Greene's One Week - Mabo, the Vibe, Justice

[Adz]

Giants cannot win with Toby. Huge call but I’m willing to back myself in.

 

[Kirby]

Is the Tribunal sitting today or tomorrow?

 

[ExcitementMachine]

Chris Fagan just said on SEN that Neale said he felt contact but didn't know who it was. But apparently told him it was "around the nose" area, not the eye(s)

Around the nose area, why that's mightily close to the eyes.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

If the charge has moved from face to eyes, then it’s an intentional ploy to get him off.

When it was face he had no out. Because even from that footage it’s clear he makes contact with the face. But eyes is far less clear and Fagan was on radio this morning saying Neale said he felt contact around “his nose”.

It’s all so f**king dodgy.

 

[unplugged]

Around the nose area, why that's mightily close to the eyes.

Yep, the charge is "eye region"

Unless you're Basil Zemplis, your nose is in the eye region.

 

[sideswipe]

Intentional is clear, low impact is clear and high contact is the face. No way they can avoid one week.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Think the one they go for is arguing low impact down to insufficient or "negligible" contact. Reckon that might just get up and Greene gets off.

FWIW, this week's episode of the Toby Files is different to last week - which might show Chrisso has learned a lesson. Last week, he charged Greene with Serious Misconduct, which isn't a classifiable offence, so it takes him straight to the Tribunal. This week, Chrisso goes with "Unreasonable contact to the eye region", which is a classifiable offence - so Chrisso can hand out a week.

However, once a player goes to the Tribunal, it is a fresh hearing and the Tribunal takes no notice of Chrisso' 1 week sanction.

 

[domin8tors]

The NRL just suspended a player for 8 weeks for an attempted eye gouge. Intentionally trying to poke someone in the eye is serious and can cause serious damage (not to mention liability or the AFL should they not act on it). It is cowardly and 1 week is not enough. The NRL case is similar with no evidence of contact but an attempt made and closer to what should happen. There was no need for Toby to get involved in that situation. He was the third man in. He looks around to check the coast is clear and attacks a man already held down by 2 others trying to get at his eyes. It would be a cowardly assault in any other context. It is also unnecessary for such a talented team. If they want to be tough lay harder tackles and run straight at the ball.
When you add that he did the same thing one week before and expressed remorse to get a lesser penalty, the AFL needs to act and stamp this out. Don’t forget that this attracts the AFL’s desired market in Sydney who will be comparing it to NRL. Sydney Mums will be making decisions about whether to let their little boys and gals play this sport.
So regardless of Collingwood, they will need to hold firm on this one.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

exactly the AFL should have gone harder last week to make an example. now the AFL have dug themselves a hole.

 

[jonbe54]

exactly the AFL should have gone harder last week to make an example. now the AFL have dug themselves a hole.

The AFL DELIBERATELY interfered with the due process they themselves laid down to get him off. I'd spit in Gils face if he was anywhere near in range.

 

[10571z]

He gets off 100%.

This is judged as a single case not from what he has done previously. He will be playing

 

[sideswipe]

The AFL DELIBERATELY interfered with the due process they themselves laid down to get him off. I'd spit in Gils face if he was anywhere near in range.

That is a Direct to the Tribunal Offence. Charming.

 

[Apples]

He got off last week, can't see him going for this. He plays.

 

[jonbe54]

He gets off 100%.

This is judged as a single case not from what he has done previously. He will be playing

Then on a single case he is deliberately laying on top of his victim who is trying to protect his vulnerable face from Greene's clawing.

If he gets off it's because the AFL think there are enough people like you that ensures they can get away with it.

 

[ExcitementMachine]

He gets off 100%.

This is judged as a single case not from what he has done previously. He will be playing

Yeah, cause it's case by case basis and the AFL never bend, divert rules on the fly.

 

[TwiggleyFanClub]

If he challenges and gets off, I reckon every single player in the team should get to him at some stage during the game and give him a bit of his own medicine.
See how he likes the shoe on the other foot.

 

[jonbe54]

If he challenges and gets off, I reckon every single player in the team should get to him at some stage during the game and give him a bit of his own medicine.
See how he likes the shoe on the other foot.

30 years ago the opposition players would have been waiting for him in the car park after the game.

 

[BringouttheGimp]

Imagine Greene was up against Zlatan Ibrahimovic re.. he'd have to plan for days to get passed that toucan schnoz of his re.

 

[neilk]

Wasn't the reason the AFL counsel requested a fine last week because he showed genuine remorse? Obviously remorse was only short-term.

 

[jonbe54]

Wasn't the reason the AFL counsel requested a fine last week because he showed genuine remorse? Obviously remorse was only short-term.

The AFL - - INTERFERED to unfairly influence a decision that was contrary to their own guidelines because it would cause an inconvenience to one of the darling little expansion clubs.

In other words just another blatant example of the competition fixing the AFL have been doing for years.

 

[foreigner]

Wasn't the reason the AFL counsel requested a fine last week because he showed genuine remorse? Obviously remorse was only short-term.

Remorse? That was a joke. He just goes about doing what he wants as there are no consequences.

 

[jonbe54]

Wasn't the reason the AFL counsel requested a fine last week because he showed genuine remorse? Obviously remorse was only short-term.

The AFL - - INTERFERED to unfairly influence a decision that was contrary to their own guidelines because it would cause an inconvenience to one of the darling little expansion clubs.

In other words just another blatant example of the competition fixing the AFL have been doing for some time now.

 

[foreigner]

If he challenges and gets off, I reckon every single player in the team should get to him at some stage during the game and give him a bit of his own medicine.
See how he likes the shoe on the other foot.

No. We need to play our own game and back ourselves to win. This is only a distraction which we shouldn't put too much focus on. Let them get distracted with tribunals and what not.

 

[Stoods]

he will get off 100% the dirty grub

it is an absolute joke really

 

[sideswipe]

Wasn't the reason the AFL counsel requested a fine last week because he showed genuine remorse? Obviously remorse was only short-term.

Not sure if that was the case about the reasoning, but Greene did plead guilty. Things are different this week. He has to plead not guilty to take it to the tribunal, so there will be arguments - likely around whether the contact was sufficient to reach low.

 

[hollyfasolo]

Is the Tribunal sitting today or tomorrow?

Tuesday night

 

[Bramax]

We can expect he will be playing.