And what is all this BS about bringing in fresh vision not presented to the MRO?  Surely in any professionally run organization ALL available evidence would be presented at the start.   Ah, “professionally run organization” May explain it.  What garbage. 

Just now, monoccular said:

And what is all this BS about bringing in fresh vision not presented to the MRO?  Surely in any professionally run organization ALL available evidence would be presented at the start.   Ah, “professionally run organization” May explain it.  What garbage. 

It sounds like amateur hour. Suddenly some Zapruder footage emerges and we need to call the jury back in. They are loving this, attention that drags on for days. 

11 hours ago, Wodjathefirst said:

Bit harsh I reckon.  Should have been reduced to one week.

Wrong. 

1 hour ago, Ham said:

Wrong. 

Actually, I’m with you on this one , he deserved what he got……..but I can only repeat, they are playing the ferals the week after! GO DEES 

Edited August 10, 20223 yr by Wodjathefirst

… except it’s not different at all. 😂

 

It’s funny how supporters view their own players. A Richmond fan would probs say “Different if his name was Cripps or Curnow” They’re all equally as one-eyed. Except for us of course 🤫

Edited August 10, 20223 yr by WalkingCivilWar

1 hour ago, layzie said:

It sounds like amateur hour. Suddenly some Zapruder footage emerges and we need to call the jury back in. They are loving this, attention that drags on for days. 

*googles Zapruder*
*Laughs*

1 hour ago, monoccular said:

And what is all this BS about bringing in fresh vision not presented to the MRO?  Surely in any professionally run organization ALL available evidence would be presented at the start.   Ah, “professionally run organization” May explain it.  What garbage. 

Someone mentioned it is a 'kangaroo  court', and in its practices and variations in outcomes, that would  be an extremely generous assessment. It was one event, well exemplified, so what 'fresh vision' could be so imperative as to take over two hours to arrive at a decision - unless some stroker wanted Cripps found innocent against the evidence? 

2 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Someone mentioned it is a 'kangaroo  court', and in its practices and variations in outcomes, that would  be an extremely generous assessment. It was one event, well exemplified, so what 'fresh vision' could be so imperative as to take over two hours to arrive at a decision - unless some stroker wanted Cripps found innocent against the evidence? 

Why does it take so long to get the fresh vision as well? Is there some system that every cameraman's footage has to go through? Is it even AFL owned vision or some dufus in the crowd who took a video on their mobile? You'd think all vision the league has access to would be gathered and made available right then and there. This was the same jargon that went on with Toby Green and Matt Stevic.

Maybe it does take slightly longer for the televising network to cut up and get ready the footage that wasn't used on the broadcast but for argument's sake I don't care. The MRO should get every angle from every camera, scrub to the part in the game where the incident happened and have instant acess to all angles of the incident on Sunday night, not Tuesday. Surely that can't be that hard.

4 hours ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

googles Zapruder

That very clever chap Andrew Denton named his production company Zapruder's other films.

 

20 hours ago, monoccular said:

Next step - UN Human Rights Commissioner. Geneva or The Hague??

As the resident UN Official, the computer says ‘No’.

 

For Crimes against Humanity I sentence him to 12 months of Protection Cluster meetings in a protracted emergency

Carlton appealing again apparently. 6pm tomorrow night.

3 minutes ago, Nascent said:

Carlton appealing again apparently. 6pm tomorrow night.

sauce?

Should we assume that Carlton will lodge a stay of proceedings or something so as to allow the hearing to be heard at the Conclusion of the home and away series    or the end of the finals ?

The whole stinking entitled club should be suspended for wasting time.

11 minutes ago, Nascent said:

Carlton appealing again apparently. 6pm tomorrow night.

Clubs usually have until 12pm Wednesday to appeal a tribunal decision, heard on the radio Carlton were given until 5pm today because their representative/lawyer was in court today.

Edited August 10, 20223 yr by Dee Zephyr

Confirmed by Carlton FC on Twitter

15 minutes ago, Nascent said:

Carlton appealing again apparently. 6pm tomorrow night.

I'd be interested to know how he still has a two week suspension after losing the first appeal.

Isn't there supposed to be some sort of incentive/disincentive built in?  Accept your punishment and get what you get.  Challenge and its an extra week?

If not, and if it's just a free hit, why wouldn't everyone challenge every suspension?

Edited August 10, 20223 yr by JTR

Appealing the appeal

 

Should increase the suspension an extra week for wasting everyone’s time and money. He carelessly bumped and knocked a bloke out who’s now missing two weeks. His suspension is lenient if anything.

I hope the appeals board extend his suspension, Carlton make finals (losing to us but beating the pies) and lose their elimination final by a point with their skipper looking on from the stands. Would serve them right.

To succeed he would have to establish that the decision the Tribunal made, was not open to them on the evidence. That is an extremely high bar. Essentially you are asking for a finding that the Tribunal completely stuffed up the case. 

17 minutes ago, Redleg said:

To succeed he would have to establish that the decision the Tribunal made, was not open to them on the evidence. That is an extremely high bar. Essentially you are asking for a finding that the Tribunal completely stuffed up the case. 

Rush on sandwich bags at coles carlton

However, clubs have the option of contesting a Tribunal decision at the Appeals Board so long as they meet one of four stipulations:

• Error of law
• That the decision was so unreasonable that no Tribunal acting reasonably could have come to the decision having regard to the evidence before it.
• Classification of offense manifestly excessive or inadequate.
• Sanction imposed manifestly excessive or inadequate.
• Club believes it is privileged and has rights above others
• Club believes its season is f--ked if its player does not get off.

Perhaps they are just trying to confuse any planning we are doing for Saturday. 

Carlton fans on Twitter reacting to the appeal with “YES FREE MY BOY HE AINT DO NOTHING WRONG”….

He literally knocked a player out.