Preview 2nd Semi Final, 2020: Richmond v St.Kilda - Metricon Stadium, Friday 9th October, 7:50PM AEDT

[Diehard Saint]

Lethers saying we will likely appeal it. Does anyone know the process for the appeal and how it’s different to what’s just happened?

Considering we’re 0/2 so far obviously wouldn’t be confident but we should absolutely appeal it and refuse to lay down. Need to affirm that this is a new Saints organisation that doesn’t take **** at the very least.

In Lethlean we trust (and to think I wasn’t keen on getting him first up - I’ve done a complete 180 degree). I think he‘s saying you can’t push us around anymore without any pushback. Playing at the Gabba was a perfect example.

 

[kernelT]

AFL is just so dumb at times...

The ‘premiership’ captain of the side we are about to play got off a bump that finished his opponents day, but the ‘potential’ for injury has cost Long.

 

[PoppedCorn]

View attachment 978171

Between 5 and 25 grand

Ohh you just know itll cost us 25
Lol

 

[BrutThough]

Why couldn't our Appeal team use this an example?

Or this one from Naughton who got off.

Only difference... Whitfield actually went off the field and got assessed by medical staff. Yet thats the incident that doesn't result in suspension.

 

[triggering bro]

Strong words from Lethers indicating we will likely appeal. Win or lose it's great to have leaders at the club that just won't roll over any more.

We are a different club these days and I love it.

He is a lawyer by trade. He would be furious at the incompetence of the MRO.

 

[Joffaboy]

Why couldn't our Appeal team use this an example?

Precedence not allowed.

 

[puppy_dog7]

Precedence not allowed.

If precedence isn’t allowed, then imagining what could happen if he was injured shouldn’t be allowed either!!

 

[Joffaboy]

If precedence isn’t allowed, then imagining what could happen if he was injured shouldn’t be allowed either!!

It's not a court of law, it's a kangaroo court chooklotto farce.

 

[_Maximus_12]

Precedence not allowed.

Isn’t precedence how the basis of Law is developed?

 

[Joffaboy]

Isn’t precedence how the basis of Law is developed?

Yes. Thats why you can take it to appeal where precedence is allowed.

 

[PoppedCorn]

Fmd maybe capper and jacko ARE on the jury

 

[12Chill]

all lack of precedence does it allow them to have stuff all accountability tbh

Pretty silly stuff

 

[Diehard Saint]

Precedence not allowed.

Wow. Seriously? It can be used in a real court of law, but not this one?
That is just ludicrous.

 

[Diehard Saint]

Yes. Thats why you can take it to appeal where precedence is allowed.

So the afl can make more money out of it. Of course.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Isn’t precedence how the basis of Law is developed?

It is , but its wrong. It means if they ever **** up, that ****up stays forever

 

[Primed4Glory]

Wanted Long to play but I can deal with the decision.
A back 6 of Paton Howard Wilkie Coff Clarke maybe Savage is still pretty strong.
Still get plenty of drive from that back 6.
Personally hope Geary gets another forward tag on Houli of Short.

 

[_Maximus_12]

It is , but its wrong. It means if they ever fu** up, that fu**up stays forever

I think that’s more individual record and not history.
Presence is how they adjudicate certain actions based on previous cases.

 

[WhiskySaint]

If we want to put pressure on regarding the Long decision then tweet the comparison vids to Loyd and Purple. They can blow things way over the top and the incompetents of the mrp is a great story that will create outrage.

In failing/ no-existent systems, political pressure is how you get sh!t done.

 

[PoppedCorn]

Theres a couple already in response to the long tweet by the club

 

[George]

Why? All the ones who have done exactly the same and got a fine were white. Hawkins punches a bloke in the face, fine.

Long is indigenous gets banned when white players dont.

Really poor take

 

[tugga]

Let the kid play.
Nothing in it.
Can’t miss a final for that.
Game has gone soft.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I think that’s more individual record and not history.
Presence is how they adjudicate certain actions based on previous cases.

So one ******ed decision leaves us ******ed forever.
Unless they change the legislation to stop it...which HAS happened.
There are plenty of cases of laws where the interpretation has been in favor of obvious loopholes which were clearly not the intent of the law.

 

[Keg still on legs]

We have smart operators at the club but need to be careful not to turn this into too much of a distraction for the lads.

 

[StFly]

As an addendum, the impact clauses we were arguing are;


Bullet point 2, then first sentence after the points and it's why the AFL shit me to tears and are weak as piss generally, trying to avoid any concept of being seen to do any wrong. No "we screwed up", no "we can do better" just "it's all their fault".

In their own words as Gleeson put it: in particular, any injury sustained by the player who was offended against".

As the Dogs medico report stated, no injury sustained. Assessment and no action taken.

Secondly the potential to cause injury.

What this means is that after you have done the first bit, and looked to see no issue, you are then to say "can this cause injury?". This is a moot point. Every action in a contact sport, when there is contact undertaken, has the potential to cause injury. This needs to change but wont, because the AFL are inept at writing documents.

You then do the checklist; yep, Long made contact to Macrae above the neck. Move to third consideration;

The "Porpus" effect, where the victim player is impacted by a third player. What is Jones doing in that video? I'll tell you what, getting pushed by Macrae, who is in turn pushing against Macrae, trying to win a footy in a contest.

This is momentum ladies and gentlemen, this is what happens when two forces collide. In 1 second, Macrae has pushed off Jones, this act has put him in the path of Long who at this stage;

Is propped. Not moving forward. No momentum.

Ball is: in dispute.

In 1 second, contact is made. Just 1 second from the above frame. See where Longs momentum is, it's right not left, the path of the ball and Macrae.

As he's propped; ball pivots left, Lone steps left

What do you not see? Answer: The centre circle. What causes this? Answer: Macraes greater momentum.

Now what happens when two forces meet? I'll tell you what, the greater momentum smacks into a propped wall. Newtowns balls, only one side doesn't move sicne you are grounded.

Now as their feet are close together, technically: Macrae ran into Long. Macrae has ability and kinetic force to spring left as his right foot is planted, what does he do?

Runs into Long who is already in the act of bracing. See his left hand, it is extended as in the space of 1 second the ball went from contested and free to in Macraes possession. As we know, Macrae then meets Long.

This is why Gleeson is a fop. This is why he does not understand momentum. This is why the result is bullshit of the highest order made by idiots who have NFI how momentum works. See how close the square is in comparison to distance traveled by both parties.

The third impact was the victims, in pushing off Jones that set him on this path.

Long did not bump Macrae. Macrae ran into Long who had arrested previous momentum but did not have sufficient momentum, to run into Macrae who had the greater force.

Learn science you dumbarses.

 

[kernelT]

What about Bontempelli fracturing Haynes larynx... assessed as low impact, have a listen to Michael Christian in this video.

Star Giant could miss multiple weeks with fractured larynx

Greater Western Sydney's injury worries have continued with a star defender going down

www.afl.com.au