MRP / Trib. AFL Round 18 findings - Scott Thompson's hit on Johnson at the opening bounce

[marshhhhh]

Think the Adel flogs need to crawl back to their own cesspool of a board if they want to have a go at cats supporters.

Agreed.
If it was the other way around it would be totally different.

Any fans are welcome, but not if they are going to come in here with an attitude like some.

 

[marshhhhh]

Corey sits in a very bias position and its feasible to assume Corey would say what needs to be said to support his team.

Support his team?
No matter what he said in regards to the issue it wouldn't help the team.
How can it help the team after the fact?

 

[Pilchard_Adams]

Support his team?
No matter what he said in regards to the issue it wouldn't help the team.
How can it help the team after the fact?

Say his push was virtually non existent to sway the MRP decision. If Thommo is suspended for 4 weeks like some suggested, Adelaide are more likely to drop a few games and fall down the ladder.

 

[Pilchard_Adams]

Think the Adel flogs need to crawl back to their own cesspool of a board if they want to have a go at cats supporters.

If this is aimed at me, can you quote where I have "had a go" at a cats supporter today?

You only have to look at the thread in the Tribunal MRP board to see the countless supporters of uninvolved clubs making posts about how the correct decision was made...

 

[dav3]

It's tough to make a call, but for consistancies sake he probably should have got something.

 

[marshhhhh]

Say his push was virtually non existent to sway the MRP decision. If Thommo is suspended for 4 weeks like some suggested, Adelaide are more likely to drop a few games and fall down the ladder.

What possible interest would Joel have in trying to get Thommo suspended?
He's not some evil genius plotting the down fall of the Crows.

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

He should of got 1-2 IMO. In the replay i see, I honestly can't see Thompson going the ball at all...?

 

[romeoh]

Think the decision by Mrp is basically fine. Thompson is a ball player and ok that he got no weeks, but there is no consistency. And the 'push' by Corey, on which they apparently made the assessment, is just laughable.

 

[marshhhhh]

I don't mind him getting off.
Everyone knows he isn't a dirty player, he's probably just lucky to get off.

Another winner of MRP roulette.

 

[TooFar]

I think you should watch the incident again champ. Johnson had eyes for the ball, Thompson braced for contact, took eyes off the ball. If Thompson's intent was the ball only, he would have copped a knock too. He chose to brace... No prizes for which of the 2 showed courage.

So what you are saying is that if the roles were revered and SJ hit Thompson, you would be perfectly happy for SJ to be suspended for 2 weeks.... Righto

 

[marshhhhh]

So what you are saying is that if the roles were revered and SJ hit Thompson, you would be perfectly happy for SJ to be suspended for 2 weeks.... Righto

We wouldn't be happy, but you guys would be calling for his head.

 

[yogogorilla41]

If they just out and out said "Contact was purely unavoidable and accidental!" I think there would be less confusion. But to blame joel corey's push and still give no excuse for the fact he braced for the contact just makes this laughable. North board must be in melt down!

Anyway off to my centrebet account, putting $1000 on Thompson for the brownlow has to be a surer thing than big Loz and that flag business (thanks Cambridge!)

 

[TheHonestyPolicy]

Thompson was barely moving when the collision occured. Besides teleporting, what else should he have done?

Corey would never be consulted for the force of his push because a) it was one of about 1500 arm movements he would have made during the game, and b) Corey sits in a very bias position and its feasible to assume Corey would say what needs to be said to support his team. The push may have been very slight, that doesnt mean Thommo was ready to be pushed from behind...

If head high contact leads to MRP suspension, why have the players who have concussed Tippet the last few weeks playing? Accidental head contact does not = MRP suspension.

You can see Thompsons head turned looking at the ball, and turns to look at SJ with less than a second before impact. Its right there in the video, unless you are suggesting Thommo sneakily rotated his head in a different angle to where his eyes were looking to disguise contact that he didnt even know was coming a second earlier...

Apologies, I will pass the word on to the AFC that Geelong fans require opposition team members to wear teleportation devices to teleport out of the path of Geelong players, because Geelong supporters dont want football collisions within this great contact sport of ours.

Sarcasm and deluded football romanticism side by side.

Tippet ran into someone himself whilst he was in possession of the football and was collected from the front, so he had some chance of seeing what happened. SJ never had possession and never had any vision.
You might want to remember that at some stage as being vital parts of the evidence chain here.

There is no proof Thompson can see the football from his position. If he saw it then a natural instinct is to head for the ball surely? Does he? Nope.

Question to the facts here; If you lay an intentional bump and collect someone in the head knocking him out, costing him 1 match of fitness and potentially 2, should this never carry punitive potential in the future?

Hypothetical; If you allow people to get regularly knocked out from head high bumps without punitive measures, wont sides naturally adopt this as a weekly tactic to take out the opposition's best players?

 

[Geoffa32]

It was the best result for Football.


Given the way your guys play, I mean this as a compliment, I am sure many here would agree if SJ was not on the wrong end of it.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

I'm not too fussed either way.
But as a hypothetical, if that was Campbell Brown, he'd be serving weeks.

If it was any Geelong player, they'd be serving weeks. The AFL just don't want the brownlow favourite made ineligible.

 

[Partridge]

The MRP is not a competent body!! But looks like he got off.

I reckon he lined Johnson up and at no stage does he deviate or react to the football falling the other way.

If the Brownlow medal wasn't in play he would have been suspended based on their own track record.
Not saying I agree with their track record mind you, but there it is.

Lined him up? He barely moved. How can you line someone up by standing still?

Johnson came flying through, Thompson braced for the impact. He's allowed to do that. I don't particularly care about other decisions and how stupid they have been (Ziebell's for instance), they got this one 100% correct.

 

[Partridge]

It's tough to make a call, but for consistancies sake he probably should have got something.

No he shouldn't. Just because they stuff up seemingly ever other decision brought before them doesn't mean they should stuff up one they've actually gotten right.

 

[RichardMarx]

If it was any Geelong player, they'd be serving weeks. The AFL just don't want the brownlow favourite made ineligible.

Are you serious, any Geelong player would've been serving weeks? Just like Selwood for punching Raines or Hunt for stepping on Betts' arm? Get your hand off it mate.

The issue here is the MRP is just so inconsistent. Anyone who is a lover of football should be pleased Thompson is playing this weekend, but it'd be nice if all incidental clashes like this one (Ziebell) were treated in the same way.

Having said that, what's done with Jack Ziebell is done. I'd rather the MRP begin to get some decisions correct, than stick to their guns & continue ruining our game by penalising everyone like Ziebell.

 

[TheRoo32]

If it was any Geelong player, they'd be serving weeks. The AFL just don't want the brownlow favourite made ineligible.

Joel Selwood and Josh Hunt may have a thing or two to say about that...

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Are you serious, any Geelong player would've been serving weeks? Just like Selwood for punching Raines or Hunt for stepping on Betts' arm? Get your hand of it mate.

I guess the point is at this late stage of the season, with the market for the Brownlow looking a bit more settled, maybe the MRP is more likely to try to help out one of the favourites, than they would have been three months ago (not saying I agree). In saying that, you're right: we're the last group of supporters that should be claiming we're getting shafted by the MRP this year and another team is getting a good run there. We've had more than our fair share of luck in 2012.

 

[isen river]

If they just out and out said "Contact was purely unavoidable and accidental!" I think there would be less confusion. But to blame joel corey's push and still give no excuse for the fact he braced for the contact just makes this laughable. North board must be in melt down!

Spot on, the need for them to attribute the contact to the Joel Corey push, just reeks of the MRP trying to cover their own asses from the Zeibell decision. What I still think they should do and it would clear a lot of the confusion up, is allow for intent and the circumstance of incidents in their criteria to play a much more significant role in adjudicating head high contact. Over the years these two factors have been reduced in terms of their effect on suspensions and it has made for a lot of comical comparisons between similar incidents that are judged as if they were worlds apart. You can still protect the head but it must be acknowledged that footy can never be a totally safe sport without compromising the fabric of the game.

 

[randyzany]

I guess the point is at this late stage of the season, with the market for the Brownlow looking a bit more settled, maybe the MRP is more likely to try to help out one of the favourites, than they would have been three months ago (not saying I agree). In saying that, you're right: we're the last group of supporters that should be claiming we're getting shafted by the MRP this year and another team is getting a good run there. We've had more than our fair share of luck in 2012.

Not "help out" necessarily rather avoid any potential fall out/criticism of the Match Review Panel decisions if Thompson ends up with the most votes and is ineligible to win it because they rubbed him out on a "contentious" ( a la Chris Grant ) decision.

As far I can tell the only ones they're helping are themselves with an advantageous by-product of that result being Thompson.

They wouldn't ordinarily have a problem rubbing out Thompson on what occurred but it's the blowback that's made them reluctant to apply their usual criteria on the incident.

 

[RichardMarx]

Not "help out" necessarily rather avoid any potential fall out/criticism of the Match Review Panel decisions if Thompson ends up with the most votes and is ineligible to win it because they rubbed him out on a "contentious" ( a la Chris Grant ) decision.

As far I can tell the only ones they're helping are themselves with an advantageous by-product of that result being Thompson.

They wouldn't ordinarily have a problem rubbing out Thompson on what occurred but it's the blowback that's made them reluctant to apply their usual criteria on the incident.

So do you believe if it was Rory Sloane for example who bumped Stevie J, he would have received weeks because he's not in Brownlow contention? Even I'm not that cynical!

 

[topic97]

So do you believe if it was Rory Sloane for example who bumped Stevie J, he would have received weeks because he's not in Brownlow contention? Even I'm not that cynical!

Who would know though?!

With the inconsistency of the AFL Tribunal & the AFL draw "coincidentally" constantly favoring certain teams, surely you can see where a supporters cynicism & conspiracy theories come from!!

If there was a hard and fast rule & consistency in the tribunal then there would be no doubt immediately after the incident.
But fact of the matter is the MRP is as inconsistent as a bloody weather reporter which breeds all these theories - true or not!!
It could well be the fact that they went easy on him due to brownlow, why would Ziebell get weeks for a very similar incident? If they have set the precedent, just like legal precedents, then technically Thompson should have gotten weeks.

But unfortunately the MRP is neither consistent & are a law unto themselves so you might as well just use a magic 8 ball to predict the outcome.

FYI - neither Thompson nor Ziebell should have gotten weeks IMO.

 

[SydCrow]

the fact that the Brownlow is even mentioned as a factor shows how crap the MRP system is