MRP / Trib. Charlie Cameron gets a week for dumping tackle on Lever - Tribunal = down to a fine.

Remove this Banner Ad

The afl is a complete shit show.

Redman gets a week for pushing a bloke that glances slightly high and Cameron gets off this?

just crazy
 
HirdsTheWord said:
The afl is a complete s**t show.

Redman gets a week for pushing a bloke that glances slightly high and Cameron gets off this?

just crazy
Click to expand...

Does redman do any community service? I take it no, of bad character
 

Log in to remove this ad.

From now on, irrespective of other MRP sanctions, any player who has not been suspended before will be permitted to invoke the 'good bloke' defence and not receive a suspension for a suspendable offence. Charlie Cameron may use he status as "never suspended" at his next tribunal case, and so forth in an infinite loop. Once all players to have been previously suspended prior to 16/04/2024 have finished their careers, suspensions will cease to exist in the AFL.

The head remains sacrosanct.
 
I think there is a real risk that this could become a lightning rod for those bone-headed knuckle draggers who want to use this as cover to direct their racist vitriol towards a prominent first Australian.

Just like it did with Goodes, those morons will claim the cover of booing a “AFL protected species” to direct abuse at Cameron. People like me (I’ll admit I wasn’t a fan of Goodes when he was dropping the knee into people) will inadvertently enable these idiots by booing as well, claiming “I’m not driven by racism - all good players who get kissed on the d$&k by the umpires or tribunal get booed.”

I won’t get into that this time and I’d encourage all non-racists out there to do the same. Let those racist w***ers self identify and get them away from the game.

Regards

S. Pete
 
Elixuh said:
Does redman do any community service? I take it no, of bad character
Click to expand...

nice to know Charlie can use his I've never been suspended before on an endless loop.

I understand the good bloke defence for minor stuff like pendles gut hit, but getting off that tackle because you're a good bloke is just crazy.
 
HirdsTheWord said:
nice to know Charlie can use his I've never been suspended before on an endless loop.

I understand the good bloke defence for minor stuff like pendles gut hit, but getting off that tackle because you're a good bloke is just crazy.
Click to expand...

Charlie caused no discomfort or pain to lever. Pendles floored Neale to the ground with a punch. Weird argument.
 
Elixuh said:
Charlie caused no discomfort or pain to lever. Pendles floored Neale to the ground with a punch. Weird argument.
Click to expand...

There have been plenty of players suspended for an almost identical tackle that have not caused any damage. Neale got straight up and continued playing. He did not even leave the ground.

This is a classic case of not punishing the action, just the outcome.

Very silly stance in regard to that kind of tackle when potential to cause damage is very serious.

Very silly decision, but my opinion of course.
 
HirdsTheWord said:
There have been plenty of players suspended for an almost identical tackle that have not caused any damage. Neale got straight up and continued playing. He did not even leave the ground.

This is a classic case of not punishing the action, just the outcome.

Very silly stance in regard to that kind of tackle when potential to cause damage is very serious.

Very silly decision, but my opinion of course.
Click to expand...

Charlie is a star of the competition so I’m confused as to why he even got a suspension.

We were lucky that a VFL suns player was also up for a worse tackle. A nice soft target.
 
Elixuh said:
Charlie is a star of the competition so I’m confused as to why he even got a suspension.

We were lucky that a VFL suns player was also up for a worse tackle. A nice soft target.
Click to expand...

don't think it has anything to do with Charlie as a person or player.

but that action should be suspendable in the current concussion environment. the AFLs inconsistency is very frustrating
 
JasRulz63 said:
So frivolous the appeal was they decided to deduct a week instead.
Click to expand...
They were completely wrong with this judgement and the AFL are not serious at all about these tackles. They actually upheld the original decision, but for some insane reason they fall for the "good boy" trick. No, this was a total mistake and Cameron should've copped another week for the stupidity of the appeal, instead he's been rewarded for something all the players now know not to do. Crazy.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HirdsTheWord said:
I understand the good bloke defence for minor stuff like pendles gut hit, but getting off that tackle because you're a good bloke is just crazy.
Click to expand...

This seems really intellectually dishonest. Either character should be a factor or it shouldn't.
 
This is beyond a joke, it was not altered and the Tribunal has confirmed it was a dangerous tackle of medium impact. But because he is a good Aboriginal bloke, it was careless and the player didn't suffer injury he is free to play.

So for my club, Matt Crouch is a good bloke, it was careless but exactly the right technique all of us were taught when
going in after the footy and the player was not injured. Does this mean he can appeal and just get a fine??

The Tribunal is a pathetic, its a bloody lottery
 
Section 5 said:
The AFL Tribunal found that this was 'medium' impact, but downgraded the sanction from a one-match ban to a fine based on exceptional and compelling circumstances.

Here are the full reasons on that:

We turn now to exceptional and compelling circumstances.

We find that those circumstances do exist here.

Cameron has played for 10 years without being suspended - 207 games suspension-free puts him in a very small minority.

Only 668 players of the 13,125 who have played the game at the elite level have played 200 games.

Almost half of those have been suspended for one match or more.

Cameron is clearly in the unusual category in this regard.

This alone would not be enough in our view to result in us necessarily describing it as an exemplary record or, if it was, to exercise our discretion to downgrade.

We note in this matter Cameron has suffered five fines in his history, including three for rough conduct, the charge he faces tonight.
It is however the case that he has not been suspended for 207 games.

The matters that cause us to downgrade this sanction from a one-week suspension to a fine commensurate with a low impact grading are as follows.

1) While this was careless, it was at the lower range of careless.

Cameron knew Lever had one arm free. He is much smaller and lighter than Lever and, as he said, lost control of a tackle.
If he didn't rotate 95-plus kilograms of Jake Lever, he would’ve landed squarely on his 74-kilogramme frame.

It was careless but not grossly careless.
We take into account Cameron's guilty plea, his acceptance that he could and should have released Lever’s arm.

2) While this was medium impact for the reasons we stated, Lever suffered no injury or apparent discomfort.
The difference between this case and the three examples that were graded low impact was real but not significant.

3) The references from Eddie Betts and Gregory Egert provide impressive details of the work Cameron does in the Indigenous community.

He is a role model with an impressive AFL career, it is something for those he connects with aspire to.

These matters are not irrelevant when we come to exercise our discretion in respect of a first suspendable offence when no injury was suffered and was neither intentional or grossly negligent.

Exceptional and compelling means what it says.

It will be a rare case when all of the circumstances combine to result in an exercise of discretion to downgrade a sanction.

This is such a case.

We determine in our discretion the appropriate sanction is the fine that would be imposed on Cameron if this was graded as low impact.
Click to expand...
I mean.... 'A' for honesty I guess?

They're straight up admitting Good Bloke Charlie was the reason they let him off.
 
LordLucifer said:
Pathetic result, have nothing against Cameron, just the goddam inconsistency of the actual tribunal.

Butters - got off
Couch - 1 week
Cameron - got off
Click to expand...
Absolutely

Butters action way more dangerous than Crouch but because he is loved he gets off, Crouch did the right thing, the Carlton player should be fined for leading with the head if anything but Crouch is suspended.

And worst of all Cameron's spinal injury potential tackle is all good coz he's nice.

The least consistent league in the country, WAFL and SANFL wouldn't put out this garbage and they are amateur
 
Lockie said:
The issue is that Lever didn’t suffer any injury, had one arm free, and seems as tough he contributed by throwing his head back so it looked like he been hit on the ground. He got straight up continued to play and didn’t go off for any concussion check. It was minimal at best.

Richmond’s Vlaustin and GWS Greene had similar tackles - one got off with a fine and one was sighted.
Click to expand...

This. The AFL MRO needs to be consistent, Greene did a similar tackle last week and nothing. What is bullshit is the reasoning he got off, good character?? Give me a spell. I don't think Charlie is a dirty player by any stretch and I am sure he's a great bloke but what is the tribunal supposed to rule on?? It should be the action and precedent was set only a week ago. In short I agree that he got off, just not the way they got there.

Same as Crouch and Butters, Crouch should have got off if Butters did.

MRO and Christian are a joke. The whole thing is a mess. It cant be this hard to make it more consistent, instead they come up with crap to engineer an outcome.
 
What I resent is that, in a decision where his indigenous status formed a key part of his defence and the verdict, anyone on here who objects to it is accused implicitly of racism.

The other part of the reasoning is something from a Kafka story:

" Only 668 players of the 13,125 who have played the game at the elite level have played 200 games. Almost half of those have been suspended for one match or more.
Cameron is clearly in the unusual category in this regard. "

So over half have not been suspended and, because Cameron is one of them, he's "clearly ... unusual"?
 
Chief can we add ‘Good Bloke Charlie Cameron…’ to the thread title pls
 
LordLucifer said:
Pathetic result, have nothing against Cameron, just the goddam inconsistency of the actual tribunal.

Butters - got off
Couch - 1 week
Cameron - got off
Click to expand...

Chuck in:
Greene - got off
Vlaustin - got off
Hewett - got off

Like you said, the consistency is interesting, especially as those three got off/fine at the MRP stage.
 
Hollow Knight said:
This seems really intellectually dishonest. Either character should be a factor or it shouldn't.
Click to expand...

that's just a dumb comment. things of different scales of danger require different factors.

Someone who did something minor should not be treated in the same way as someone who did something major.

The seriousness of potential injury to what Pendles did to what Cameron did is in no way a parallel.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Charlie Cameron gets a week for dumping tackle on Lever - Tribunal = down to a fine.

Similar threads

VicBased
Barass a week/Cameron gets off come on AFL.
Replies
22
Views
832
VicBased
VicBased
1990crow
News AFL Tribunal appeals board upholds Houston's 5 Week Suspension
32 33 34 35 36
Replies
893
Views
27K
Eshay187
Eshay187
P
  • Poll
MRP / Trib. Higgins - 3 weeks for Aliir tackle
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
128
Views
4K
PenfoldsFan
P
Leather Poisoning
Driving an elbow into a player who's on the ground - should it get weeks?
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
ThatsjustDappa
ThatsjustDappa
Waspy79
Kosi Pickett Gets 3 Weeks
2 3 4 5
Replies
111
Views
4K
Stax on the mill
S
kreuze_missile
"If you make an attempt to dispose of the ball when tackled, even if it's an incorrect attempt, it's play on"
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
gbatman
gbatman
Colonial
Tackling banned?
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
3K
FlowersByIrene
FlowersByIrene

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top