Preview Round 3, 2024: Essendon v St.Kilda - Marvel Stadium, Saturday 30th March, 4:20PM AEDT *HASTIE DEBUT*

[phantom13]

WTF is with the Gringo pile on?

He's one of the best posters on here imo.

gringo2011 how many burner accounts you got champ?

 

[Saint Watto]

@gringo2011 how many burner accounts you got champ?

Gold there phantom.....!!!!!!

 

[Murraj1966]

14 minutes gone without an update...

 

[StFly]

We’ve really gotta review our legal/tribunal team.

Low impact was a ******* slam dunk instead with go for the Hail Mary accidental and then coach Max to say he did it on purpose.

Couldn’t script how bad that is

Nah they right in arguing twice stating intention guess was wrong and impact rating was wrong it's just that the impact rating instance is the stronger argument. Where King was always going to testify (and be allowed to) intent was always on the cards since it then shows calling it careless is wrong when you consider what King stated: turned body, lowered body, knew things running in, how can you say he essentially gave no shits and bumped?

So at present at least, it's fine thus far.

Gotta lol though with the AFL updates, tried and true "no u" immediately.

 

[Murraj1966]

Well this is about to fall to shit

 

[Dard Ball Get]

His suspension is going to be upped to 10 weeks after Vinny Gambini is done defending us for f*cks sake.

 

[Diehard Saint]

We’ve really gotta review our legal/tribunal team.

Low impact was a ******* slam dunk instead with go for the Hail Mary accidental and then coach Max to say he did it on purpose.

Couldn’t script how bad that is

Think we have.
It was Jack Rush and now more recently Adrian Anderson.

Think we won our last tribunal case although can’t remember what it was?

This case taking a bit of time. Hopefully it’s good that they don’t think it’s a cut and dried case.

Trying to convince myself anyway

 

[phantom13]

Nah they right in arguing twice stating intention guess was wrong and impact rating was wrong it's just that the impact rating instance is the stronger argument. Where King was always going to testify (and be allowed to) intent was always on the cards since it then shows calling it careless is wrong when you consider what King stated: turned body, lowered body, knew things running in, how can you say he essentially gave no shits and bumped?

So at present at least, it's fine thus far.

Gotta lol though with the AFL updates, tried and true "no u" immediately.

I disagree completely.

You’re confusing the argument presenting both and King himself seemed confused in his own testimony.

 

[George]

View attachment 1940294

And the top half

 

[stavro#4]

View attachment 1940291

Well this is about to fall to s**t

To be fair. He does get pretty low and Macrae does get dragged down

 

[beside the seaside]

We’ve really gotta review our legal/tribunal team.

Low impact was a ******* slam dunk instead with go for the Hail Mary accidental and then coach Max to say he did it on purpose.

Couldn’t script how bad that is

I reckon they didn't have a prayer with low impact.

 

[phantom13]

Think we have.
It was Jack Rush and now more recently Adrian Anderson.

Think we won our last tribunal case although can’t remember what it was?

This case taking a bit of time. Hopefully it’s good that they don’t think it’s a cut and dried case.

Trying to convince myself anyway

Review it again then, this was horribly planned and executed.

We should still win because that’s not a suspensions arseh*le but we’ve made it harder than it should have been

 

[StFly]

View attachment 1940291

Well this is about to fall to s**t

Juxtapose against


So never said contesting ball, said contesting to tackle, said boycotted that attempt once ball was cleared. So, Mr Pane immediately with the "not contesting" almost didn't even listen to statements made prior? Then his statement he elected to bump is discounting the attempt to turn and avoid contact knowing contact might be inevitable.

All depends on how the arguments are made, as say if I'm adjudicating and statements on this feed are exact, I'm seeing Kings as "did his best" and AFL as "not the argument being debated", since it's intent and contact, and if King doesn't know his intent and Pane does, there's a larger issue there.

 

[stavro#4]

The above image says this is wrong from the AFL

 

[phantom13]

I reckon they didn't have a prayer with low impact.

I mean logically how can it be anything but low impact, he’s not injured.

But mro/tribunal and logic don’t go hand in hand

 

[stavro#4]

I mean logically how can it be anything but low impact, he’s not injured.

But mro/tribunal and logic don’t go hand in hand

The photo I posted clearly shows king gets lower and Macrae is dragged down

 

[stavro#4]

 

[Dard Ball Get]

Sidebottom used more force in swinging from whoever's neck it was. Joke league.

 

[Diehard Saint]

Review it again then, this was horribly planned and executed.

We should still win because that’s not a suspensions arseh*le but we’ve made it harder than it should have been

The impact should have been adjudged low, not medium.
But I don’t think they go with the result any more so probably not the best way to go anymore.

 

[StFly]

TBF though, thank god the tribunal previously stated this is not a court of law as more holes in their arguments than swiss cheese.

Maybe they should have the 5 seconds consistently replayed so the AFL rep can figure out if Player A or B moves prior to contact since he's obviously confused about how tall people are and where they were situated.

 

[phantom13]

The photo I posted clearly shows king gets lower and Macrae is dragged down

Not sure how this relates to my argument

 

[beside the seaside]

I mean logically how can it be anything but low impact, he’s not injured.

But mro/tribunal and logic don’t go hand in hand

I agree but they don't work it out that way anymore.

 

[phantom13]

I agree but they don't work it out that way anymore.

Pretty sure they do? Why consider medical reports and concussions?

Weights not getting severe impact if Cunningham walked away?

 

[stavro#4]

Review it again then, this was horribly planned and executed.

We should still win because that’s not a suspensions arseh*le but we’ve made it harder than it should have been

Was supposed to have quoted this post.

But their argument appears sound and provable. Which doesn’t always mean shit at the tribunal

 

[Sarcoidevo]

So are we arguing low impact as well?

Given Macrae got up within 3 seconds and ran off