AFL Player # 7: Indefatigable Zach Merrett (c) - 5 time Crichton Medallist! 🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅

[Beerfish]

Contract Status: Unrestricted Free Agent 2027
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 10, I Remember Bluey

 

[Alberto_Magnifico]

Boooooooooooo

 

[Lore]

Didn't they say that if it fails they wanted to contest the impact? Haven't done that yet...

 

[Beerfish]

What a ****ing surprise

 

[wichidi]

I'll come back in 2 hours after the second challenge expecting the same result.

 

[scythe]

 

[Lore]

 

[Lore]

And we should get more info about the 'deliberations' later.

 

[Zach Package]

Seems like our argument was pretty rubbish to be honest.

Wouldn’t be surprised if Adams gets off on a more convincing presentation.

 

[wichidi]

Well that's c**p. Bring in Hobbs I say. Never in the history of ANZAC day matches has a young gun coming in for his first match of the season worked. On wait...

 

[Ambrosia]

Would have much rather read about the impact to the head arguments rather then whether or not it was a dangerous tackle

 

[Hamez]

Doesn’t sound like we’ll appeal

 

[Jobe Watson]

I say we just play Merrett anyway.

 

[boncer34]

Appeal again

 

[justlookingaround]

 

[TheGrizz]

I wouldn't let this Ihle bloke order a coffee for me based on those arguments.

 

[Hamez]

Seems like our argument was pretty rubbish to be honest.

Wouldn’t be surprised if Adams gets off on a more convincing presentation.

They’ve got a few hours to alter their approach after seeing our case. Probably works in their favour.

 

[Seb78]

So ineligible for the brownlow then.

 

[TheGrizz]

Appeal again

AFL has really tightened up appealing Tribunal decisions after the Cripps fiasco last year.

 

[TheUnicorn]

 

[boncer34]

AFL has really tightened up appealing Tribunal decisions after the Cripps fiasco last year.

Do it anyway

 

[scythe]

Would have much rather read about the impact to the head arguments rather then whether or not it was a dangerous tackle

Considering they didn't talk about any of that stuff, or how Sparrow continued on right away, I don't believe they deliberated on the impact argument at all. Infuriating.

 

[TheGrizz]

Do it anyway

They have to show a genuine legal error in the decision. Almost impossible with how vague the charges are with dangerous tackles.

 

[Beerfish]

I wouldn't let this Ihle bloke order a coffee for me based on those arguments.

If it's Ben Ihle the guy is a KC.

 

[TheGrizz]

Would have much rather read about the impact to the head arguments rather then whether or not it was a dangerous tackle

This.

Ihle seemed more intent on arguing the tackle wasn't dangerous, rather than the fact Sparrow landed on Merrett and got straight up with nill ill effects.

 

[scythe]

I say we just play Merrett anyway.

Haircut and a bit of makeup and we can just say Jackson was keen for another crack at it.