daisycutter

might be going for the filibuster.

more like a kc upping his billable seconds 🤣

wtf .... better be good

dermie?

can i have some more please? 61,324

jacob should have changed his name by deed poll to patrick cripps before tonight's hearing

if you want to see brown bananas monbon, you should become a dorks supporter you'll see 18 of them on the field every week

the 'reasonable player' argument was just the tribunal chairman's weak narrative. it was not the reason the mro decision was upheld. the afl was not happy about the lynch and fogarty decisions (mainly about liigation and optics considerations) and decided the next bunny would not be so lucky and jvr suited their desires being young and not a star of the game or from a big powerful club. if the afl were genuine they would have been more transparent and changed the rules/interprtation around spoiling situation, publicly giving video examples and education. except they didn't have the guts to be upfront and transparent, so chose the backdoor, mates method.

put one on the table, bends to the right flip it over, bends to the left your mission if you accept it, is to determine why

to the left or right of what?

i know that technically this is not a court of law, but nevertheless jvr is still entitled to fairness and natural justice. how then do we explain natural justice to jvr when the afl mro/tribunal processes in just the last few weeks, in the fogarty and lynch cases, can come up with different interpretations and results? Is this natural justice? Did the afl change the rules of the game or the interpretations in the last few weeks? didn't the afl tell the clubs that this year there would be no mid season changing of rules or interpretations? the afl must be the only sporting organisation that has a set of rules that only the afl fully understand, and only then when it suits their agenda.

i'd settle for just a plain reformation

not even downgraded from high to medium impact ... wtf ... double jeopardy

gofundme for high court appeal?

.

are they deliberately deliberating as long as possible?

tribunal having a cappuccino and doughnuts break?

what's taking so [censored] long should be a lay down misere

still deliberating on close. 32 minutes now.

did ralph ever play footy?

Tribunal. Close case has been in deliberation on verdict for 10min. Rooey up soon. you can follow on here

everyone has gone nana and behaving like nuts

this thread is getting too high-brow intellectual for me ... need a rest

we're about 4 weeks ahead of last year

more good news 61,260