklin to turn towards him and at that precise moment decided to headabutt, did headbutt - all because he was about to be beaten for the ball. Just like in a pub brawl, it is the coward who headbutts.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Deemania since 56

[Demonstone 19,250]

What Cotchin did is neither here nor there.  

The issue that Sydney is disputing is whether Franklin's action was deliberate.  I can't see how you could possibly argue that it was anything but deliberate.  To me, there are no grounds to uphold the appeal.

[Graeme Yeats' Mullet 6,292]

2 hours ago, picket fence said:

My alter ego Byron would have got 10 weeks, Rugged Rod Grinter ........... Season!!!!

If Balls had hit him, it wouldn't have been a glancing blow 👊

[Fat Tony 4,426]

13 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

What Cotchin did is neither here nor there.  

The issue that Sydney is disputing is whether Franklin's action was deliberate.  I can't see how you could possibly argue that it was anything but deliberate.  To me, there are no grounds to uphold the appeal.

I assumed they would argue force was insufficient. Hard to see them arguing the intent down, but the tribunal has been pretty lenient recently. 

[Jaded No More 58,071]

When is this going to happen? I need to know when to crack the [censored] as clearly he will get off.