waynewussell

Are You Adrian Anderson Roost It? I haven't got time to unravel the ball of wool for you, but think "dominos'!!!

1. 3 umpires 2. hands ON!!!! the back 3. kick in b4 flag wave 4. second centre circle 5. advantage rule (parts 1,2&3) 6. 50 mtr penalty 7. 4 on the bench 8. centre square 9. H.T.B. ruckman tackled etc. 10.front on contact

Mark Macgugan: Trengove found guilty and receives 325 demerit points, as originally charged by the MRP. He's out for three matches.

Mark Macgugan: We've been called back into the room. Just waiting for the Demons contingent to return and we should receive a verdict. Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:38 Mark Macgugan

Mark Macgugan: Everyone has now left the room to allow the tribunal to come to a decision. Back soon.

Mark Macgugan: David Jones (tribunal chairman) instructing panel on factors to consider when deliberating. Reminds them to focus on the conduct, not the consequence to the tackled player. Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:33 Mark Macgugan

Mark Macgugan: Findlay: It's not Trengove's fault that Dangerfield was knocked out. He applied the tackle as he had been taught, within the laws and spirit of the game. We believe the charge should be dismissed. Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:27 Mark Macgugan

Mark Macgugan: Findlay: "This, I would submit to you gentlemen, was nothing more than an accident."

Mark Macgugan: Findlay: The force Trengove used was legitimate and within the rules.

Mark Macgugan: Findlay: There is a temptation to be distracted by the end result. But the tackle itself was a fair and reasonable attempt to dispossess Dangerfield and bring him to the ground. The end result was an accident. Draws a comparison to Jonathan Brown's facial injury earlier this season, suffered in an accidental collision.

Mark Macgugan: Findlay saying the umpires were right there and called play on. They saw it as a fair tackle.

Mark Macgugan: Findlay saying Trengove didn't sling Dangerfield. Trengove was knocked off balance.

Mark Macgugan: Trengove's advocate Iain Findlay now summing up.

Mark Macgugan: Tinney reading through the rules on when a tackle may be considered unreasonably dangerous. Relevant here is that the arm of the player was being held, which made it 'a tackle of an inherently dangerous kind'. Dangerfield was unable to control his movements or protect his head. Also to be considered, 'a player may not be slung or driven into the ground with an excessive level of force'. Tinney suggesting the same outcome could have been achieved with considerably less force than was used.

Mark Macgugan: Tinney now summing up. He says: in the past this tackle would have been seen as acceptable. But football as changed. It must be decided in the context of the rules as they now apply, not as they used to apply.

Mark Macgugan: Tinney suggesting Trengove could have achieved what he was trying to without this amount of force. Trengove disagrees.

Mark Macgugan: Tinney: you said you didn't put a great amount of force into the tackle. Didn't you put as much force as you could into it? Trengove: I don't think I did. I think the momentum was increased because we were both off balance.

Mark Macgugan: Question from tribunal counsel Tinney: Were you still holding Dangerfield's right arm when he hit the ground? Trengove: In such a quick situation, I didn't have time to let his arm go. Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:07 Mark Macgugan

Comment From DeeFan DeeFan: ] Mark, Is it likely that Melbourne can argue the fact head high contact wasn't made by the player, the interpretation of the law states that *contact* from *A* player constitutes head high contact....... is it likely Melbourne will go down that path? Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:06 DeeFan

Mark Macgugan: Trengove: the club teaches us that if you can grab an arm it's definitely acceptable because it will stop the opponent from disposing of the ball. It was an accident. I didn't intend for him to get concussed. Don't think I used any unusual level of force. Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:05 Mark Macgugan

Mark Macgugan: Trengove now recalling a tackle on Brodie Smith in the very next sequence of play. Says he used the exact same technique in that tackle with no consequence.

Mark Macgugan: Trengove says he is aware of his duty of care to other players. Doesn't believe he did anything wrong in this tackle. Says he was technically correct, and didn't use excessive force. Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:01 Mark Macgugan 19:02 [Comment From GD GD: ] Surely consequences only come into it if he's proven to be negligent....? if he's not negligent then it's a football incident.. the same as curnow.. the same as someone diving across someone's leg to make a smother. Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:02 GD

Mark Macgugan: Trengove says he is aware of his duty of care to other players. Doesn't believe he did anything wrong in this tackle. Says he was technically correct, and didn't use excessive force. Tuesday May 10, 2011 19:01 Mark Macgugan

Mark Macgugan: Trengove: As he grabbed the ball, I grabbed his hand. Reason for doing that was to prevent him from handballing. Next thought was he'd then try and kick it. To prevent him from doing that I pulled him back, as taught by the club.

Jack Trengove now taking the witness stand