MRP / Trib. Hawkins 2 weeks, Duncan 1

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

They both should know better. They were undisciplined acts. Scott should also fine them for the lack of discipline. I think Barassi used to do that to his charges at North when they were silly enough to get suspended.
 
Dear GFC,

I thought you should have challenged last week, but if you do not challenge Duncan's ban then you are utterly spineless.
I hope we do. If anything it will draw media attention to Papley diving.
I actually thought Papley could get a warning for diving. Cannot believe this.
One thing that is holding soccer back in this country is people can't stand the diving. AFL is encouraging it. Crazy.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Only surprises Hawkins getting 2 instead of 1 and Mumford is allowed to bump but others can't. Mumford lined him up should be more than 1
 
Duncan is risking 2 weeks by challenging.
So? We're 2.5 games clear of missing finals and those that can displace us won't.
We don't have Duncan on Saturday. We lose.

On exposed evidence we are likely to lose to Collingwood regardless so nothing to lose challenging.
 
So? We're 2.5 games clear of missing finals and those that can displace us won't.
We don't have Duncan on Saturday. We lose.

On exposed evidence we are likely to lose to Collingwood regardless so nothing to lose challenging.
Sure, but was replying to a post stating that we have nothing to lose by challenging. We do, we could lose Duncan for an extra week.

Edit: ah, didn't realise that Hawk was 3 down to 2 as well.
 
Hawkins I can accept. He's acting like a dumb buffoon but Duncan.
Get ****** AFL, gut punches have been fined all year.
Not when you read the MRP report you can't accept the Hawkins verdict

Tom Hawkins, Geelong Cats, has been charged with striking Dane Rampe, Sydney Swans, during the second quarter of the Round 20 match between the Geelong Cats and the Sydney Swans played at Domain Stadium on Friday August 4, 2017.

In summary, due to a previous poor record, his two-match sanction is increased by one further game to three matches and he can accept a two-match sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available video evidence and a medical report from the Sydney Swans Football Club, the incident was assessed as intentional contact with low impact to the face. The incident was classified as a two-match sanction. A poor record over the last two seasons increases the penalty by one-game to a three-match sanction. An early plea enables the player to accept a two-match sanction.

Mitch Duncan, Geelong Cats, has been charged with a striking Tom Papley, Sydney Swans, during the fourth quarter of the Round 20 match between the Geelong Cats and the Sydney Swans, played at Domain Stadium on Friday August 4, 2017.

In summary he can accept one-match sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available video evidence and a medical report from the Sydney Swans Football Club, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct with medium impact to the body. The incident was classified as a two-match sanction. The player has no applicable record which impacts the penalty. An early plea enables the player to accept a one-match sanction.

Where is gods name did Hawkins hit Rampe's face? How is it worth 3 games?
Plus we have a ready made ground for appeal in that if we can't rely on the MRP to understand where the game was played how can we trust their deliberation finding?
 
Last edited:
They get the full sanction, which is typically one week higher than what they get for accepting the MRP verdict. That is, Duncan would miss 2 weeks rather than one.
Not necessarily. I'll show you the rule later on.

To get a week it must be medium impact. If we go to the tribunal and plead guilty to the punch but argue force down to low impact and fined then under their tribunal guidelines you're still eligible for the guilty plea discount. Only forfeit it if you flat out deny wrongdoing.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Hawkins 2 weeks, Duncan 1

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top