On 12/08/2022 at 02:45, Sir Why You Little said:

Who allowed this Corruption?

Don't tell me it was you!?

  On 12/08/2022 at 03:20, DubDee said:

Jordy Lewis to give the pre game talk?  remember that game a few years back?  him and hogan I think got suspended?

https://www.afl.com.au/video/166383/lewis-hit-on-cripps-sparks-scuffle?videoId=166383&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1491128967001
 

onya Jordy
 

The strange thing is with all of this I kind of agree that he shouldnt get suspended if it was judged he was playing the ball and had no intent to make a hit, If that’s the judgement, which you could argue against too. 
 

however, I would love the afl to move toward intent rather than outcome as it seems far less complicated. It does however mean some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished. 

  On 12/08/2022 at 03:55, von said:

The strange thing is with all of this I kind of agree that he shouldnt get suspended if it was judged he was playing the ball and had no intent to make a hit, If that’s the judgement, which you could argue against too. 
 

however, I would love the afl to move toward intent rather than outcome as it seems far less complicated. It does however mean some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished. 

If the AFL is not worried that "some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished" they may find themselves in legal hot water in 15 years.  But by then those currently with the snouts in the troughs will be retired to their beachside havens so worried, but not too worried.

  On 12/08/2022 at 04:12, sue said:

If the AFL is not worried that "some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished" they may find themselves in legal hot water in 15 years.  But by then those currently with the snouts in the troughs will be retired to their beachside havens so worried, but not too worried.

Agreed. We don’t know what we are in for with concussion in the future. Lawsuits around it could decimate the game.

  On 12/08/2022 at 03:10, DubDee said:

Absolutely.  Saying to players that this elbow to the back of the head is allowed and acceptable is clearly creating an unsafe working environment that will lead to brain damage and other concussion related issues. The AFL will try to distance themselves saying we said it was 2 weeks but then this external tribunal deemed it fair.  Irrelevant I say as the system is created and maintained by the AFL with clear overall accountability.

The external Appeals Board, like the Tribunal, like the MRO, are all on the AFL payroll.

  On 12/08/2022 at 04:32, von said:

Agreed. We don’t know what we are in for with concussion in the future. Lawsuits around it could decimate the game.

It's a scary thought, but it is coming. 

Overturned because of a legal technicality is that how we really want our game adjudicated 

  On 12/08/2022 at 05:07, loges said:

Overturned because of a legal technicality is that how we really want our game adjudicated 

Hear, hear. It's a sporting tribunal.

Courts of law go over definitions to hair splitting detail because a guilty decision can be very very serious. Career prospects, house home & family, earning capabilities ... big bickie stuff.

Here we're dealing with whether a footballer will miss a game of football or not.

It's farcical that a QC is permitted to speak for an hour and a half, befuddling the tribunal -- including a beak -- as to which way is up. What is a bump? What is football even? What is "is"?

And the tribunal members, bless their little cotton socks, bought into the paradigm and embraced it.

It was a travesty and a farce.

  On 12/08/2022 at 05:59, Mazer Rackham said:

Hear, hear. It's a sporting tribunal.

Courts of law go over definitions to hair splitting detail because a guilty decision can be very very serious. Career prospects, house home & family, earning capabilities ... big bickie stuff.

Here we're dealing with whether a footballer will miss a game of football or not.

It's farcical that a QC is permitted to speak for an hour and a half, befuddling the tribunal -- including a beak -- as to which way is up. What is a bump? What is football even? What is "is"?

And the tribunal members, bless their little cotton socks, bought into the paradigm and embraced it.

It was a travesty and a farce.

you get what you pay for

and they were very well paid

So if this was a match early in the year would they have over turned the suspension, i think not. While it was stated that Cripps was going for the mark, i personally did not see his arms out looking to grab the ball as we often see true marking collisions. Cripps turned and led with his shoulder. So  is the AFL now saying if you turn your shoulder at the last minute and knock the crap out of someone that is ok, no consequences for hurting someone. How many others will use the Cripps defense going forward. He took an opposition player out of the game leaving them one man short and receiving no penalty. At what point in time do we see some mongrel deliberately take out an opposition player and plead that they were only protecting themselves. I would prefer melbourne to play and beat Carlton with Cripps playing as they may get complacent if he was not. But its the AFL's attitude and double standards that pisses me off.

  On 12/08/2022 at 05:07, loges said:

Overturned because of a legal technicality is that how we really want our game adjudicated 

Johnathan Brown performed an all time grub manoeuvre by grabbing someone in a headlock from behind, swinging them to the ground before landing on top of them. Was charged with rough play but go off because the quarter had actually finished so technically play had stopped. It’s been going on for a while now.

Incidental contact to the head where a bump is involved is always going to be impossible to adjudicate properly anyway (with the ball being in the vicinity) 

So unless the tribunal or the appeals tribunal is instructed to find a guilty verdict for incidental contact to the head from a bump, they are likely to arrive at a not guilty verdict as absolute guilt is very difficult to prove.  Again, with the ball being in the vicinity

So the language from the AFL doesn't match the language of the bodies that they have in place to adjudicate on these matters

If they are going to have rules, they need to make sure that everyone associated with those rules are all on the same page

Highly doubt that that will happen though

Edited August 12, 20222 yr by Macca

Yeah the AFL sold out their integrity again for the mighty dollar.
Am I surprised ... No.
They spent 4 and a half hrs calculating ticket sales and found the contact was incidental.

 

I'm surprised the government hasn't stepped in by now. 

  On 12/08/2022 at 07:18, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Johnathan Brown performed an all time grub manoeuvre by grabbing someone in a headlock from behind, swinging them to the ground before landing on top of them. Was charged with rough play but go off because the quarter had actually finished so technically play had stopped. It’s been going on for a while now.

Should have been charged with assault then.

The big issue is that they (the AFL) don't practice what they preach

"If you choose to bump and contact is made to your opponents head, you will be reported and sidelined"

Except that doesn't happen but sometimes it does.  It's pot luck on outcomes

They've got all the time in the world to get these decisions right and also, to end up with consistent outcomes ... but it's still a crapshoot

  On 12/08/2022 at 06:16, Deecisive said:

So if this was a match early in the year would they have over turned the suspension, i think not. While it was stated that Cripps was going for the mark, i personally did not see his arms out looking to grab the ball as we often see true marking collisions. Cripps turned and led with his shoulder. So  is the AFL now saying if you turn your shoulder at the last minute and knock the crap out of someone that is ok, no consequences for hurting someone. How many others will use the Cripps defense going forward. He took an opposition player out of the game leaving them one man short and receiving no penalty. At what point in time do we see some mongrel deliberately take out an opposition player and plead that they were only protecting themselves. I would prefer melbourne to play and beat Carlton with Cripps playing as they may get complacent if he was not. But its the AFL's attitude and double standards that pisses me off.

Problem is, they were trying to gather a spoil, it wasnt a marking contest.   Makes the overturning even worse.

The moral of the story. It pays to have a good Attorney at Law. I hope we hire this Christopher Townsend fella that next time we want to get someone off the hook.

  On 12/08/2022 at 05:07, loges said:

Overturned because of a legal technicality is that how we really want our game adjudicated 

No

Let justice be done though the heavens fall…unless you're Carlton.

Absolute disgrace

  On 12/08/2022 at 03:55, von said:

The strange thing is with all of this I kind of agree that he shouldnt get suspended if it was judged he was playing the ball and had no intent to make a hit, If that’s the judgement, which you could argue against too. 
 

however, I would love the afl to move toward intent rather than outcome as it seems far less complicated. It does however mean some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished. 

It’s how Cripps always attacks the footy which is flawed. He attacks it with little care for his opponent. I guess that’s fine. But I’d have thought in an era where the AFL have to be at least seen to be trying - to protect the head - that Cripps would’ve copped the two weeks. This incident won’t make me pity the AFL when the lawsuits come piling in down the track. As soon as players can get CTE accurately diagnosed In living players it’s a wrap, and this case is the perfect precedent for any player. I love MFC, but I’d like to see the AFL completely fold due to not having a safety of care for the players. League can start again under another form, but this organization is corrupt at its core. 

  On 12/08/2022 at 03:42, 1964_2 said:

https://www.afl.com.au/video/166383/lewis-hit-on-cripps-sparks-scuffle?videoId=166383&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1491128967001
 

onya Jordy
 

This clip reaffirms what an arrogant [censored] Silvagni is, hope he gets a solid (legal) clip tomorrow night

Glad he got let off as the game & the fans have gone softer than that other round ball football code these days. Always reward a player going for the ball & he jumped to go for the ball. Wish there was more of it & also wish they let a defender wrap a forward around the ears when going for a mark, earn your kicks.

The while concussion thing is garbage, you sign up to play a contact sport & there should be no legal case for compensation down the track.