MRP / Trib. 2022 - MRO Chook Lotto - Carlton Tribunal News & Reports

[Coops93]

I think this has been a blinder by Fox media. A perfect storm of getting a reaction out of fans. Brownlow contender, big 4 club, star name player, "the games going soft" type incident that'll incite rage for even being discussed. Give that man a raise for the clicks he's generated on a nothing story.

As for the incident itself, it could literally be put down to "Big man tackles little man, little man comes off second best shocker".

Only subbed off because he has a pre-existing neck injury that'll be managed probably for his career. Dawsons post-siren kick was a free to Murphy who got a knock to the head/neck area and couldn't take his kick in a similarly innocuous incident.

 

[jj1978]

if it wasn’t for his pre-existing issue we wouldn’t have been talking about it & it has to be the action not the outcome

If I'm the club I'm just getting the spin doctors to question why he was cleared to play after suffering such a serious condition and operation.

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

If I'm the club I'm just getting the spin doctors to question why he was cleared to play after suffering such a serious condition and operation.

Sounds like the bloke shouldn't be playing footy at all.

 

[carlton_99]

When do MRO findings for the previous days games normally get released. Before or after AFL360...? Could be the difference between the verdicts

 

[jj1978]

When do MRO findings for the previous days games normally get released. Before or after AFL360...? Could be the difference between the verdicts

usually next day after the game... so assume before

 

[Aphrodite]

When do MRO findings for the previous days games normally get released. Before or after AFL360...? Could be the difference between the verdicts

This afternoon.

 

[Aphrodite]

I think this has been a blinder by Fox media. A perfect storm of getting a reaction out of fans. Brownlow contender, big 4 club, star name player, "the games going soft" type incident that'll incite rage for even being discussed. Give that man a raise for the clicks he's generated on a nothing story.

As for the incident itself, it could literally be put down to "Big man tackles little man, little man comes off second best shocker".

Only subbed off because he has a pre-existing neck injury that'll be managed probably for his career. Dawsons post-siren kick was a free to Murphy who got a knock to the head/neck area and couldn't take his kick in a similarly innocuous incident.

Started with CH7's Mitch Cleary.

 

[Coops93]

Started with CH7's Mitch Cleary.

Then the same applies but to 7 and Cleary instead.

 

[Aphrodite]

Then the same applies but to 7 and Cleary instead.

My Twitter feed is full of several media outlets Tweeting about Cripps.




#trialbymedia

 

[Brezsa]

If I'm the club I'm just getting the spin doctors to question why he was cleared to play after suffering such a serious condition and operation.

He went down grabbing his neck in the showdown too, it resulted in the free kick that had Adelaide win the match (can’t remember who kicked it), but he couldn’t take his kick then & has now been subbed out.

I’m not a doctor so I’ll leave that to them, but I’m worried about the kid

 

[jj1978]

He went down grabbing his neck in the showdown too, it resulted in the free kick that had Adelaide win the match (can’t remember who kicked it), but he couldn’t take his kick then & has now been subbed out.

I’m not a doctor so I’ll leave that to them, but I’m worried about the kid

Like in the movie "Any Given Sunday", similar to Shark, perhaps he needs one more tackle to get his million dollar bonus.

 

[slingy55]

As a Crows supporter but a big Cripps fan I reckon this is a storm in a teacup. Must be a quiet news day.
No chance Cripps gets games or even a fine for this. I'd prefer to see them crack down on rubbish like Cotchin's kick on Tex the other week and the forearm on Ginnivan.

 

[YeahGnar]

If a player cannot take a fair but heavy tackle without injuring their neck, then the physio need to be suspended for letting the play onto the ground, not the tackler. Feel for the poor guy, but imagine letting someone play who had a neck injury that hasn't properly healed and been tested.

 

[MarcMaverick]

The MRO can FRO.
First Young now Cripps.

If Crippa is suspended or even sanctioned the AFL can FRO too.

 

[thylacine60]

I think this has been a blinder by Fox media. A perfect storm of getting a reaction out of fans. Brownlow contender, big 4 club, star name player, "the games going soft" type incident that'll incite rage for even being discussed. Give that man a raise for the clicks he's generated on a nothing story.

As for the incident itself, it could literally be put down to "Big man tackles little man, little man comes off second best shocker".

Only subbed off because he has a pre-existing neck injury that'll be managed probably for his career. Dawsons post-siren kick was a free to Murphy who got a knock to the head/neck area and couldn't take his kick in a similarly innocuous incident.

got a reaction out of you..... mission accomplished......

 

[blues4flag]

Suspension issue aside, is it time we got rid of the "fairest" criteria, or reserved it for suspensions of a certain duration?

Footy's pretty clean these days and the threshold for a reportable offence has changed massively over the last 30 years. Surely a one week suspension for a negligence shouldn't rule a player out of contention.

 

[thylacine60]

Suspension issue aside, is it time we got rid of the "fairest" criteria, or reserved it for suspensions of a certain duration?

Footy's pretty clean these days and the threshold for a reportable offence has changed massively over the last 30 years. Surely a one week suspension for a negligence shouldn't rule a player out of contention.

what about 2? where do you wanna draw the line?

 

[Bletch]

Suspension issue aside, is it time we got rid of the "fairest" criteria, or reserved it for suspensions of a certain duration?

Footy's pretty clean these days and the threshold for a reportable offence has changed massively over the last 30 years. Surely a one week suspension for a negligence shouldn't rule a player out of contention.

Would create a nightmare... If we said it was no longer "Fairest and Best" and allowed suspended players to win, then players like Chris Grant and Corey McKernan would rightfully ask, "where's mine?" And if we then said, "Ok, Corey, Chris, you win." Then what about Robert Harvey's 1997 win - Grant polled higher, so do we now have to take Harvey's away? And then there's Watson in 2012...

 

[Coops93]

got a reaction out of you..... mission accomplished......

The reaction to the query got a reaction out of me

And my reaction to the reaction got a reaction out of you...

and that reaction to the... ahh what was I saying again?

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Would create a nightmare... If we said it was no longer "Fairest and Best" and allowed suspended players to win, then players like Chris Grant and Corey McKernan would rightfully ask, "where's mine?" And if we then said, "Ok, Corey, Chris, you win." Then what about Robert Harvey's 1997 win - Grant polled higher, so do we now have to take Harvey's away? And then there's Watson in 2012...

The Mckernan suspension was very stiff, especially as its no longer a reportable offence, but Chris Grant deserved to be rubbed out in 97. He had no eyes for the ball when he hit Nick Holland, and the Tribunal inexplicably let him off.

 

[blues4flag]

what about 2? where do you wanna draw the line?

Good question. At some stage players eliminate themselves by too many games missed.

Maybe the threshold should be reckless/intentional acts. Don't think a suspension is a good representation of fairness in today's game. Back in the day suspensions were reserved for reckless or malicious acts.

 

[Blue Reaper]

Reckon Cripps has nothing to worry about.

Of course … I know nothing and the MRO and tribunal have befuddled me at times this year.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

Sounds like the bloke shouldn't be playing footy at all.

If the walking cte that is McCartin is still playing then why not the guy with serious neck issues...

 

[thylacine60]

Good question. At some stage players eliminate themselves by too many games missed.

Maybe the threshold should be reckless/intentional acts. Don't think a suspension is a good representation of fairness in today's game. Back in the day suspensions were reserved for reckless or malicious acts.

It's still going to be someone making a judgement call. Always has been.

 

[DangerousD]

Our only hope is that Slobbo spends his 360 time pleasuring himself over *'s win. I can hear it now;

Robbo: "Mate, did you see the Bombers! That was the most scintillating quarter of footy produced by a team all year!"
Whately: "Yes it was good, we'll get back to that but I've got 45 mins now slotted in to talk about Cripps and his tackle",
Robbo: "Yeah yeah we'll get to Cripps, I just really want to get this off my chest! As a bomber fan......"

That continues all the way through to the credits.

I'm sure on SEN Whately at present has found a way to start the ball rolling anyway.... the HUN has in an article commenced with a line "the review panel will surely look at it"...

What a load of turd, you mean the same two guys that pushed for the Blues to appeal the Young suspension?