MRP / Trib. Eric Hipwood to tribunal - Result $2500 fine

Remove this Banner Ad

Ok so not guilty fair enough.

But this makes no sense ... "The AFL pushed for a two-game ban, arguing he'd intentionally pushed Gardner into the path of the umpire."

If you believe he intentionally pushed a player with such force into an umpire, then why only 2 weeks? Greene got 6 weeks for a light bump.
 
Ok so not guilty fair enough.

But this makes no sense ... "The AFL pushed for a two-game ban, arguing he'd intentionally pushed Gardner into the path of the umpire."

If you believe he intentionally pushed a player with such force into an umpire, then why only 2 weeks? Greene got 6 weeks for a light bump.
Greene's was completely different IMO. Greene showed a complete lack of respect walking through an umpire.

But I do tend to agree with you there. Had the AFL felt he done it on purpose which is clearly not the case then why only 2 weeks. If a player deliberately pushes a player into an umpire. That's worth more then 2 weeks.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Crazy that he got away with this. Footage shows him look directly at the umpire, he admits to watching Zac Bailey run past. Nonsensical defence on multiple fronts.
 
Sanity prevails. 2500 dollar fine. Still too much but acceptable.
seriously need to split this fine three ways, the dogs player can play a third the umpire can play a third and hipwood pay a third, absolute accident and just general football defender v forward push and shove. umpire was half asleep.
 

The Tribunal deliberated for over 40 minutes before ultiamtely finding Hipwood did not show a high degree of carelessness, which they said was worthy of a $2500 fine but not a suspension.

“Viewed from certain angles this incident looks quite troubling, as it appears that Hipwood intended to push Gardner into the umpire,” Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson explained.

“However, on viewing the footage from behind the goals and hearing the evidence from Hipwood, the circumstances were very different to what they first seemed.

“It is now clear to us that Hipwood was simply running towards goal when his opponent, who was running beside him, deviated and all but stopped in Hipwood‘s path, blocking his run. Hipwood reacted by pushing his opponent, who collided with the umpire.

“However, we find that Hipwood ought to have been aware that an umpire was in close vicinity, as he and his opponent were running at speed, he ought to have been aware that the umpire was vulnerable to a high speed collision. In those circumstances, he breached his duty of care by forcefully pushing his opponent into the umpire.


“He did have an alternative, he need not have pushed his opponent. He did more than brace for contact. As a result, we find Hipwood was careless.

“It was however a reaction and not his action alone that caused the incident and we do not regard the level of carelessness as high. We do not propose to impose a suspension, we have in mind imposing a fine of $2,500.”

Given the Tribunal found a level of carelessness that was less than high, the AFL opted not to push for at least a one-match ban.
 

The Tribunal deliberated for over 40 minutes before ultiamtely finding Hipwood did not show a high degree of carelessness, which they said was worthy of a $2500 fine but not a suspension.

“Viewed from certain angles this incident looks quite troubling, as it appears that Hipwood intended to push Gardner into the umpire,” Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson explained.

“However, on viewing the footage from behind the goals and hearing the evidence from Hipwood, the circumstances were very different to what they first seemed.

“It is now clear to us that Hipwood was simply running towards goal when his opponent, who was running beside him, deviated and all but stopped in Hipwood‘s path, blocking his run. Hipwood reacted by pushing his opponent, who collided with the umpire.

“However, we find that Hipwood ought to have been aware that an umpire was in close vicinity, as he and his opponent were running at speed, he ought to have been aware that the umpire was vulnerable to a high speed collision. In those circumstances, he breached his duty of care by forcefully pushing his opponent into the umpire.


“He did have an alternative, he need not have pushed his opponent. He did more than brace for contact. As a result, we find Hipwood was careless.

“It was however a reaction and not his action alone that caused the incident and we do not regard the level of carelessness as high. We do not propose to impose a suspension, we have in mind imposing a fine of $2,500.”

Given the Tribunal found a level of carelessness that was less than high, the AFL opted not to push for at least a one-match ban.
Is Hipwood supposed to vanish into thin air when Gardner runs into him? Guilty my ass, no more guilty then Gardner actually starting the whole thing, and the flog umpire for having no awareness.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Would be a different story if the dogs player was standing next to a standing ump and Hipwood ran at him to intentionally push him into the unsuspecting ump. The ump chose to run alongside two players, Dogs player went to knock Hipwood off balance in the chase for the position and Hipwood responded in kind.
 
“Viewed from certain angles this incident looks quite troubling, as it appears that Hipwood intended to push Gardner into the umpire,” Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson explained.

“However, on viewing the footage from behind the goals and hearing the evidence from Hipwood, the circumstances were very different to what they first seemed.

“It is now clear to us that Hipwood was simply running towards goal when his opponent, who was running beside him, deviated and all but stopped in Hipwood‘s path, blocking his run. Hipwood reacted by pushing his opponent, who collided with the umpire.

“However, we find that Hipwood ought to have been aware that an umpire was in close vicinity, as he and his opponent were running at speed, he ought to have been aware that the umpire was vulnerable to a high speed collision. In those circumstances, he breached his duty of care by forcefully pushing his opponent into the umpire.


“He did have an alternative, he need not have pushed his opponent. He did more than brace for contact. As a result, we find Hipwood was careless.

“It was however a reaction and not his action alone that caused the incident and we do not regard the level of carelessness as high. We do not propose to impose a suspension, we have in mind imposing a fine of $2,500.”

Given the Tribunal found a level of carelessness that was less than high, the AFL opted not to push for at least a one-match ban.
On the bolded, the wording of that quote would lead you to believe that tonight was the 1st time anyone in authority had a look at the behind the goals vision.... you would think that buffoon Christian would have looked at the behind the goals vision before referring it straight to the tribunal.
 
On the bolded, the wording of that quote would lead you to believe that tonight was the 1st time anyone in authority had a look at the behind the goals vision.... you would think that buffoon Christian would have looked at the behind the goals vision before referring it straight to the tribunal.
Just another example of Christian coming across as incompetent
 
I seem to recall about 15 years ago Jude Bolton pushed Tom Harley into an umpire, and Harley was the one fined for it. Insane decision. Lucky they didn't use that precedent to go after Ryan Gardner this time.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Eric Hipwood to tribunal - Result $2500 fine

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top