MRP / Trib. 2015 MRP/ Carlton Tribunal News & Reports (aka Chook lotto)

[Big Sim]

So they were wrong. Who knew?

Credit where credit is due though..... At least they admitted being wrong.

Yeah I laughed at that too Harks. Apart from Port supporters, EVERYONE knew they were wrong.

Surprised they came out and admitted it though...

As for the Fyfe fine, that was to make sure there is no angst on Brownlow night when the winner doesn't win it because of a rush of blood that nearly took a blokes head off.

 

[blueboy25]

As for the Fyfe fine, that was to make sure there is no angst on Brownlow night when the winner doesn't win it because of a rush of blood that nearly took a blokes head off.

Fyfe's problem is that this is his second fine, one more and he cops a week.

 

[Tony Lynn 15]

The AFL and MRP are turning into an absolute farce.

In two weeks two identical incidents occur, I do not care what people say about the 'differences' between the Gibbs and Schultz incidents as they were about as identical as you could see. One player gets 3 weeks and the other has the case dismissed. At what point after that did the AFL not understand they needed to intervene for the good of the game and over turn a nonsensical decision. They then have the audacity to come out 2 weeks later and tell us what all of us already knew.

Absolute ****ing incompetence of the highest order!

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

They need to **** the MRP off and bring back the Tribunal. Too many cooks, and all that.

 

[ODNBlue]

There was a difference between the two... basically, Schulz is a far bigger player than Gibbs and Gray is a stronger player than Richards... thus, Schulz got Richards to the ground more quickly and needed less of a pivot to do so... the whole two actions thing is simply a matter of Gibbs needing the extra momentum to get Gray off his feet... imo.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

There was a difference between the two... basically, Schulz is a far bigger player than Gibbs and Gray is a stronger player than Richards... thus, Schulz got Richards to the ground more quickly and needed less of a pivot to do so... the whole two actions thing is simply a matter of Gibbs needing the extra momentum to get Gray off his feet... imo.

Gray was also less of a passenger in that tackle than Richards was. By the time Gibbs had rotated while upright, Gray was still upright and still a real chance to get the ball out in a dangerous part of the ground. Richards was deep in defence and not much of a threat. Schulz actually wanted the ball to come out (and it did) while Gibbs was trying desperately to ensure the ball did not come out. I feel Gibbs had more need to continue his tackle than Schulz did.

 

[Murphkreuzmitch]

So they were wrong. Who knew?

Credit where credit is due though..... At least they admitted being wrong.

It would have taken real courage to actually impose a suspension, albeit a week later. It really irritates me that the AFL claim to care about the welfare of players, here there is a situation where a player has now missed games due to concussion, the AFL admitted they were wrong, but there are no repercussions for the individual who laid the tackle and caused the injury to the player.

They may as well have come out and said it was wet and windy on the week end. It would have carried about the same weight as the comments they have made.

 

[Aphrodite]

Why am I NOT surprised!

Nick Holman can accept 1 game for striking Luke Breust.

 

[Aphrodite]

What a joke!

Josh Gibson can accept $1500, striking Blaine Boekhorst.

 

[Moe B]

Getting sick and tired of this crap, give us a freakn break you tossbags!!

 

[El Topo]

don't ya just love those unsociable Hawks

 

[mickelboy182]

2 weeks seems a little severe

 

[La Vache]

No way that cops a week from Holman. Fine would have easily sufficed. Should have been high, careless and low contact.

 

[James_Blues]

The MRP set a precedent earlier this season when Lewis did a similar thing to Goldstein (albeit a little more forcefully). Should be upheld even though they 'set a precedent' with Gibbs earlier this year and we know how well that was upheld a week later.

 

[Aphrodite]

don't ya just love those unsociable Hawks

The MRP loves them!




#MarkEvans

 

[Styxx]

I see they put a dildo on a drillbit for this absurd dicking this time.

 

[Jeremias]

2 weeks for that?

Surely that's a joke.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Any chance of appealing?

 

[Blue__Balls]

I think it's time we had a change of umpires and an overhaul of the MRP.

I don't want to hear an umpire's name during the course of the game, I don't want to know their names full stop. I don't want them to be given stupid nicknames as though they're some kind of celebrity. Umpires should be anonymous, they should be unnoticed. They should not impact the result of a game. They should not "interpret" the rules at all, only apply them as they are written.

The MRP should sit each night at the conclusion of all games, or at worst, the following morning. If you want to keep your Friday/Saturday/Sunday nights free, stick to your day-job and let someone else have your spot. They should penalise deliberate acts harshly, regardless of "impact", and scrutinise accidental acts based on how reasonable the action was. Punching a bloke in the gut off the ball should always be deemed worse than accidentally clipping a bloke high when spoiling. A player going hard for the ball should not be penalised for high contact if their opponent headbutts them in the hip.

We've got umpires who want to be seen, want to be heard, and are ruining games in their own quest for notoriety.

And we've got a MRP that can't even stay consistent from one week to the next, and is too easily swayed by the Media Inquisition.

Sick of this shit.

 

[DaVillaBlues]

Actually more angry that Gibson got off for his whack on Boek than Holman's suspension.

I am so over footy this season, its almost reached the point of my least enjoyable season ever.

 

[mickelboy182]

Actually more angry that Gibson got off for his whack on Boek than Holman's suspension.

I am so over footy this season, its almost reached the point of my least enjoyable season ever.

I'd hate to see players get done for that, cheap shot yes but a fine is all that is required.

 

[MickyB]

When we play the Hawks in round 23, every one of our starting 18 need to punch their Hawks opponent in the solar plexus in unison. They might get one free, but we should be able to score a goal or two as they struggle to recover after throwing their guts up. At least we know none of our players will be suspended for it.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I'd hate to see players get done for that, cheap shot yes but a fine is all that is required.

Couldn't disagree any more.

Pushing, shoving, jostling off the ball - all fine in my book. The minute you take a swing at another bloke you've overstepped the mark. Especially when it's a senior player lining up a bloke in his first season.

As has been said before - do that anywhere but a footy field and it's assault.

Not the kind of behaviour we should be allowing, especially if we want more kids playing footy.

 

[Dramoth]

The AFL is a farce now... so over the protected clubs whose players can do whatever they like but certain other clubs... well mainly Carlton seems to get dicked over whenever one of our players goes before the tribunal.

Yarran... should have gotten a weeks ban max. Chappy instigated it, Yarran finished it and Hird made it appear worse than it really was by keeping him off the the whole 20 minutes of the concussion testing period.

Gibbs... unfortunate that Gray got knocked out, but he came out of it without concussion unlike the Shulz incident where Richards came out of it with concussion. Might have been worthy of a weeks holiday for unduly rough conduct... but by that standard, Shulz should have had the same holiday.

And now Holman... late clumsy attempt to spoil, nothing wrong with Breust long term and he played out the match... he cops 2 weeks down to 1. Completely different to Hodges swinging arm from earlier in the season.

It's a ****ing joke really.

 

[PuffDragon89]

Any chance of appealing?

Not a chance, Holman's was the only case they were definitive on...
Charges Laid:
Nick Holman, Carlton,
Based on the available video evidence and a medical report from the Hawthorn Football Club, the incident was assessed as careless conduct with medium impact to the head. The incident was classified as a two-match sanction. The player has no applicable bad record. An early plea enables the player to accept a one-match sanction.

Josh Gibson, Hawthorn,
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Carlton Football Club, it was the view of the panel the incident should be classified as intentional conduct with low impact to the body. This offence was the second to be classified against the player this season and therefore was classified as a $2500 sanction. An early plea can reduce the penalty to a $1500 sanction.

Richard Douglas, Adelaide Crows,
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Gold Coast Suns Football Club, it was the view of the panel the incident should be classified as careless conduct with low impact to the head. This offence was classified as a $1500 sanction. The player has no applicable bad record. An early plea can reduce the penalty to a $1000 sanction.

Andrew Swallow, North Melbourne,
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Brisbane Lions Football Club, it was the view of the panel the incident should be classified as careless conduct with low impact to the head. This offence was the second to be classified against the player this season and therefore was classified as a $2500 sanction. An early plea can reduce the penalty to a $1500 sanction.

Jackson Macrae, Western Bulldogs,
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Collingwood Football Club, it was the view of the panel the incident should be classified as careless conduct with low impact to the body. This offence was classified as a $1500 sanction. The player has no applicable bad record. An early plea can reduce the penalty to a $1000 sanction.

Lewis Jetta, Sydney Swans,
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the West Coast Football Club, it was the view of the panel the incident should be classified as intentional conduct with low impact to the body. This offence was the second to be classified against the player this season and therefore was classified as a $2500 sanction. An early plea can reduce the penalty to a $1500 sanction.