Just now, In Harmes Way said:

Like all good lawyers, he’s paid by the sentence

QCs are paid by the syllable. 

1 minute ago, In Harmes Way said:

Like all good lawyers, he’s paid by the sentence

No by the syllable

Edited August 11, 20223 yr by chook fowler

Just now, chook fowler said:

No by the syllable

 

1 minute ago, Tony Tea said:

QCs are paid by the syllable. 

Great minds think alike Tony

Just a 35-minute submission for AFL counsel Nicholas Pane.

Not a lot to report. Pane said a player could contest with his eyes on the ball and still be in the "action of bumping an opponent", which of course was what Townshend disputed.

He said Cripps not being questioned whether it was a bump or not was irrelevant. He said based on the evidence given it was a matter for the Tribunal to determine whether the actions could be constituted as a bump.

"There has been no denial of natural justice." – Michael Whiting

1 minute ago, chook fowler said:

 

Great minds think alike Tony

We're just realists, Chooky.

Absolute farce if he gets off. You can’t be knocking out blokes who then miss weeks and walk away scot free.

Just now, Superunknown said:

Too long, didn’t live?

Maybe tl_nl (too long _ not listening)

Can you imagine one of the Tribunal members putting up his hand (like a stop sign) and saying that? 

10 or 15 minutes you could understand but an hour would put some of our pollies to shame

I imagine that the protagonists are sitting amicably together sipping single malt and smoking cigars laughing at the peasants outside who are waiting with baited breath for their pronouncements.

2 minutes ago, Macca said:

Maybe tl_nl (too long _ not listening)

Can you imagine one of the Tribunal members putting up his hand (like a stop sign) and saying that? 

10 or 15 minutes you could understand but an hour would put some of our pollies to shame

30 mins in

lawyerus interruptis

chair’s hand goes up

”sorry but ya fken what?”

 

5 minutes ago, At the break of Gawn said:

Absolute farce if he gets off. You can’t be knocking out blokes who then miss weeks and walk away scot free.

This already happens most weeks. 

14 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

Too long, didn’t live?

I thought it was Too Long Demonland 

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

For heavens sake just let Cripps play . Carlton  is done. Who cares?   What has all this 'lawyer -ing and legal interpretation got to do with anything. This sports elite garbage happened several weeks ago with Buddy and the swans still beat us.

Let Cripps play. We'll lick em in the morrow!

 

Just now, Demonland said:

 

That post went up on the AFL blog and has now been removed.

The door has been opened. Apparently the Tribunal said he was contesting the ball but should have been more careful. They didn’t say he bumped.

I smell a rat. Why wouldn’t they have simply found he bumped?

Is this a set up to get him off at the last stop, so it looks like they fought hard to suspend him.

We will see.

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

The door has been opened. Apparently the Tribunal said he was contesting the ball but should have been more careful. They didn’t say he bumped.

I smell a rat. Why wouldn’t they have simply found he bumped?

Is this a set up to get him off at the last stop, so it looks like they fought hard to suspend him.

We will see.

 

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

The door has been opened. Apparently the Tribunal said he was contesting the ball but should have been more careful. They didn’t say he bumped.

I smell a rat. Why wouldn’t they have simply found he bumped?

Is this a set up to get him off at the last stop, so it looks like they fought hard to suspend him.

We will see.

The AFL is full of rats I suspect.

2 minutes ago, Redleg said:

The door has been opened. Apparently the Tribunal said he was contesting the ball but should have been more careful. They didn’t say he bumped.

I smell a rat. Why wouldn’t they have simply found he bumped?

Is this a set up to get him off at the last stop, so it looks like they fought hard to suspend him.

We will see.

i was thinking along similar lines too. also said going for ball, eyes on ball

41 minutes ago, layzie said:

The government should step in and do something about this, it's a joke.

 

1 minute ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

The AFL is full of rats I suspect.

Jeez that’s like saying the ocean’s full of water 

If he gets off this then there’s no point in the rules re head high contact and no point in the tribunal. 

14 minutes ago, Redleg said:

The door has been opened. Apparently the Tribunal said he was contesting the ball but should have been more careful. They didn’t say he bumped.

I smell a rat. Why wouldn’t they have simply found he bumped?

Is this a set up to get him off at the last stop, so it looks like they fought hard to suspend him.

We will see.

This. Win win for the AFL. One of the Brownlow “favourite” gets off but the AFL don’t look week on head knocks because they tried. 

What an absolute sham of an "organisation" the AFL has become.   Gillon can't move on soon enough.

"The head is sacrosanct" except when it isn't.  Chandler must be feeling totally flabbergasted and abandoned having made the perfect tackle and getting two weeks without even an appeal.

Edited August 11, 20223 yr by monoccular