Daisy in trouble ?

[TheLastEmperor]

2 weeks minimum

 

[ReebusMaximus]

Buddy does that, he gets 8 weeks.

Will get 1 week. Oh how convenient it will be...make it as though it's a real punishment

Not sure if serious??

Round 13? Gold Coast? Elbow? Didn't realise Buddy got 8 weeks for that..



To keep on topic, not sure if Daisy made contact with the head. I reckon he'll be fine.

 

[damuzzdu]

This. Carry over points and hit the head with feet off the ground. Gonski for two I'd say. Not sure he gets points reduction now for an early plea do to his last suspension this year.

Lower's was horrid. 4 weeks surely at a minimum.

Then again, this is the MRP, anything could happen. It's almost exciting waiting to see what they come up with for it.....

for min 4 weeks that would be 550 pts (less early plea) that would be reckless, high impact & high contact - very unlikely

Reckless, medium, high contact

 

[eddiesmith]

for min 4 weeks that would be 550 pts (less early plea) that would be reckless, high impact & high contact - very unlikely

Reckless, medium, high contact

If they moved away from this requires hospitalisation for high impact then he should get high impact, that was worth more than medium impact without doubt

 

[PP34]

Soft bump that back in the day wouldn't have got anything. Now he'll get at least a week stupid bump if your going to bump do it hard not soft.

 

[kaiserchief13]

If they moved away from this requires hospitalisation for high impact then he should get high impact, that was worth more than medium impact without doubt

The flaws of this system....they can't change the precedent unless they announce it publically I would've thought

 

[jko'neal]

If they moved away from this requires hospitalisation for high impact then he should get high impact, that was worth more than medium impact without doubt

Spot on, Lower should be 4 weeks minimum. Thomas 2, both hit a player high and went out of their way to do it.

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

for min 4 weeks that would be 550 pts (less early plea) that would be reckless, high impact & high contact - very unlikely

Reckless, medium, high contact

Possibly. I reckon though that this is the exact sort of hit they are trying to get rid of and Daisy seemed fairly dazed and sore after it. He'll get whacked big time for mine.

 

[KissmeRobbo]

How would anyone know he actually got him in the head thanks to the wondrous array of angles available from Channel 7

 

[eddiesmith]

The flaws of this system....they can't change the precedent unless they announce it publically I would've thought

There is no such thing as precedent in the tribunal, they dont allow any reference to previous incidents so its irrelavant

Unless the tribunal laws clearly state it requires serious injury then they can hit him with a high impact charge, everyone including the clubs want it changed anyway

 

[Strahany]

How would anyone know he actually got him in the head thanks to the wondrous array of angles available from Channel 7

Because one of the replays clearly shows Thomas' upper arm colliding with his head. It was shown well after the incident.

 

[trooroo4life]

Will be having a spell for sure. Did make contact to the head but was low impact. Soon as he decided to leap of the ground and bump he had himself in trouble. Will be missing 1 week as the minimum at worst could get 3 just because no one knows how the MRP works. My guess would be 1-2. IMO Lower's is going to be very lengthy, by ch7's footage he didn't look at the ball decided to bump early and went passed the ball then made contact. So contact being his only intention he is going to be missing atleast 4-5 IMO, but maybe 3 depending on his record.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

I haven't seen it but it is safe to say if it is borderline 1/2 weeks there is no way he'll get more than 1.

Eddie will make sure of it. As he should.

Eddie isnt the problem, its the AFL and its kow-towing

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Thomas has form, although Ibbotson got up fine, probably looking at a week even with an early plea.

There was high contact - but whether the high contact to the head was forceful enough to be reportable is debateable.

If it is - he'll cop two weeks due to his carryover points and loading.

It will be reckless (due to him leaving the ground) and high contact - low impact makes it a level 2 rough conduct and 225 points.

Loaded to 247 plus 68 - down to 236 after a plea. He'd risk a third week by challenging as well

Ultimately it will come down to whether the high contact is forceful enough - for mine though there was high contact - but the majority of force went through the body and for mine should be ok

 

[Scodog10]

There was high contact - but whether the high contact to the head was forceful enough to be reportable is debateable.

If it is - he'll cop two weeks due to his carryover points and loading.

It will be reckless (due to him leaving the ground) and high contact - low impact makes it a level 2 rough conduct and 225 points.

Loaded to 247 plus 68 - down to 236 after a plea. He'd risk a third week by challenging as well

Ultimately it will come down to whether the high contact is forceful enough - for mine though there was high contact - but the majority of force went through the body and for mine should be ok

Very well summed up

 

[kosifantutti]

Daisy challenged his strike earlier in the season on Clint Jones because he had nothing to lose.

They asked him on 3AW at the time if he was concerned about making such a frivolous appeal and having more points over his head.

His attitude was that he hadn't been reported in five years and it wasn't about to happen again. I'd love to see that come back to bite him.

 

[Damon_3388]

But unfortunately you can't hit blokes in the head anymore.

When were you actually allowed to? A hit to the head in any form has usually resulted in a free kick (at least) since I began watching the game regularly in 1993.

Because one of the replays clearly shows Thomas' upper arm colliding with his head. It was shown well after the incident.

Yes, but the point that KissmeRobbo is trying to make is that if Channel Seven (and other media) didn't focus so heavily on any possibly reportable contact, and persistently replay these incidents from 10,000 different camera angles, the MRP (usually the ones laying the report, as these bumps rarely result in an on-field report) might not even notice bumps like this or have cause to closely look at them.

 

[Donakebab]

Yes, it will be all Channel 7's fault if Thomas goes...

 

[blue harvest]

Didn't see the incident, but there was another one I think in the first half where Daisy cannoned into the back of someone after they disposed of the ball. Umpire didn't do anything, straight away I thought he could get a week for it, couldn't believe that he would do something intentional like that at this stage of the year.

 

[dumb]

the medical report they now constantly refer to might get him off. unless the 'head is sacrosanct'...? nobody knows.

 

[Damon_3388]

Yes, it will be all Channel 7's fault if Thomas goes...

I'm not saying that. Obviously if Thomas didn't do what he did, he'd have no worries whatsoever. What I am saying is that the persistent focus on these incidents from the television and print media pretty much guarantees that players can't get away with anything (even if they haven't been reported out on the ground, which they often aren't in these situations), and often makes these incidents seem more serious than they actually are. Again, Thomas would have no worries if he hadn't bumped Garrick Ibbotson, but he (and others) would have a right to fill a bit pissed off at the television networks, who seem so intent on almost "dobbing in" the players and making a bigger deal out of these incidents by persistently highlighting them, making sure that the MRP has something to look at and focus in on on Monday.

Tom Harley mentioned tonight that "there's so much scrutiny these days on every little thing" (they were discussing whether Peter Faulks should have or could have pulled out of the contest where he got his jaw broken), yet he totally failed to acknowledge that he and his colleagues (and their television network, the papers, etc.) are the primary drivers of this scrutiny, and the ones that put players under the microscope with replays from every angle and invading the "inner sanctum" (eg. cameras in the change rooms spotting Leon Davis using his mobile phone).

 

[mike14]

Why did daisy jump up? If he had of just run through him, it would have been the perfect bump. Now it looks like he'll sit for a couple.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

He shouldn't be, but he will be.

He SHOULD be, and he will be.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Tom Harley mentioned tonight that "there's so much scrutiny these days on every little thing"

Yes there is, but we only see supporters and officials complaining when it affects players from their clubs, and that is why nothing is done about it. If all 18 clubs jumped up and down each time something like this happens, maybe something would change, but it doesn't happen.

I've seen Hawthorn players rubbed out for some of the most piddling things imaginable. That's AFL life, circa 2011.

 

[Big Blow Hard]

I don't know why the thread title has a ? He is in trouble.

Medium impact. Left his feet, head high. Can't recall Daisys record, but I don't think he is an angel is he?

Should be 2 weeks, but we all know the Collingwood discount will get him down to a reprimand.