MRP / Trib. 2023 - MRO Chook Lotto - Carlton Tribunal News & Reports

[Aphrodite]

 

[HereComesJuddy]

I'm shocked to be sitting here. I actually think it was careless and if they are stopping everything head high then 200 incidents would happen a week. I'm all for protecting the head but this was something my 8 year old would have gotten up from and laughed about it.

 

[BigBreakfast]

H will get a rest this week. Bugger!

 

[BigFrizz36]

Shows that am way off the mark with this now. Thought that Acres was 50/50 snd this was more 10/90.

Clearly we appeal and if we lose we gather on mass and raze afl headquarters to the ground. Not much point in over reacting.

 

[F_therest]

I'm shocked to be sitting here. I actually think it was careless and if they are stopping everything head high then 200 incidents would happen a week. I'm all for protecting the head but this was something my 8 year old would have gotten up from and laughed about it.

Yeah, I get what they're doing with head high contact but this was just a free kick. Fine at most.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Do we understand why it was classed as medium impact? Has Sheezel had some late onset symptoms of concern, or is this one of the "potential to cause serious injury" situations?

 

[Just Kreuzing]

Dumb act but shouldn’t be considered enough force to warrant a suspension.

 

[Wickzki]

If Lynch gets off and H gets suspended it will officially be a farce.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Do we understand why it was classed as medium impact? Has Sheezel had some late onset symptoms of concern, or is this one of the "potential to cause serious injury" situations?

The latter you would think

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Well we should clearly challenge this. Soft as ****. Clearly low impact.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Let's do it another way

If Larkey committed the same act on young Hollands, what outcome would you want?

Nothing. I'm not a Helen Lovejoy.

 

[SurreyBlue]

I'm resigned to the fact that our boys will be going for anything possibly even remotely closely scrutinised - payback from last year. Its the way this organisation operates. We'll appeal - no doubt - but it won't change a flowering thing.

 

[Arr0w]

Nothing. I'm not a Helen Lovejoy.

I played in a different era, acts like that were non free kicks

But, somewhere, the line needs to be drawn, no matter the level of force

 

[lukep_86]

I bet we appeal and the week ban is upheld

 

[Revenant1965]

I'm off to bed. Intentional. High contact. Medium impact (with pillow).

 

[BigFrizz36]

I played in a different era, acts like that were non free kicks

But, somewhere, the line needs to be drawn, no matter the level of force

So you're not storming AFL headquarters with the rest of us?

Thy has requested that we leave the umpires department untouched as apparently "it wasn't their fault and they have no impact on this sort of thing".

 

[Arr0w]

So you're not storming AFL headquarters with the rest of us?

Thy has requested that we leave the umpires department untouched as apparently "it wasn't their fault and they have no impact on this sort of thing".

Never blamed an umpiring decision for a game outcome in my life

 

[ferrisb]

How TF is that not intentional?

 

[ferrisb]

If Lynch gets off and H gets suspended it will officially be a farce.

If the AFL had paid proper attention to Lynch over his career, he'd have a list of reports and suspensions as long as Rhys-Jones (although acts not as bad/violent).

Always thought Lynch was a grade-A sniper in disguise...

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

If the AFL had paid proper attention to Lynch over his career, he'd have a list of reports and suspensions as long as Rhys-Jones (although acts not as bad/violent).

Always thought Lynch was a grade-A sniper in disguise...

Ol' mate Christian adjudicated that this didn't warrant a striking charge despite driving Witherden's head into the turf - no suspension....

edit - just for context, Lynch was offered a $500 fine for this - as compared to TDK being offered $3,000 for raising his knee in a ruck contest

 

[carlton_99]

How TF is that not intentional?

It was graded intentional, low impact, high contact which is a week. Then got appealed and downgraded to a fine as he argued it wasn't intentional

 

[RedFury]

Do we understand why it was classed as medium impact? Has Sheezel had some late onset symptoms of concern, or is this one of the "potential to cause serious injury" situations?

It actually comes under the lesser known "potential to rub out a Carlton player" clause.

Warning : rant to follow.

Does MC ever miss an opportunity to nab one of our guys? It feels like many other incidents across the afl that are 50/50 end up without suspensions, but ours almost always manage to "make the grade".

And before anyone screams Carlton victimisation conspiracy (which I concede can be a real thing on this board) - be reminded this system is decided by one guy - an ex Collingwood player. Also be reminded that subconscious bias is a very strong, proven scientific principle.

Scientific experiments wouldn't need to be double/ triple blind in order to pass peer review and be taken seriously if we didn't already know for a fact that humans are incapable of true impartiality even when they try.

The afl seems to be clueless about this principle though, so rather than doing the common sense thing of using a panel of individuals with varying backgrounds, skills and allegiances in order to make fair decisions that have the highest chance of eliminating said biases, we instead continue with this one man farce.

 

[Revenant1965]

How TF is that not intentional?

How is it not 'medium impact'?

 

[Just Kreuzing]

No surprises tbh. Was pretty dumb by H.

Not the smartest cookie is Harry, often wonder what the hell he is thinking or doing during games, he made 3 dumbass decisions or acts during the game but Christ this is soft to be offered a week !!

 

[lily of laguna]

It actually comes under the lesser known "potential to rub out a Carlton player" clause.

Warning : rant to follow.

Does MC ever miss an opportunity to nab one of our guys? It feels like many other incidents across the afl that are 50/50 end up without suspensions, but ours almost always manage to "make the grade".

And before anyone screams Carlton victimisation conspiracy (which I concede can be a real thing on this board) - be reminded this system is decided by one guy - an ex Collingwood player. Also be reminded that subconscious bias is a very strong, proven scientific principle.

Scientific experiments wouldn't need to be double/ triple blind in order to pass peer review and be taken seriously if we didn't already know for a fact that humans are incapable of true impartiality even when they try.

The afl seems to be clueless about this principle though, so rather than doing the common sense thing of using a panel of individuals with varying backgrounds, skills and allegiances in order to make fair decisions that have the highest chance of eliminating said biases, we instead continue with this one man farce.

I posted the same thing earlier, just a lot less eloquently!

On SM-A115F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[CCurnow3votes]

I agree.

They are trying to eliminate head high hits.

Part of their response to the concussion lawsuit.

Harry suspension will stand, even if it's not technically correct

They may have downgraded from intentional based on the imagery we’ve seen showing Harry’s first impact to the shoulder of sheezel.

His forearms slid up from shoulders to sheezels head - he also had his eyes closed at time of impact.

So careless.

Leaves the door open to argue low impact.