I know what I saw.

There was no eye gouge charge. End of story.

Otherwise I here the tribunal have been struggling. You could apply for a seat?

I know what I saw.

Did you see the head butt? worth any form of retaliation as it is a dog act. Did you see West?

Bulldogs are so lucky they have AFL support atm

Disgraceful

Firstly, he didn't eye gouge anyone. He wasn't even up on an eye-gouging charge. He was up on rough conduct, and making unnecessary contact with Johnson's face.

There was a great shot of Chris Fagan looking very pleased with himself outside the tribunal, and saying something about the charge that was laid wasn't even in the AFL rule book (or something like that, I wasn't paying great attention at the time) and therefore the case was simply for contact to Johnson's face.

Secondly, Dutchy was bleeding at the time, so it was hardly an unprovoked attack. I wonder why Brad Johnson didn't even get charged, when Holland needed to be stitched up.

Which begs the question as to why Johnson was not charged with anything?

Fagan also said that he thought the contact to Dutchy's head was accidental and therefore everything turned out alright.

Holland pleaded guilty but got off with a reprimand.

He said that he couldn't see properly and that it wasn't done on purpose.