AFL Round 11 - MRP - Dale Thomas May Be Cited?

[beez]

Who would've thought the MRP could get something right? 1 week the deserved penalty.

 

[damuzzdu]

http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=115648

COLLINGWOOD star Dale Thomas' Brownlow hopes have been dashed after he was charged with striking St Kilda's Clint Jones by the Match Review Panel.

Thomas was charged with a level three striking offence by the MRP and offered a one-match suspension with an early plea.

http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=115648

 

[HFF]

Who would've thought the MRP could get something right? 1 week the deserved penalty.

Really? They didn't get it right at all. The 1 week seems "fair" and deserved but really under the "early plea and 5 year good record" Daisy should have been hit with a reprimand.

The penalty was not worth 2 weeks, period.

He certainly deserved a week for his stupidity but what's done is done and at least we don't have to worry about any carry over points from here on.

 

[Medders_7]

...Yet David Swallow walks free.... I'm not shocked. AFL is a joke. Thomas should just say it was reflex or he was going for the pressure point.

 

[mattys123]

Really? They didn't get it right at all. The 1 week seems "fair" and deserved but really under the "early plea and 5 year good record" Daisy should have been hit with a reprimand.

Nah, it's 100 correct, look at the wording of the ruling by the MRP.

Thomas was charged with a level three striking offence by the MRP and offered a one-match suspension with an early plea.

The incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points).

He drew 225 demerit points and a two-match sanction that can be reduced to 168.75 points and one game because of his good record.

What can you argue with? It was intentional, it was low impact (lowest category) and it was definitely high.

Not the MRP's fault that it comes out to 225 points before reductions, blame the AFL if anyone here for too harsh a penalty.

He got what he deserved under the current rules, but what frustrates and angers most supporters is the inconsistency in some cases (The Judd on Pavlich case still is frowned upon as a joke).

 

[PieBeast]

Well, you can't really argue with any of that so fair outcome IMO.

 

[Pie eyed]

How could S Selwood get off for a Worse a Thing as it was Way Off Play

Spell out that name again Dave.

 

[TradeDraft]

Really? They didn't get it right at all. The 1 week seems "fair" and deserved but really under the "early plea and 5 year good record" Daisy should have been hit with a reprimand.

The penalty was not worth 2 weeks, period.

He certainly deserved a week for his stupidity but what's done is done and at least we don't have to worry about any carry over points from here on.

Was Never Going to Win the Brownlow

 

[mattys123]

Here's the footage.

http://www.youtube.com/collingwoodctv#p/u/0/TypQzvtOPrA

[YOUTUBE]TypQzvtOPrA[/YOUTUBE]

 

[TradeDraft]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/115651/default.aspx

Contact between Carlton's Chris Judd and an umpire from the third quarter of Sunday's match was assessed. The umpire had bounced the ball and was heading backwards when he deviated away on an angle, rather than move in a direct straight line. Player Judd held his position and it was the view of the panel that the change in path by the umpire had contributed to the contact. No further action was taken.

Umpires/AFL Love Child Got Off

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/115651/default.aspx

 

[damuzzdu]

Nah, it's 100 correct, look at the wording of the ruling by the MRP.



What can you argue with? It was intentional, it was low impact (lowest category) and it was definitely high.

Not the MRP's fault that it comes out to 225 points before reductions, blame the AFL if anyone here for too harsh a penalty.

He got what he deserved under the current rules, but what frustrates and angers most supporters is the inconsistency in some cases (The Judd on Pavlich case still is frowned upon as a joke).

Matty,

Correct me here, but DT should get 25% off with early plea plus furthur 25% off for 5 year good record making it 126 pts carried over ???

 

[mattys123]

Matty,

Correct me here, but DT should get 25% off with early plea plus furthur 25% off for 5 year good record making it 126 pts carried over ???

Yeah, but there's really no need for the guilty plea, because either way he will get so many points, and none of them will carry over as he has actually been suspended anyway.

I don't think teams enter an early plea unless they have something to gain out of it, and in this case we have nothing to gain from it.

But yes, if we add it, it would bring it down to around 126 points.

 

[gravy1]

Hang on, so if he pleads guilty (drawing 126 points) does that mean he now has 26 points hanging over him? Or zero?

 

[damuzzdu]

Yeah, but there's really no need for the guilty plea, because either way he will get so many points, and none of them will carry over as he has actually been suspended anyway.

I don't think teams enter an early plea unless they have something to gain out of it, and in this case we have nothing to gain from it.

But yes, if we add it, it would bring it down to around 126 points.

DT carries that balance 168 (or 126) pts with him for 1 AFL year.

I think club may challenge...as if we fail - loses the early plea discount (25%) part but still has 5 year record to fall back on....so will still be just 1 game.

Intentional - Baker smacking SJ hand is intent - Daisy was a swinging arm...silly act but hardly intentional.

Agree with other part thou - high and low impact.

 

[BartBart]

Hang on, so if he pleads guilty (drawing 126 points) does that mean he now has 26 points hanging over him? Or zero?

Surely it would be whatever is left over - so 26pts carried over.

 

[mattys123]

DT carries that balance 168 (or 126) pts with him for 1 AFL year.

I think club may challenge...as if we fail - loses the early plea discount (25%) part but still has 5 year record to fall back on....so will still be just 1 game.

Intentional - Baker smacking SJ hand is intent - Daisy was a swinging arm...silly act but hardly intentional.

Agree with other part thou - high and low impact.

I didn't know the points carried over, anyway why wouldn't we challenge, as you say we really have nothing to lose, and we got Dawesy off thanks to our lawyers, and to me that action by Daisy doesn't look a lot different to the one that Dawes was sighted for (although Dawes also had the ball right in front of him).

Worth a challenge, if only to waste the AFL and tribunals time.

 

[damuzzdu]

Surely it would be whatever is left over - so 26pts carried over.

no the 126 pts stays with Dale Thomas for 1 AFL year, as it was actually 225 pts.

 

[damuzzdu]

I didn't know the points carried over, anyway why wouldn't we challenge, as you say we really have nothing to lose, and we got Dawesy off thanks to our lawyers, and to me that action by Daisy doesn't look a lot different to the one that Dawes was sighted for (although Dawes also had the ball right in front of him).

Worth a challenge, if only to waste the AFL and tribunals time.

Off Twitter

@RalphyHeraldSun

Pies could easily challenge the intentional nature of Daisy's ban. Would still only have 160 points and a one week ban. Roll the dice

I say go for it...

 

[jerry springer]

take it and run

 

[HFF]

Was Never Going to Win the Brownlow

lol such a random comment Dave.

We are talking about having a player available for round 11, not for what happens after Preliminary Final week.

Yep, may as well roll the dice. Nothing to lose.

 

[Xtreme]

What would his defence be ? Trying to pick his nose, but got the wrong nostril ?

He just needs to say that he was emulating Chris Judd, he'll get off and the AFL will have to fund the legal bill.

 

[damuzzdu]

on 2nd thought, DT should change his name to D. Judd. MRP should then give DT total license to smack taggers completely free of any charges for one AFL year.

 

[Scodog10]

The club will challenge this so fast it'll make the AFL's head spin as its impossible for him to end up missing 2 weeks. The way we'll do it is by attempting to downgrade the charge from intentional to reckless. I'd argue that its extremely difficult to hit someone with low impact if you intentionally strike them!

Also where is the 126 points coming from? When I went to school half of 225 was 112.5 as the early plea is 25% and the good record is 25% so the discount is 50% all up...

 

[docks]

DT carries that balance 168 (or 126) pts with him for 1 AFL year.

I think club may challenge...as if we fail - loses the early plea discount (25%) part but still has 5 year record to fall back on....so will still be just 1 game.

Intentional - Baker smacking SJ hand is intent - Daisy was a swinging arm...silly act but hardly intentional.

Agree with other part thou - high and low impact.

I only think you carry forward the points if you aren't suspended and get a reprimand, there is no mention of "points towards his future record" other than for the players getting reprimands

 

[Yidaki]

To be honest, it was extremely silly by Daisy to do that. Really disappointing considering his blistering form of late. He shouldn't have let his frustrations get to him like that and give Jones a cheapy to the face. His loss may cost his team the game on Monday. Melbourne are no easy beats, especially on QB, as we have seen in the past.