Big Bad Bustling Tyrone Vickery

[telsor]

Intentional, severe, high...would have been appealed anyway, so no difference going straight there.

This is clearly a political call to keep the weagles from exploding which will be reduced once it gets to the tribunal.

 

[telsor]

Ah, well, c'est la vie, telsor

and when the tribunal rules otherwise?

 

[Oneiros]

Slightly amusing that it's gone to the tribunal. Could and should have been settled by the MRP.

The MRP's grading schedule mandates referral to the tribunal at that combination of gradings. There is no prescribed punishment for it.

 

[telsor]

Slightly amusing that it's gone to the tribunal. Could and should have been settled by the MRP.

would have been appealed anyway, so really it's just saving Richmond the trouble (and $$$).

 

[manboob]

Intentional, severe, high...would have been appealed anyway, so no difference going straight there.

This is clearly a political call to keep the weagles from exploding which will be reduced once it gets to the tribunal.

Indeed quite the opposite.

Slightly amusing that it's gone to the tribunal. Could and should have been settled by the MRP.

No early pleas at the tribunal.

 

[telsor]

That'll be the gist of it... With the recent focus on and escalation in importance of the effects of concussion... They will likely now consider concussion to be structural... Lasting impacts within the structure of the brain etc... It'll be exactly what's pushed it to be considered 'severe impact'.

So suddenly, without notice, on this incident, they've changed the way they handle things?

Really?

Wonder if the same team that provided this medical report will play Cox next week.

 

[telsor]

Indeed quite the opposite.


No early pleas at the tribunal.

Yeah, but the tribunal considers that in their verdict, especially when it's sent directly (and the player/club has already effectively plead guilty).

 

[Engimal]

The MRP's grading schedule mandates referral to the tribunal at that combination of gradings. There is no prescribed punishment for it.

Shouldn't have been graded as severe going by what I understand the MRP define as severe.

 

[Oneiros]

and when the tribunal rules otherwise?

Well, there is no reduction for early guilty plea under this scenario, even if Vickery pleads it down, so any sanction received is automatically up a week for the loss of the discount.

I don't see the tribunal ruling otherwise, on this issue. There are important differences between this and the Lake case, after all, in that this is a graded offence, not a blank request for classification under a misconduct catch-all. The tribunal will be reluctant to move from these gradings.

 

[Xtreme]

Vickery sent straight to the tribunal.

Cox incident didn't have enough force.

Good if Lakes gets 4 weeks for tugging at Petrie's jumper than Vickery can expect at least 12 weeks for thinking he was Clubber Lang against Rocky Balboa

 

[Oneiros]

Shouldn't have been graded as severe going by what I understand the MRP define as severe.

I notice that most cases where a concussion comes back as high instead of severe, it is on a rough conduct charge, not a striking charge. Presumably there is some grace built into the impact grading with a rough conduct, as the rough conduct charge tends to carry an additional 100 demerit points at each level to the striking charge.

 

[Oneiros]

So suddenly, without notice, on this incident, they've changed the way they handle things?

Really?

Wonder if the same team that provided this medical report will play Cox next week.

They won't be able to play Cox as he failed the concussion test.

 

[telsor]

Well, there is no reduction for early guilty plea under this scenario, even if Vickery pleads it down, so any sanction received is automatically up a week for the loss of the discount.

I don't see the tribunal ruling otherwise, on this issue. There are important differences between this and the Lake case, after all, in that this is a graded offence, not a blank request for classification under a misconduct catch-all. The tribunal will be reluctant to move from these gradings.

Tribunal considers that when handing down it's verdict.

They can hardly say "MRP made a mistake and graded it wrongly, but because that mistake sent you straight to us, we'll punish you more anyway".

The movement will come because now Richmond gets a chance to argue it's case...point out that ruck duels often involve contact not dissimilar to this in nature (e.g. a whack across the chest) and that 'severe' grading is usually for broken bones, etc with concussion type injuries getting 'high'.

 

[Oneiros]

would have been appealed anyway, so really it's just saving Richmond the trouble (and $$$).

I don't think I've heard a more admirably optimistic appraisal of a situation since Monty Python's lads first sang 'Always Look on the Bright Side of Life'.

 

[manboob]

The high and severe thing is super strange. I remember I go going to hospital with a broken face and it wasn't graded severe

 

[manboob]

The movement will come because now Richmond gets a chance to argue it's case...point out that ruck duels often involve contact not dissimilar to this in nature (e.g. a whack across the chest) and that 'severe' grading is usually for broken bones, etc with concussion type injuries getting 'high'.

That sort of defence will get swatted away like a fly. The AFL has shown time and again that if you chose to make contact you better be prepared for the repercussions if it goes pear shaped.

 

[Badesumofu]

They won't be able to play Cox as he failed the concussion test.

Not the case, failing a concussion test only means you can't play out the match, there is no rule that says he can't play next week. Common sense would suggest that he should not, though.

Anyway, I was surprised to see this graded as severe, as that grading has always been reserved for when the impact results in structural damage. It's probably for the best to just send it straight to the tribunal, though. The points system doesn't handle cases like this very well.

 

[manboob]

Anyway, I was surprised to see this graded as severe, as that grading has always been reserved for when the impact results in structural damage. It's probably for the best to just send it straight to the tribunal, though. The points system doesn't handle cases like this very well.

He'd be pushing 4/5 weeks under the points system. But might escape with 3 if he pleaded guilty. So either the AFL want 2 weeks or 5... I can't suss it out. My instinct is the latter cause they don't want this sort of shit going on anymore.

 

[Oneiros]

Tuesday night tribunal is nice, we've all been stewing since friday, so point dragging it out further.

 

[manboob]

But better than the Sunday night suggestion of Clarko. I think whilst shitty the players and their legal teams would appreciate the extra day, we're talking about QCs here. Not Karen from accounting who is up for a good debate over the biscuit tin.

 

[ep2018]

Vickery is a spud, copping a long sentence will be good for Richmond.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Don't agree with the severe grading. Looks like they wanted to send it to the tribunal though.

AA's system didn't churn out enough Monopoly points.

Gives Vickery the opportunity to argue against 'intentional'.

 

[Badesumofu]

AA's system didn't churn out enough Monopoly points.

Gives Vickery the opportunity to argue against 'intentional'.

It might do, if he hadn't basically already admitted that it was intentional. I reckon his lawyer should be able to argue that 'high' is a better fit than 'severe' based on past gradings, but I don't see how they can argue that it wasn't intentional. The panel tends to take contrition into account, and admission of guilt, I might guess 4 matches missed. Perhaps 5 if they agree with 'severe'.

 

[Ant_]

Good if Lakes gets 4 weeks for tugging at Petrie's jumper than Vickery can expect at least 12 weeks for thinking he was Clubber Lang against Rocky Balboa

Lol, Vickery will get 3-4

 

[GOAUS!]

My feeling is that Vickery will get 4-5.