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

Remove this Banner Ad

Tommy Morris tweeted last night that the AFL would go to the Supreme Court and challenge it 😆😆😆😆

I don't think the AFL would ever go to the supreme court.

The document discovery would put them right off.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

As I’ve posted previously.

Completely nonsensical that 3 umpires (including Williamson who screws us every time he umpires) saw this incident live and NONE OF THEM even paid a free kick.

How that can turn into a 2 week suspension is farcical.

If any of one those umpires thought Cripps wasn’t focussed on the ball it would have been a free kick as a minimum - and more likely a report.

Why aren’t the umps brought in as witnesses? The simple question to them all is why didn’t you pay a free kick?

Their answer would have been because his eyes were on the ball and thought is a a fair and reasonable attempt at the contest that was 50/50 each way


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Absolutely they do.. but it's fair to say our brains are also significantly biased to the team we follow (which is totally understandable and all part of the fun and theatre of team based sport).

I have no doubt that if Cripps was wearing different colours, then 90% of the commentary in this thread that has been ecstatic (me included) at the overturn would be calling the decision 'a disgrace'.. ..

We are a funny lot us humans..

Not me, these decisions are incredibly important to the very fabric of the game.
If you’re in a contest for the ball, attempting to actually win the ball, you should not be suspended at all.
It’s a contact sport, fans and players love the physical aspect of the game. Without it, I’m done. I’m not watching a game closer to Gaelic football than Aussie rules. It’s not my go, I’ll just go and watch my local footy club fulltime


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Not me, these decisions are incredibly important to the very fabric of the game.
If you’re in a contest for the ball, attempting to actually win the ball, you should not be suspended at all.
It’s a contact sport, fans and players love the physical aspect of the game. Without it, I’m done. I’m not watching a game closer to Gaelic football than Aussie rules. It’s not my go, I’ll just go and watch my local footy club fulltime


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I wonder if the same lawyers will be acting on behalf of players when the group action inevitably comes against the AFL/Doctors for their lack of protection for concussion

Get paid for helping both sides at some point in time
 
Feels good to have competent representation. AFL stuffed up majorly thinking it was a slam dunk. They failed to established Cripps bumped inline with the charge and then just suspended him anyways.

Ultimately Cripps was running to collected the ball and Ah Chee came in from the side. Main camera angle made it look a lot worse than it actually was
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

There's always going to be inconsistencies unfortunately. Surely the aim (and preference) is to get as many right as possible though? Not to get them all wrong because a couple of others were wrong.

This just shows the problem with the current grading system. There's very little wriggle room for incidents like this. Had Cripps copped a fine, I think most people would have been ok with that, but the current grading system doesn't allow that. It was always going to be 2 weeks and would always have to be fought.
No amount of rules or suspensions will remove incidental or accidental contact/injury from the game. I'm all for protecting the head, but protect it from deliberate, malicious and reckless acts. Not two blokes contesting the ball in a hard, but fair way.
Kennedy had his jaw broken (and concussion?) in a contest the other week. There was nothing in it. I would have hated to see that player suspended simply because they both went hard at the ball and our player came off second best and missed 2 weeks through injury.
A big part of the problem is that the AFL have not gone with First Principles, but with arse covering to reduce potential litigation.
They see a concussion and work backwards to get a suspension, which is much less consistent than prosecuting dangerous actions (sling tackles, high bumps, elbows). That they don't distinguish between hitting the head of an opponent and causing a concussion, and the player hitting their head on the ground and being concussed (when not slung into the ground) is farcical.

It lacks integrity, and is much more confusing for the general public (and those within the game too).

The game should be protecting the players, but it must also acknowledge that in a contact game, played on turf, that accidents can happen, and players need to accept that there is some risk.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

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

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top