Just now, Jaded No More said:

That wasn’t me sir. I want a full retraction.  

A full what?!

Oh, retraction… right, retraction.

RE TRAC TION

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

You do know that Anderson has lost most of his Tribunal appearances.

He was also the bloke that started the Tanking investigation against us.

And ironically the same guy that started this whole mess of high contact suspensions:
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/devolution-of-the-bump-20200717-p55cww.html

7 minutes ago, jacey said:

Fox have a stupid segment called "ear massages" where they have dozen of examples every week. 

Chol was unreasonable with possibility to cause serious damage yet not cited. 

They pick and choose. 

If this was in the NRL,  Chol would have been cited for a high shot & sent to the bin. AFL? Pffft. Nothing to see here.

Can someone explain what the outcome would have been if JVR had actually connected with the ball?

38 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Our jumper for the next two weeks should be this one.

Could wear arm bands too...   ;)

Need to go on the offensive  now... 

And we know what we need to hit...

1 minute ago, rpfc said:

A full what?!

Oh, retraction… right, retraction.

RE TRAC TION

Apologize peasant 

Edited May 9, 20232 yr by Jaded No More

47 minutes ago, DeeMee said:

This decision will absolutely make no difference to the way the game is played. There will be some media talk, we will point out in outrage identical incidents that result in no report but then the next shiny thing will come along and this will be forgotten by the media and no one else will face a similar report. MFC shafted again.

You can take that to the bank.

51 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Wow - just wow. Words completely fail me.

I was only playing with you.

22 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

@WalkingCivilWar reckon the cheer squad need to put this on the other side of the May 200 game celebration banner.

“RIP AFL. 1858 - May 9th 2023”

It died almost 20 years ago when the bump was outlawed

21 minutes ago, Demon Disciple said:

@WalkingCivilWar reckon the cheer squad need to put this on the other side of the May 200 game celebration banner.

“RIP AFL. 1858 - May 9th 2023”

The AFL Commission was founded in 1985. As much as the AFL would have you believe otherwise.

Well, that should take racism off the back page...or was that the plan?

1 minute ago, jnrmac said:

Can someone explain what the outcome would have been if JVR had actually connected with the ball?

I was thinking this too. Based on the finding, i don’t think it matters. 
 

So In effect Ballard was given permission to mark that ball with the full protection of the AFL because JVR wasn’t close enough to spoil in a way that he wouldn't get hit in the head. 
 

The AFL need to rid themselves of Gleeson, it was on his watch that Cripps won the Brownlow and that this ruling was made. 
 

In the famous words of one Jackie Chiles, “It’s outrageous, egregious, preposterous”

 

I had an epiphany a few dayz ago about Gil.

In mythology and the study of folklore and religion, a trickster is a character in a story (god, goddess, spirit, human or anthropomorphisation) who exhibits a great degree of intellect or secret knowledge and uses it to play tricks or otherwise disobey normal rules and defy conventional behavior. The trickster archetype is a character that is built on the fundamental idea of one party deceiving or playing tricks on another. There are many obvious examples around the world. Musk comes to mind. Warne did it often (before most test series, "I've been working on a new ball") - Darryl Cullinan anyone?

In the last month, I feel I've had the wool pulled over my eyes by Gil.

• Gather Round was declared a success before a footy was kicked in anger, and the South Australians handed the round for the next three years, no discussion entered into.
• The Tasmanian jamboree is full of so many holes and smokes and mirrors, it will be a miracle if it actually goes ahead (this is a different argument to whether or not Tasmania is worthy of an AFL team).
• And then tonight . . .

I'm being told night is day, black is white. Gaslighting I think is the term.

Edited May 9, 20232 yr by Queanbeyan Demon
Typo

6 minutes ago, dice said:

And ironically the same guy that started this whole mess of high contact suspensions:
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/devolution-of-the-bump-20200717-p55cww.html

I'd love to see Anderson get lined up by Bryon.

More comedic relief.

 

Peter O'Farrell (Carlton): I understand the panel has had a long afternoon and long evening, so I'll seek to be brief.

I like Peter.

 

The Tribunal is now deliberating. I am now tired.

Get onto the CIA, the FBI, the men in Black, the ACDC, B1 & B2, whoever will listen cause this is corrupted! Bad to the bone!

“A reasonable player would have foreseen…” who the [censored] is this reasonable player? The reasonable persons test is fair however completely incorrectly applied in this situation.

Edited May 9, 20232 yr by Ethan Tremblay

"However we also find that a reasonable player would have foreseen that in spoiling the way he did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in a forceful blow to Ballard's head."

We're honestly one step away from banning players for injuring themselves.

"We also find that a reasonable player would have forseen that in jumping for the ball in the way they did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in them forcefully hitting their head on the ground. We therefore must uphold the decision to ban them for 2 matches."

24 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Did I tell you about Anderson, he doesn’t win at the Tribunal generally.

I am not blaming him of course, as I think he presented a good case.

There is something more going on here and as I said in another post it is about litigation.

I would think an Appeal gets up and AFL can say we will do everything possible to protect players.

How was Fogarty not charged for breaking Murphy‘a nose the week before.

To me they have once again gone the non big club, non star player and used him as a PR pawn, to show they are actively doing their best to stamp out head injuries.

I am outraged at this blatant PR manipulation affecting a young innocent kid. The AFL should be ashamed of itself.

I may boo the AFL at the game this weekend.

Time for the dog to wag the tail.

We made this game.....

Time to remind some....

7 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

Well, that should take racism off the back page...or was that the plan?

Clearly the tribunal is racist against Zimbabweans.  

42 minutes ago, John Crow Batty said:

Who are the idiots on the the tribunal? 

All of them.

7 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Did I tell you about Anderson, he doesn’t win at the Tribunal generally.

I am not blaming him of course, as I think he presented a good case.

There is something more going on here and as I said in another post it is about litigation.

I would think an Appeal gets up and AFL can say we will do everything possible to protect players.

How was Fogarty not charged for breaking Murphy‘a nose the week before.

To me they have once again gone the non big club, non star player and used him as a PR pawn, to show they are actively doing their best to stamp out head injuries.

I am outraged at this blatant PR manipulation affecting a young innocent kid. The AFL should be ashamed of itself.

I may boo the AFL at the game this weekend.

Couldn’t agree more Red. And as this has the potential to change our game, we should elicit the support of the other 17 clubs to attack this ridiculous verdict at the Appeal. We cannot let our game be Rooyened.

12 minutes ago, djr said:

I was only playing with you.

It's quite possible my sense of humor is broken tonight @djr.

Edited May 9, 20232 yr by Queanbeyan Demon
Typo

2 minutes ago, Seraph said:

"However we also find that a reasonable player would have foreseen that in spoiling the way he did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in a forceful blow to Ballard's head."

We're honestly one step away from banning players for injuring themselves.

"We also find that a reasonable player would have forseen that in jumping for the ball in the way they did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in them forcefully hitting their head on the ground. We therefore must uphold the decision to ban them for 2 matches."

Saying it again - there was no contact to the head either by JVR or by the ground.  
These idiots are contradicting themselves. 

4 minutes ago, Seraph said:

"However we also find that a reasonable player would have foreseen that in spoiling the way he did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in a forceful blow to Ballard's head."

We're honestly one step away from banning players for injuring themselves.

"We also find that a reasonable player would have forseen that in jumping for the ball in the way they did, it would have almost inevitably resulted in them forcefully hitting their head on the ground. We therefore must uphold the decision to ban them for 2 matches."

Well I would counter that by stating that a reasonable person would say you don't have a ffing clue.