MRP / Trib. 2023 MRP Lotto

[Gasometer]

There was blood.

Afl don't like blood.

2 weeks.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Ball carrier. LOL.

 

[Passmore]

There was blood.

Afl don't like blood.

2 weeks.

If there's no blood it possibly gets overlooked. Given fumbles was a bit dazed maybe a fine.

Having said that, on what grounds do we appeal? I don't think bullshit decision is grounds. Careless is not getting overturned. Impact? Maybe....but what's the likelihood?

 

[muttley45]

If there's no blood it possibly gets overlooked. Given fumbles was a bit dazed maybe a fine.

Having said that, on what grounds do we appeal? I don't think bullshit decision is grounds. Careless is not getting overturned. Impact? Maybe....but what's the likelihood?

We appeal that it was incidental, and unavoidable contact, not rough play.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

They biggest crock of shit out of this whole scenario is that a suspension in these nothing games is to be served in the season proper.

WTF IS THAT SHIT?

 

[Rooboys Rool]

If there's no blood it possibly gets overlooked. Given fumbles was a bit dazed maybe a fine.

Having said that, on what grounds do we appeal? I don't think bullshit decision is grounds. Careless is not getting overturned. Impact? Maybe....but what's the likelihood?

Would've thought low impact is a far better assessment of what occurred. Would also produce a more appropriate penalty (fine) if the MRP feels it has to report this incident.

Are we able to get the information from the AFL/Hawks that was used to determine it was medium impact? We should have the right to this information before we make the decision on whether to challenge. If we can't get access to it, I call shenanigans.

 

[Frank Thring]

He gets off because Duryea contributes more to the impact than Cunners does. Collisions happen in sport all the damn time. Watch it again and pause 1sec before impact. Duryea looks like he is going to maintain the direction he is going in, then swings hard right and lunges to hit the ball away....

I agree but the old duty of care clause those soft nuts at AFL house put in the MRP rules hangs Ben. If we were to appeal and Gleeson asked us "if Ben was going for the ball, why wasnt he bending over to pick it up?". What would your answer be?

 

[Saintly35]

It was pretty clumsy and looked bad, but 2 (1 with guilty) weeks is ridiculous.

A fine all it required.

 

[Arden]

Would've thought low impact is a far better assessment of what occurred. Would also produce a more appropriate penalty (fine) if the MRP feels it has to report this incident.

Are we able to get the information from the AFL/Hawks that was used to determine it was medium impact? We should have the right to this information before we make the decision on whether to challenge. If we can't get access to it, I call shenanigans.

Considering how easy it is to split the skin around the eyebrow, blood should not necessarily equal medium or high impact when assessing head knocks.

Ben contributed to it, he wasn't totally stationery but Fumbles also contributes to it by turning his head. Ben knew he was going to make contact, most likely with the shoulder/upper arm but I don't believe he meant to knee him in the head. I would cop a fine just for being a bit clumsy but two down to one is ridiculous.

 

[Donkey Chop]

One match suspension. Meh, cop it and move on. However you look at it, the head needs to be protected. Brain injury > football

 

[Arden]

One match suspension. Meh, cop it and move on. However you look at it, the head needs to be protected. Brain injury > football

If brain injury>football, we better ban football.

Accidents sometimes happen, especially with an oval ball and players turning 360 degrees.

I agree that the head needs to be protected. But from deliberate or callous acts. What duty of care does a player take in protecting their own head?

 

[Frank Thring]

Considering how easy it is to split the skin around the eyebrow, blood should not necessarily equal medium or high impact when assessing head knocks.

Ben contributed to it, he wasn't totally stationery but Fumbles also contributes to it by turning his head. Ben knew he was going to make contact, most likely with the shoulder/upper arm but I don't believe he meant to knee him in the head. I would cop a fine just for being a bit clumsy but two down to one is ridiculous.

Blood = at least Medium impact = 2 weeks minimum.

Unfortunately the tribunal has tangled itself in its own rules and fail to deliver the very essence of a tribunal and that's a feel of the incident, common sense.

 

[Only Forwards]

It's a formula.

They applied a formula and this is where it landed.

We've struggled to get things downgraded to accidental in the past.

His knee made contact was high and drew blood.

There is a table for this shit giantroo do you have the table?

That's what happened, it's not a conspiracy, it's not ludicrous, it is where it fits in a predetermined framework that has been outlined for years.

What would we have argued on he looked like he didn't want to make contact? Down to accidental? How many times has that worked for us?

He made contact and drew blood so force is probably off the table.

It was high.
It drew blood.

There is enough reason for them to give it and little ground to stand on to argue against it. So that'd be why we're not

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

It's a formula.

They applied a formula and this is where it landed.

We've struggled to get things downgraded to accidental in the past.

His knee made contact was high and drew blood.

There is a table for this shit giantroo do you have the table?

That's what happened, it's not a conspiracy, it's not ludicrous, it is where it fits in a predetermined framework that has been outlined for years.

What would we have argued on he looked like he didn't want to make contact? Down to accidental? How many times has that worked for us?

He made contact and drew blood so force is probably off the table.

It was high.
It drew blood.

There is enough reason for them to give it and little ground to stand on to argue against it. So that'd be why we're not

The thing with the formula is they can apply it however they like to achieve a desired outcome.

There is no way that was medium impact.

 

[Rooboys Rool]

It's a formula.

They applied a formula and this is where it landed.

We've struggled to get things downgraded to accidental in the past.

His knee made contact was high and drew blood.

There is a table for this shit giantroo do you have the table?

That's what happened, it's not a conspiracy, it's not ludicrous, it is where it fits in a predetermined framework that has been outlined for years.

What would we have argued on he looked like he didn't want to make contact? Down to accidental? How many times has that worked for us?

He made contact and drew blood so force is probably off the table.

It was high.
It drew blood.

There is enough reason for them to give it and little ground to stand on to argue against it. So that'd be why we're not

Is there something formalised in the rules that says if blood is drawn in will be categorised as at least medium impact, or are you just saying that as a general principle?

 

[muttley45]

A glancing blow is enough to draw blood from Joel Selwood's eyebrow, medium impact definitely not required.

 

[scottywiper]

He played out the game. It's patently crazy to base impact on blood. Low impact.

 

[longlivenmfc]

Is there something formalised in the rules that says if blood is drawn in will be categorised as at least medium impact, or are you just saying that as a general principle?

No, it's all subjective. But the bloke comes off the ground which blood pouring out of his head - there is zero chance of successfully arguing it was low contact (unless its Boomer on Selwood and a prelim is the following week).

And people have to get over this "it wasn't intentional" thing. That just doesn't matter if the grading is careless. If he had meant to do it, he would have been graded intentional and it would have been 3 down to 2.

 

[DrZaius]

No, it's all subjective. But the bloke comes off the ground which blood pouring out of his head - there is zero chance of successfully arguing it was low contact (unless its Boomer on Selwood and a prelim is the following week).

And people have to get over this "it wasn't intentional" thing. That just doesn't matter if the grading is careless. If he had meant to do it, he would have been graded intentional and it would have been 3 down to 2.

It doesn't take much to split an eyebrow..

 

[Mav]

We should boycott the next JLT game because we don't want to risk another player getting suspended for playing football.

 

[Drew23]

Perfect example of where the "no realistic alternative to contest the ball" clause should be thrown in.

"Ben showed the perfect technique demonstrated in the afl videos* of turning side on to protect the body and bracing for impact. Due to the hawthorn player fumbling the ball, Ben saw a 50/50 chance to win possession. Due to the new rules introduced in 2016 to encourage players to stay on their feet, Ben expected his oppisition counterpart to utilise the similar "correct" technique in bracing for contact, must I reinforce this is the same technique outlined in the video* distributed to clubs by the afl. However rather than Ben's opponent using this techique, in the players desperation for making a mends to the earlier fumble, he made an instrinctive lunge towards the ball. As Ben was already bracing for contact, unknowing that in a "pre-season" non-competitive game his opponent would think to put his body on the line. Ben's actions were reasonable in circumstances, and thus we request that you throw out charges laid again Ben, as it is a gross misinterpretation of the rules when incidental contact is made while contesting the ball and sets a perplexing precident for future occurances."

* - an assumption is made that said video was sent out to clubs and is vision of the commentators circle jerking over pendleburys perfect technique from a few year back.

Very poor decision if we dont appeal.

 

[Passmore]

We appeal that it was incidental, and unavoidable contact, not rough play.

I doubt we would be successful unfortunately.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[Passmore]

The thing with the formula is they can apply it however they like to achieve a desired outcome.

There is no way that was medium impact.

Impact is the only chance we would've had. But fumbles flipping bled. Makes a down grade remote.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[dus]

No lube has been used in coming to this decision.

 

[Arden]

No, it's all subjective. But the bloke comes off the ground which blood pouring out of his head - there is zero chance of successfully arguing it was low contact (unless its Boomer on Selwood and a prelim is the following week).

And people have to get over this "it wasn't intentional" thing. That just doesn't matter if the grading is careless. If he had meant to do it, he would have been graded intentional and it would have been 3 down to 2.

If Preuss is running next to Cyril behind play and they turn into each other reacting to the play, Preuss' shoulder glancing Cyril's forehead causing a split, what is the outcome?

It's not intentional, the contact is high and draws blood.