JvR Free!!!

[old dee 23,872]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Absolutely not.

We owe it to JVR and the game to get this disgraceful miscarriage set aside and we will.

I hope you are correct Mr. Leg but I won't hold my breath. We are not Collingwood or Carlton. 

[Redleg 41,484]

This will get you angrier.

In the Carlton charge Gleeson found that Newman hit Neale to the jaw forcibly, with his LEFT forearm.

BUT, he was charged with doing it with the RIGHT forearm.

He found the right arm hit Neale's chest.

He found that was not a strike.

Obviously not the underarm and armpit, which we know are lethal weapons. 

Instead of just amending to the left arm, which they always do, he dismissed the charge.

Whately can't believe it. Neither can I.

It's like you shot him with a gun in your right hand. No it's the left and therefore not guilty.

 

[Flower Magic 776]

12 minutes ago, AshleyH30 said:

I was surprised at the people having a go at Anderson last night after the failed appeal. I found his argument to be on point and showed that the contest was within the rules of the game. It was Gleeson who managed to somehow pull an argument "out of somewhere not so bright" to get the outcome we got. This is why everyone in the community is so flabbergasted by the result.

My previous comment regarding Mr Anderson was not based on his performance last night, but on the following facts:

1. He has represented Melbourne players twice before with poor outcomes (Viney and Fritsch 2021).

2. He has been a barrister for seven years - this is a very short time in the career of a barrister, hence the moniker "Junior Counsel".

3. He has moved into this arena after working for the AFL. Did he ever play football? Probably, we all did, but not at any significant level. There are ex-AFL and VFL players at the Victorian Bar. Wayne Henwood, for example.

And get this, his last appearance before the Tribunal was to represent Charlie Ballard of the GC Suns!

[Diamond_Jim 12,628]

8 minutes ago, sue said:

  And they may merely be content to use JvR's suspension to show to a court in 10 years time how they didn't tolerate anything that could cause a concussion.

I think you have unearthed the agenda

The AFL stance is not just about preventing concussion but being objectively seen to have in place a system that minimises concussion.

The follow up question is where to from here

[Redleg 41,484]

6 minutes ago, old dee said:

I hope you are correct Mr. Leg but I won't hold my breath. We are not Collingwood or Carlton. 

This will be appealed and won.

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,883]

11 hours ago, Deevout said:

 

Our former Captain and number 2 doesn’t seem to agree with the decision either. 🔴🔵

Goody and Co do need to be a little more circumspect I understand that and I think that the club actually challenging the decision is a show of support in its own right, but I do love it that Jonesy and Brad Green have put it on the line to a certain extent in their official roles to stick fat with one of their own.  That's what strong proud clubs do.

❤❤💙💙❤❤💙💙❤❤💙💙❤❤💙💙

Edited May 10, 2023 by Rodney (Balls) Grinter

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,408]

2 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

Goody holding a presser at 9.30

Has this happened?

[ElDiablo14 5,002]

7 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This will get you angrier.

In the Carlton charge Gleeson found that Newman hit Neale to the jaw forcibly, with his LEFT forearm.

BUT, he was charged with doing it with the RIGHT forearm.

He found the right arm hit Neale's chest.

He found that was not a strike.

Obviously not the underarm and armpit, which we know are lethal weapons. 

Instead of just amending to the left arm, which they always do, he dismissed the charge.

Whately can't believe it. Neither can I.

It's like you shot him with a gun in your right hand. No it's the left and therefore not guilty.

 

This Gleeson clown honestly should be named and shamed in the public arena.

[DemonicFinalFantasy 241]

54 minutes ago, GM11 said:

This process needs to be less obscure.

How does this panel work?

Do they have to be unanimous or is it a majority?

Or does the chair override and it's a panel in name only?

I have the impression it's the latter.

A bit like the RBA governor and its Board's interest rate decisions ... but I  digress.

[Demonland 73,163]

Goody’s Presser

 

[ElDiablo14 5,002]

9 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

I think you have unearthed the agenda

The AFL stance is not just about preventing concussion but being objectively seen to have in place a system that minimises concussion.

The follow up question is where to from here

You can always counter that by bringing a play from the same game that wasn't even cited, Chols knock on Boweys head.

[Monbon 1,840]

Can anyone explain what 'woke' means, especially in this context. Granted, I am an alte kacker, much jargon has passed me by - I lost track when everything became 'substantive' - and I assume it has nothing to do with bein awake. If it has, I'll go back to bed right now....

[dice 712]

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

And what a great mark it was:

 

Edited May 10, 2023 by dice

[Monbon 1,840]

13 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This will get you angrier.

In the Carlton charge Gleeson found that Newman hit Neale to the jaw forcibly, with his LEFT forearm.

BUT, he was charged with doing it with the RIGHT forearm.

He found the right arm hit Neale's chest.

He found that was not a strike.

Obviously not the underarm and armpit, which we know are lethal weapons. 

Instead of just amending to the left arm, which they always do, he dismissed the charge.

Whately can't believe it. Neither can I.

It's like you shot him with a gun in your right hand. No it's the left and therefore not guilty.

 

If that's not the epitome of Sophistry and jesuitry, I'll go she...

[sue 9,145]

If we appeal, I'd hope that 17 other clubs chip in for the costs.  Won't happen, but it should.

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,883]

So, can everyone please consider how we might go about getting together for a class action on the damage that the Slater and Gordon's (or whoever is leading this latest thing) are doing to the game of AFL?

Causing a loss of lifestyle to many of us and I think there is a value that can be put on that.

To be clear, I've got a fair degree of compassion that the Shaun Smith's of the game that played hard but fair deserve some 'reasonable' compensation to support ongoing treatment and loss of quality of life.  That said I have less sympathy for the snipers like Gary Ablet Snr that hunted and were culprits of concussion to others and who then also did dumb stuff to their brains like loading up on elicit drugs and getting into the boxing ring.  Even Shaun to an extent needs to accept some self responsibility for injuries done to himself with the kamikaze way he played the game (as  much as I lauded it as a supporter), as no one else but himself made him jump 15 foot into the air and land on his head.

But by far the biggest leaches in all this are the lawyers that will undoubtedly make out with an exorbitant portion of the final settlement for a disproportionate sacrifice.  I'm not saying I hate all lawyers, but particularly after seeing how they are making like bandits with the rates they are charging on my sister's divorce and child custody matters, it's pretty clear to me that a significant portion of that profession is not in it for altruistic reasons.

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,883]

11 minutes ago, dice said:

And what a great mark it was:

 

Nup, Robbo you should have reasonably foreseen that you were going to knock him out.

FFS

Edited May 10, 2023 by Rodney (Balls) Grinter

[Diamond_Jim 12,628]

nvm

Edited May 10, 2023 by Diamond_Jim

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

25 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This will get you angrier.

In the Carlton charge Gleeson found that Newman hit Neale to the jaw forcibly, with his LEFT forearm.

BUT, he was charged with doing it with the RIGHT forearm.

He found the right arm hit Neale's chest.

He found that was not a strike.

Obviously not the underarm and armpit, which we know are lethal weapons. 

Instead of just amending to the left arm, which they always do, he dismissed the charge.

Whately can't believe it. Neither can I.

It's like you shot him with a gun in your right hand. No it's the left and therefore not guilty.

 

you cannot make this [censored] up. at some point the afl clubs have to produce a vote of no confidence in this process.. 

[ElDiablo14 5,002]

1 minute ago, Gawndy the Great said:

you cannot make this [censored] up. at some point the afl clubs have to produce a vote of no confidence in this process.. 

Bar Carlton, they must be over the moon with the way the MRO adjudicates their players. 

[sue 9,145]

16 minutes ago, Monbon said:

Can anyone explain what 'woke' means, especially in this context. Granted, I am an alte kacker, much jargon has passed me by - I lost track when everything became 'substantive' - and I assume it has nothing to do with bein awake. If it has, I'll go back to bed right now....

Don't worry about it.   Conservatives use the label to indicate that "I don't like it" so they apply it in areas where it appears to be out of context.

[david_neitz_is_my_dad 4,084]

6 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

Pretty ballsy from Chunk given he 'presently' has a chanel 7 contract

Has he just kissed any renewal goodbye?

Nothing he wrote is bad for 7 or the AFL

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

34 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This will get you angrier.

In the Carlton charge Gleeson found that Newman hit Neale to the jaw forcibly, with his LEFT forearm.

BUT, he was charged with doing it with the RIGHT forearm.

He found the right arm hit Neale's chest.

He found that was not a strike.

Obviously not the underarm and armpit, which we know are lethal weapons. 

Instead of just amending to the left arm, which they always do, he dismissed the charge.

Whately can't believe it. Neither can I.

It's like you shot him with a gun in your right hand. No it's the left and therefore not guilty.

 

They've lost the plot. Back in days when reports were laid by umpires on the spot, charges would get thrown out because of this left/right business. In the heat of the moment the ump wasn't certain which it was. So they brought in a rule to allow umps to amend their report to state the "correct" arm.

Now Gleeson, the tribunal chair, lacks the authority to simply amend the charge?

More like, lacks the clarity of vision. It's not a court case. No-one's going to prison.

They've taken the legalistic approach too far.

They've [censored]-ing lost the plot.

[Doug Reemer 1,197]

Has anyone ever noticed we also seem to cop the shifting of the fabric of the game in the tribunal?

Trengove on Dangerfield in 2010/11 for a sling tackle?

Viney for his bump against Adelaide in 2014.

And now JVR for his spoil against Ballard.

If this is upheld on appeal. The games dead. The game is well and truly dead and the only game watching once a year is the GF.

[monoccular 17,576]

2 hours ago, bandicoot said:

He recklessly hit a player high in the head enough for that player to be subbed out. Lucky not to get more weeks 

Are you trolling? Firstly he was not hit on the head and he was taken off for concern, later unproven, of a neck injury.   And he did not hit his head at any time.  He did not hit him with anything other than his upper arm. 

1 hour ago, GM11 said:

This process needs to be less obscure.

How does this panel work?

Do they have to be unanimous or is it a majority?

Or does the chair override and it's a panel in name only?

I have the impression it's the latter.

Kangaroo courts have no rules. 

36 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

This Gleeson clown honestly should be named and shamed in the public arena.

Why stop there.  Drawn and quartered would be more appropriate