He'll definitely go to the tribunal, under
18.7.1 Spirit and Intention Players shall be protected from unreasonable conduct from an opposition Player which is likely to cause injury.
But unless he got him high (not in terms of MRP), then there is no free kick to be paid. Pretty sure that's...
18.7.2 Free Kicks - Rough Conduct A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player when that Player engages in rough conduct against an opposition Player which in the circumstances is unreasonable, which includes but is not limited to: (a) (b) (c) (d) executing a dangerous tackle on an...
5 weeks to me is quite high for someone who didn't actually get him high, but if it's determined that that was an unfair bump (as it had too much force) and the new norm is that is reportable, I would not like to see 5 for a bump that wasn't high. The ball was in between players, the intent to...
Lets just all agree on that David King's MRP predictions are out 100% of the time, and then you get the media reporting it as fact. I'd take people on here as having more reasoned analysis and reporting skills.
They were in perfect position. What would have the free been for? It wasn't high. Is this a situation where the player will be reported for a reportable offence that isn't even classified as a free?
It definitely didn't help the umpire not paying the mark to rozee and then the mark to bergman, that essentially led to a 2 goal turn around in the first minutes of the game and caused port fans to get angry, 7 - 1 frees for Adelaide in the first, then the tunnelling incidents, i have to admit...
Your players had half a game to get him as you say, all they managed to do was stupid stuff that turned the game. It wasn't Houston's hit, it was the lack of composure of the Crows that turned the game and Rachelle went missing.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.