Chris Masten biting allegation

Remove this Banner Ad

the harry said:
Suban does appear to have what may be described as a "bit mark" on his arm after wresting on the ground with Masten.
Click to expand...

Could you positively say without any doubt, that you are 100% certain that the alleged mark on Subans arm came from a bite from Masten?
If Masten were to dispute this, what evidence could you provide to prove without reasonable doubt that Masten is in fact lying and was the cause of said mark?

You cannot prosecute someone with a single allegation. You can however build up a case with circumstantial evidence.

That would then require in this example a direct comparison clearly showing Subans left arm immediately before and after the altercation which from what I've seen is not available as of yet.

In Hindsight the AFL should treat such allegations photography of the alleged wound. Not only for the AFL review process, but for legal and OH&S purposes.

If there is proof without reasonable doubt Masten did bite Suban, then I am all for the book being thrown at him.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

TheInjuryFactory said:
View attachment 163244
:$
Click to expand...
Where is this photo from
162745_34f06a29687156497eed2e781401c269.jpg
 
Not condoning biting or anything like that, but I think incidents should be looked at by the seriousness of injury that could arise from it.
Silvagni intentionally elbowed an unsuspecting player off the ball in the face/head region. Suban possibly? could have a tiny scratch on his arm which he brought on himself by throwing his arm into Masten's face. Calm the hysteria geez
 
HeaveHo_WeBlow said:
Could you positively say without any doubt, that you are 100% certain that the alleged mark on Subans arm came from a bite from Masten?
If Masten were to dispute this, what evidence could you provide to prove without reasonable doubt that Masten is in fact lying and was the cause of said mark?

You cannot prosecute someone with a single allegation. You can however build up a case with circumstantial evidence.

That would then require in this example a direct comparison clearly showing Subans left arm immediately before and after the altercation which from what I've seen is not available as of yet.

In Hindsight the AFL should treat such allegations photography of the alleged wound. Not only for the AFL review process, but for legal and OH&S purposes.

If there is proof without reasonable doubt Masten did bite Suban, then I am all for the book being thrown at him.
Click to expand...
This, this and this. No point arguing his guilt or innocence until more evidence is put forward, as it stands it is nothing but an allegation and a non definitive photo, which is not enough to suspend someone.
 
Ilkka Sinisalo said:
That is not how the tribunal works. People have this misguided impression that being referred straight to the tribunal means that the infraction is especially bad. The MRP have guidelines by which they assess punishments for incidents on the field. There is nothing in those guidelines about biting (or alleged biting), so it has to go before the tribunal. Even moreso because it's unlikely that there is clear video evidence that a bite occurred - so it will come down to the accounts of the players, their credibility, and the injury to Suban's arm.
Click to expand...
Whilst I understand what you are saying, the 2015 guidelines for misconduct allows the MRP to have made a ruling and a sanction. It goes onto say "Serious misconduct offences will be referred directly to the Tribunal. However any other act of misconduct will be subject to a Fixed Financial Sanction to be determined by the MRP".
So things that are seen to be "especially bad" (in regards to misconduct) ARE referred directly to the tribunal.
In saying that, it could be (as you rightly say) that they didnt have enough evidence to work out if misconduct had occurred, so decided to leave it up to the jury....or, they have other evidence (such as a different camera view) and decided that the misconduct was serious enough to refer.
 
boondy said:
Where is this photo from
162745_34f06a29687156497eed2e781401c269.jpg
Click to expand...

I work in Kindergarten. I see plenty of bites. That is not an intentional bite with a mouthguard. That is a scratch done with something quite sharp like fingernails or boot studs or an arm being pushed against something sharp. So unless Masto is part of some pseudo neo vampire cult that files their bottom teeth to points and has a mishappen triangular shaped jaw then I would say time to lawyer up as verdict should be not bitten.
 
Forums are usually for opinions

I have a question well two

If mastern did bite him what led him to that course of action?

Biting is usually a retaliation to being cornered and I'll be interested to see what he did if any and why ....and not for one second am I condoning

However if Suban grabbed his nuts or eye gouged him then those are mitigating circumstances .....like I said I don't condone it but I'll be curious what led to the alleged behaviour

People don't just do something .....action causes reaction ...two wrongs don't make a right but I suspect Suban will be under scrutiny also for his actions
 
Bunnie said:
I work in Kindergarten. I see plenty of bites. That is not an intentional bite with a mouthguard. That is a scratch done with something quite sharp like fingernails or boot studs or an arm being pushed against something sharp. So unless Masto is part of some pseudo neo vampire cult that files their bottom teeth to points and has a mishappen triangular shaped jaw then I would say time to lawyer up as verdict should be not bitten.
Click to expand...
You work in Kindergarten? If you call your fruit time, play dough and dress-ups work. It would be more accurate to say you go to Kindergarten.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

hoss said:
You work in Kindergarten? If you call your fruit time, play dough and dress-ups work. It would be more accurate to say you go to Kindergarten.
Click to expand...
Come and walk a day in my shoes and say that. Turns many a man into screaming pussies within hours. Ever tried to get 20 x 3/4 year olds to do what you want in your time frame? Its like gathering raindrops.
 
Bunnie said:
Come and walk a day in my shoes and say that. Turns many a man into screaming pussies within hours. Ever tried to get 20 x 3/4 year olds to do what you want in your time frame? Its like gathering raindrops.
Click to expand...
Oh trust me, I know what Kindy's and Pre-primary's are like. I don't question that. I question the honesty and validity of your post. For you to try and deny that Masten is responsible for that bite, or even bit in the first place is a disgrace. Why would someone get up shouting 2-3 times, 'he bit me' and show the bite to an umpire if nothing happened? Maybe Suban bit himself. I'd hate you looking after my kid if they were ever hurt by someone else in Kindy. What would you say ... 'they tripped over .."
 
Back in the 80's Richmond's David Palm was accused of biting the Saints' Robert Elphinstone. Think fingers were involved and blood was drawn. There was no report; Palm admitted to biting but said it was a reflex action as he felt fingers in his mouth and couldn't breathe. No penalty.
 
hoss said:
Oh trust me, I know what Kindy's and Pre-primary's are like. I don't question that. I question the honesty and validity of your post. For you to try and deny that Masten is responsible for that bite, or even bit in the first place is a disgrace. Why would someone get up shouting 2-3 times, 'he bit me' and show the bite to an umpire if nothing happened? Maybe Suban bit himself. I'd hate you looking after my kid if they were ever hurt by someone else in Kindy. What would you say ... 'they tripped over .."
Click to expand...
That is rubbish. You took a swipe at whether I work when at my job and I do - damn hard for what is best for each and every one of my little ones.

As for Suban i dont think that is a bite. I do question his honesty. Footballers LIE all the time on the field. They play for kicks. They jumper punch and scrag then deny it. They cry touched when they are no where near the ball. All the footage shown does not show Masten chomping down for dinner Subans arm. Masten looked damned pissed off when he got up. I think Suban went a forearm to the face and whacked Masten in the mouth. I do not think he bit him.
 
Bunnie said:
Come and walk a day in my shoes and say that. Turns many a man into screaming pussies within hours. Ever tried to get 20 x 3/4 year olds to do what you want in your time frame? Its like gathering raindrops.
Click to expand...


I,admire you're work....work,with kids work with anyone
 
Ron The Bear said:
Back in the 80's Richmond's David Palm was accused of biting the Saints' Robert Elphinstone. Think fingers were involved and blood was drawn. There was no report; Palm admitted to biting but said it was a reflex action as he felt fingers in his mouth and couldn't breathe. No penalty.
Click to expand...
I recall a case where a North player bit a Freo player in the mid 90s, but Google doesn't seem to reveal anything. There was grainy photographic evidence in the Herald Sun, but it was thrown out because the North player said he bit the Freo player's arm hair.

Wish I could find it.
 
Ilkka Sinisalo said:
The AFL and the tribunal aren't a court of law. They don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Masten bit him.
Click to expand...

You're correct, in this case the Civil Burden of proof applies. A player is guilty of the charge if, "on the balance of probabilities" he committed the offence.

According to the High Court, this means a "reasonable satisfaction that the allegation is made out, bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation made, the inherent unlikelihood of the occurrence…or the gravity of consequences following from the finding".

To summarize, the Tribunal weighs up the possible explanations for what happened and then decides, on the "balance of probabilities", if one version of the cause is more probable than not. If the Tribunal is not satisfied to that extent, the charge should be dismissed and the reported player given the benefit of the doubt.

Even then, the Tribunal has to act in "good faith", making a decision that is reasonable and could be honestly arrived at. As part of the "accord natural justice".

Really all this is going to come down to is if the referred to umpire reports he clearly could see the outline of a bite mark on Subans arm.
When looking at the vision you could say whilst they umpire had a glance, he didn't seem to take an in depth look at it.

Somewhat negligent on the AFL side of things though highly unlikely to over-turn a tribunal ruling.
None the less it can still escalate beyond a tribunal hearing.
 
Bunnie said:
That is rubbish. You took a swipe at whether I work when at my job and I do - damn hard for what is best for each and every one of my little ones.

As for Suban i dont think that is a bite. I do question his honesty. Footballers LIE all the time on the field. They play for kicks. They jumper punch and scrag then deny it. They cry touched when they are no where near the ball. All the footage shown does not show Masten chomping down for dinner Subans arm. Masten looked damned pissed off when he got up. I think Suban went a forearm to the face and whacked Masten in the mouth. I do not think he bit him.
Click to expand...
Kindergarten teachers lie too. Masten knows he bit him and Suban knows he got bitten. I'm not the one here saying Silvagni 'accidently' hit Cripps. You may be desensitised to biting, as you say you see plenty in your class, but you are being blinded by your team loyalty and supporting a filthy dog act.
 
Bunnie said:
That is rubbish. You took a swipe at whether I work when at my job and I do - damn hard for what is best for each and every one of my little ones.

As for Suban i dont think that is a bite. I do question his honesty. Footballers LIE all the time on the field. They play for kicks. They jumper punch and scrag then deny it. They cry touched when they are no where near the ball. All the footage shown does not show Masten chomping down for dinner Subans arm. Masten looked damned pissed off when he got up. I think Suban went a forearm to the face and whacked Masten in the mouth. I do not think he bit him.
Click to expand...

Congratulations on your work. Very valuable to society and I thank you for it.

Pretty much counts for zero in this situation though. Suban was VERY confident that there was a bite. You don't show an ump your arm up close straight away if there is nothing to show. If there was no evidence it would have been thrown out. Simple.

That's one thing we do know for a fact. There's enough there for it to go straight to the tribunal.

No expert west coast witnesses or JFK freeze frames are going to persuade me otherwise. Id suggest the tribunal are busy blokes and wouldn't waste their time if there wasn't some kind of evidence.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Chris Masten biting allegation

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top