It won't happen of course, but shouldn't Moore be cited for pushing Melksham into that contest with Howe?

1 minute ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

It won't happen of course, but shouldn't Moore be cited for pushing Melksham into that contest with Howe?

Of course it won’t happen. That would be admitting that the ump’s got it wrong.

On 10/06/2025 at 17:47, Neil Crompton said:

Of course it won’t happen. That would be admitting that the ump’s got it wrong.

Which is why you might assume the MRO ignored the blatant Kozzie trip, or was instructed to, so as not to keep the issue in the public eye.

On 10/06/2025 at 17:47, Neil Crompton said:

Of course it won’t happen. That would be admitting that the ump’s got it wrong.

More like the MRO is a totally one eyed intellectually challenged Collingwood hack.

How long do the clubs tolerate this absolute disgrace?

Pushing an opponent into a dangerous situation, like Moore did to Melksham, was at the start of the season deemed to warrant a suspension. But that halfwit Christian didn’t see that. He urgently needs to be replaced.

lindsay should challenge the fine and cite the kozzy example

i'm fedup with the mro

It’s old news , but I’m still flabbergasted at Kozzie ‘s three week ban for accidentally brushing Moore’s head in round 23 last season( which has grossly disrupted our 25 season).

Compare that to Durham’s brutal assault on Cerra last week … 2 weeks!!! Durham was so lucky he didn’t break Cerra’s neck. (Reminiscent of Long in the 2000 GF, for which he should still be suspended.)

Can’t wait to see what happens to Butters for that off the ball strike to Kozzie’s head, causing our BOG at the time to have a concussion test, miss nearly a quarter and effectively end his contribution to the game.

Notice the way the media is ignoring Butters’ act?

Star player though, so we will see. When do Port play the Pies?

Edited June 15Jun 15 by Redleg

On 16/06/2025 at 07:49, Redleg said:

Can’t wait to see what happens to Butters for that off the ball strike to Kozzie’s head, causing our BOG at the time to have a concussion test, miss nearly a quarter and effectively end his contribution to the game.

Notice the way the media is ignoring Butters’ act?

Star player though, so we will see. When do Port play the Pies?

No surprise, not even a fine, not even the slightest mention.

Kozzy would have got a minimum of 3 weeks for that.

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

No surprise, not even a fine, not even the slightest mention.

Kozzy would have got a minimum of 3 weeks for that.

McVee got off unscathed as well.. I suppose it could have been worse.

Butters has lots of form in this space and am absolutely astonished he got off without a fine. Maybe the AFL feel sorry for him?

21 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

McVee got off unscathed as well.. I suppose it could have been worse.

Butters has lots of form in this space and am absolutely astonished he got off without a fine. Maybe the AFL feel sorry for him?

I think that’s why McVee got off so there wouldn’t be any publicity.

Same as Hardwick getting off Kozzie trip.

Orders from up high maybe?

8 hours ago, GS_1905 said:

McVee got off unscathed as well.. I suppose it could have been worse.

Butters has lots of form in this space and am absolutely astonished he got off without a fine. Maybe the AFL feel sorry for him?

If I was AJ, I'd feel pretty had done by as well.

Very glad McVee did get off though, he has been getting back towards his best footy in recent weeks and a really important contributor. Want to get yet more development into him and of course extend his contract to 2035.

8 hours ago, Redleg said:

I think that’s why McVee got off so there wouldn’t be any publicity.

Same as Hardwick getting off Kozzie trip.

Orders from up high maybe?

Is it any wonder that some suggest that the AFL, and its one man prosecutor, judge and jury, the MRO, could be regarded as corrupt. Like the IOC and FIFA.

You can't tell me there's no bias.

Poor little champ had a tough night.

Fox Sports

‘Step too far’: Why Daicos tag could prompt AFL call afte...

‘Step too far’: Why Daicos tag could prompt AFL call after fiery duel with Saint

2 hours ago, Brownie said:

You can't tell me there's no bias.

Poor little champ had a tough night.

Fox Sports

‘Step too far’: Why Daicos tag could prompt AFL call afte...

‘Step too far’: Why Daicos tag could prompt AFL call after fiery duel with Saint

The fine for striking is over the top given it happens 272 times a game. Fine them all or none.

Naw poor Nick is copping what Clarry for years

WAAAAAAA

Fiorini KOs Petty in a contest, very similar or even more culpable than Kozzie v Moore last year, except that Moore was not concussed.

Kozzie gets 3 weeks, Fiorini nothing to see.

And some ask if the MRO is corrupt, inept, or both.

Looks like Viney and May Ok as well, lot of fines though for Melee commentators will be disappointed. No longer worried about head high contact??

Finally some good news from the MRO

I was sure Viney would get a week

36 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Fiorini KOs Petty in a contest, very similar or even more culpable than Kozzie v Moore last year, except that Moore was not concussed.

Kozzie gets 3 weeks, Fiorini nothing to see.

And some ask if the MRO is corrupt, inept, or both.

What are you talking about?

Fiorini was trying to pick the ball up, and Petty went in head first.

Pickett chose to bump. Yes, he got unlucky that Moore went to ground, and I didn’t like the suspension, but the two are nothing at all alike.

If you think im going to try and make sense of all the MRO work from our game then you have the wrong guy and you need to get out more.

I wish they add weeks to his suspension, in no way was he going for the ball.

4 minutes ago, Dee Zephyr said:

I wish they add weeks to his suspension, in no way was he going for the ball.

that only happens to mfc players; reckon anb was the ONLY player to contest a 3 week ban and come out of the tribunal with 4

What's below careless? Because it's not like they could argue against severe impact or high contact.

8 minutes ago, Random Task said:

What's below careless? Because it's not like they could argue against severe impact or high contact.

According to the AFL's guide, there is nothing else

Not sure what their argument will be, because as you say there is no arguing the severe impact or the high contact.
No doubt there are some dodgy loopholes for Carlton players they'll try and use.