MRP / Trib. Guerra offered three weeks

[NetworkNerd]

IF you challenge it, do you have to want 0 weeks or can you challenge it to reduce it by 1 or 2 weeks. 3 weeks id just fking stupid. MRP once again leave us all baffled

I'm not a lawyer but I would have thought you could challenge the grading from intentional down to reckless and bring it down to 1 or 2 weeks. Id go with that if I was the hawks administrator.

 

[MrFujiMoto]

I agree with the MRP looking at the draw before the decision. Cheney to come in for GWS and then Hodgey in for Bullies and Pies. Burgers/Suckers could also take Goo's spot as designated kick in. Will miss Goo but as someone said it is probably an area we can cover a bit.

 

[SJT76]

Sorry, I'm not that bright, and don't get this:

Guerra:

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Carlton Football Club, the incident was assessed as reckless conduct (two points), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Three offence, drawing 400 demerit points and a four-match sanction. He has no existing good or bad record. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 300 points and a three-match sanction.​

Walker:

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Richmond Football Club, the incident was assessed as reckless conduct (two points), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Three offence, drawing 325 demerit points and a three-match sanction. He has an existing bad record of two matches suspended within the last three years, increasing the penalty by 20 per cent to 390 demerit points and a three-match sanction. He also has 39.06 demerit points carried over from within the last 12 months, increasing the penalty by 429.06 points and a four-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 321.80 points and a three-match sanction.​

Shouldn't Goo get 325, less a 25% discount = 2 weeks?

 

[snap9782]

He definitely deserved a suspension.
Guerra was looking at the ball but went passed it with the full intention of collecting Betts.
No attempt to hide his intention which is ultimately what cost him. I think 3 with an early guilty plea is a little excessive and if he had of collected the ball I think the MRP would have looked at the incident more favorably.
I have mixed feelings over his and lewis's suspension, they were both incredibly stupid from senior members of the team but we seem to play our best football when on that edge.

Give Cheney a go as that attacking small defender. After all, he will hopefully be Brent's long term replacement.
Time to step up

 

[SJT76]

Oh, and Goddard:

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the North Melbourne Football Club, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of seven activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Four offence, drawing 325 demerit points and a three-match sanction.​

WTF??

 

[Stratton_Gun]

I'm not a lawyer but I would have thought you could challenge the grading from intentional down to reckless and bring it down to 1 or 2 weeks. Id go with that if I was the hawks administrator.

Reading through the report on AFL.com. It got a total of 6 points. 2 for reckless, 2 for high and 2 for medium impact (debatable ). that gets 400 points and he can redue it by25% with a early plea which is 300 (3 games). The system is shit. No common sense involved. If I were Hawthorn I would be tempted to appeal and show Kelly's from a few weeks ago and then the Guerra incident. Then ask someone to explain how one orginally got 4 games and the other got 0

 

[sydney_hawka]

Doesn't Betty play it up for the camera too...
Personally I reckon Goo's hip hits Bettys shoulder rather than head, but hard to tell. Stutter stepping it seems to support this I feel?

I don't think Goo got him in the head either. If you look at the vision closely, Betts head doesn't even move when contact is made. Contact was made to the shoulder and with not a whole lot of force. Shit decision by a bunch of inconsistent muppets.

 

[spudmaster]

SJT76
The activation points are worth different amounts depending on what incident they come under.
You can read about their gradin system on the afl site

http://mm.afl.com.au/Portals/0/2012/AFL-Tribunal-Booklet-2012.pdf

 

[porley]

Sorry, I'm not that bright, and don't get this:

Guerra:


Walker:


Shouldn't Goo get 325, less a 25% discount = 2 weeks?

Was thinking the exact same thing???

Based on that he should get his 3 weeks reduced to 2 which seems about right.

If so that'd work out well - rest him up for the next couple and have him fit and firing for the big 3 games from round 17.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Hawthorn has the choice of accepting the three-week suspension or challenging the decision.

If Hawthorn challenges, it has the choice of arguing that the charge should be withdrawn (no chance) or that one of the elements to the charge should be downgraded.

Based on the vision I saw on Channel 7 on Friday night, Hawthorn has no chance, so they should simply accept the decision and move in.

At least Hodge is waiting in the wings to return.

 

[Hawkas1988]

Let's be honest here, he shoudln't have done it and he did hit Betts with a fair bit of force, I was hoping 2 weeks but aren't suprised by 3.

Silly and stupid but I like our hard edge atm it's great to see

 

[NiceJacketJeff]

At the time I felt he would be in for 2 weeks. 3 seems excessive.

 

[satan1]

Sorry, I'm not that bright, and don't get this:

Guerra:


Walker:


Shouldn't Goo get 325, less a 25% discount = 2 weeks?

Activation points determines the level of the the offence, not the type. I assume the charge for a high bump front on (whatever that is classified under) carries a higher penalty than a rough conduct or striking charge.

 

[Gralin]

I hate the MRP system, it is so all over the place with how the same grading, ie reckless, medium, high can have 3 different results depending on tackle, hit or bump.

Considering the ball was in play and it was a bump you would think that would not be considered the same as a strike...

Think Goo was stupid and was expecting him to have 2 weeks off with an early plea. The only thing the Hawks could do is contest and try and get it reduced to 2 weeks, not sure they will see the worth in that risk, expect we won't be seeing Goo for the next 3

 

[spudmaster]

Page 7 of that link i posted above tables the levels and classifications of each offense.

Bumping/front on contact is the 5th one down and is graded as heavily as kicking and misconducted (eye gouging)

 

[MinerBoy]

I thought Guerra would and should get a suspension. He wanted to hurt Betts and he did, right across the head.
But you've highlighted the question I really want the answer to, but never will get.

Yep. If they want to penalise players for that stuff, then that's fine and Guerra cops his whack.

But the MRP need to be held accountable at some stage. How is that that when possible suspendable incidents happen involving Hawthorn, the MRP never miss, but when they involve Geelong...............

Kelly's was worse IMO. Full front on and copped him flush.

Anyway...........not unexpected.

 

[StevenwellerHFC]

Soft as f*ck, but oh well, cop it sweet.

 

[satan1]

Page 7 of that link i posted above tables the levels and classifications of each offense.

Bumping/front on contact is the 5th one down and is graded as heavily as kicking and misconducted (eye gouging)

Thanks for posting, it's sad when a misguided bump is assessed so much worse than striking.

On reflection the Tribunal demerit point system needs a total overhaul, whilst the MRP isn't great the system they are forced to use is inherently flawed in my eyes

 

[Henry Jr]

People forget about adding on of the Carbon Tax.

 

[MadDawg]

I thought he went to get the ball expecting Betts to go in hard resulting in them hitting bodies over the ball. Instead Betts pulled out of the contest Guerra over shot the ball and collected Betts. I dont know, to me it looked accidental whilst genuinely going for the ball, got him a bit high - sometimes in these situations I feel it could be just a free kick.

 

[Brant]

Straight swap Hodge?

Hope so.

Not sure it'll work out that way but that's what I'd do.

 

[TAITA]

Any kid whom has ever played the game under any sort of decent tutelage would have been taught that if you commit yourself to the ball you will not get hurt. Sit back and take the easy option however, and that is the textbook example of what will happen.

I'm disgusted in Betts effort personally.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

What a load.

 

[Gralin]

I can see one some cases why they would assess a bump as worse than a strike. Pretty safe to say in the history of the game the worst injuries have come from bump type contact, eg Dunstalls face, Hird's face, Plugger on Craven up in Sydney etc

Not sure on Goo's chances of getting it changed from Reckless to negligent or getting the force lowered or the high changed to body

 

[Baz_hawk]

Expected him to get 2 weeks, 1 with an early plea. Yes it was a stupid thing to do but he never took his eye off the ball the whole time and eddy had his head down and pretty much squibbed the contest. Happened not far from me at the ground and watching it live Guerra didn't even glance up. He knew Betts was there and it wasn't a necessary hit but 4 weeks is a joke. The MRP needs to be disbanded and the tribunal should be how every player goes through to receive their suspension. The points system is flawed and the decisions are often made based on opinion which is a joke in a professional sport. Let the player(s) plead their case and sort it out properly. The MRP also has a huge effect on the tribunal at the moment since you basically go into the tribunal with a guilty sign over your head.