MRP / Trib. How many Weeks for Rioli?

[masai tu]

What ever your view on this case, let’s just see if this type of incident is viewed consistently this season.

Me thinks the umps / MRP / tribunal, couldn’t lie straight in bed.

 

[VicBased]

I suppose we could settle all this and just give Rowell the free kick....That should stop the whinging huh?

 

[Lia]

The media coverage on this has been so bizarre with how one sided it has been, especially Fox Footy. Either they have been provided with an agenda from the AFL or they are trying to distract from something else (Hi Tom?). Very vocal and one sided coverage for not much.

 

[BringOn2017]

The media coverage on this has been so bizarre with how one sided it has been, especially Fox Footy. Either they have been provided with an agenda from the AFL or they are trying to distract from something else (Hi Tom?). Very vocal and one sided coverage for not much.

Yes, an AFL agenda because a sports reporter got fired. Not the far more likely and logical reason, that someone jumped in the air had taken his eyes off the football and hit someone high with their body at force, didn't get suspended in 2022. Completing contradicts the whole protect the head thing that has been happening for 15 odd years now.

 

[Lia]

Yes, an AFL agenda because a sports reporter got fired. Not the far more likely and logical reason, that someone jumped in the air had taken his eyes off the football and hit someone high with their body at force, didn't get suspended in 2022. Completing contradicts the whole protect the head thing that has been happening for 15 odd years now.

1 - This did not happen, rewatch it closely and get a clue.
2 - What protect the head thing? The one where players like Trent Cotchin are able to get a penalty free snipes at opposition midfielders during Prelim finals? The AFL has consistently ducked and dived on this issue depending on what month it is and the mood of the day. Funny how there is currently more coverage about Dan Venables and concussion, so the AFL needs to be seen to be doing something, hence this ridiculous outcry over a marking contest.

 

[kaiserchief13]

No, it's just the lens you choose to view it through

Put a Hawthorn or North Melbourne player in Willie Rioli's shoes with exactly the same MRO & tribunal outcomes and there would be EXACTLY the same media uproar, and the same defensiveness from Hawthorn or North fans...

Except we wouldn't be able to cling to any long-held paranoid fantasies of "Vic bias" like you guys.

We would have to think of another name for the conspiracy theory.

When media are calling taking the case to the tribunal ridiculous and then the player gets off, they are either ridiculously bias or have no idea about the current rules, which is it?

 

[Whiskers]

I’ve had a change of heart as I’ve actually watched this properly.
He shouldn’t be suspended because he was in the contest right up until the very last millisecond.
He had to jump to get above Rowell if he is to mark it.
I’m very impressed the tribunal overturned this.
It’s unlucky Rioli got into such a position, he had to be going hard for the mark and is unlucky Rowell is courageous as hell. Also lucky Rowell wasn’t knocked out but sometimes it’s impossible to avoid a situation like this. Imo he could not have done any better to not knock him out.
I applaud both players.

Now the outraged who wanted him suspended need to calm down especially the AFL360 crew as much as I like Whateley, settle down.
We know the way rules are written but common sense prevailed.
Bravo tribunal.

 

[Whiskers]

The media coverage on this has been so bizarre with how one sided it has been, especially Fox Footy. Either they have been provided with an agenda from the AFL or they are trying to distract from something else (Hi Tom?). Very vocal and one sided coverage for not much.

It’s nuts. I got sucked in by it also!
I feel ashamed.

 

[SuperMal]

I’ve had a re-think on this also.

It may be that WR could have assumed Rowell would do as he did..jump and turn to protect himself while going for the ball.

At worst this would have left Rowells ribs exposed but reduced the chance of head injury significantly.

It may also be that Kane Cornes

Kane Cornes

Age

41

Ht

183cm

Wt

78kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.5

5star

K

12.5

5star

HB

11.0

5star

M

5.2

5star

T

3.3

5star

CL

2.6

4star

No current season stats available

D

13.0

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

5.4

4star

M

3.0

3star

T

1.2

3star

is correct...that the real-time footage reduces the appearance of a ‘charge’ and makes it more of a legit contest.

What I do not accept is that Rioli made any real effort for the ball once he was in the air.

So was WR entitled to jump for the ball, yes.

Was he entitled to give up the attempt to nark and turn into a charge? Strictly no....but if he’d raised his knee which is legal...Rowell would still be in surgery.

 

[Sttew]

I’ve had a change of heart as I’ve actually watched this properly.
He shouldn’t be suspended because he was in the contest right up until the very last millisecond.
He had to jump to get above Rowell if he is to mark it.
I’m very impressed the tribunal overturned this.
It’s unlucky Rioli got into such a position, he had to be going hard for the mark and is unlucky Rowell is courageous as hell. Also lucky Rowell wasn’t knocked out but sometimes it’s impossible to avoid a situation like this. Imo he could not have done any better to not knock him out.
I applaud both players.

Now the outraged who wanted him suspended need to calm down especially the AFL360 crew as much as I like Whateley, settle down.
We know the way rules are written but common sense prevailed.
Bravo tribunal.

That's how Gil McLachlan has reconciled it. He says the AFL advocated for a suspension, but the Tribunal overturned it and the AFL did not consider it worthwhile appealing because of the "in the contest" argument.

 

[SloppyJoe]

I’ve had a re-think on this also.

It may be that LR could have assumed Rowell would do as he did..jump and turn to protect himself while going for the ball.

At worst this would have left Rowells ribs exposed but reduced the chance of head injury significantly.

It may also be that Kane Cornes is correct...that the real-time footage reduces the appearance of a ‘charge’ and makes it more of a legit contest.

What I do not accept is that Rioli made any real effort for the ball once he was in the air.

So was LR entitled to jump for the ball, yes.

Was he entitled to give up the attempt to nark and turn into a charge? Strictly no....but if he’d raised his knee which is legal...Rowell would still be in surgery.

My guess is that if Rioli doesn't turn and instead goes full blooded for the mark, then his raised knee goes straight through Rowell's face. But we'll never know.

 

[SuperMal]

My guess is that if Rioli doesn't turn and instead goes full blooded for the mark, then his raised knee goes straight through Rowell's face. But we'll never know.

Yes....he'd still be in surgery..as I said. Its an odd game where a pointed knee to the ribs is considered legal...

 

[MrBarry]

Jesus it's a contact sport, there are going to be collisions and impacts.

As long as one player is not being absolutely reckless and looking to hurt the opposition, just ****ing leave it.

Every single player knows when they take the field they are going to be coming into contact with other players. The AFL is trying far too hard to micro manage.

 

[Lia]

There is no argument about Vic media bias. It's engrained, systematic.

So many factual examples it isn't funny.

Remember the 2015 GF week. Do you want to guess what some of the Vic media ran with pre grand final? The Eagles drug scandal from 10 years earlier. TEN years earlier without a single player of that era playing.

Now tell us, why would they do that? What the relevance to the 2015 grand final what happened 10 years earlier. Piss poor mud raking at it's blatant finest from the Vic media. Gutter journalism.

Can you explain a single valid reason why they would run with that story?

Off topic, I'm not a big fan of a lot of decisions made in life by Daniel Chick but he was chucked under the bus something fierce by Rita Panahi and the Herald Sun. No regard for a person with obvious health issues, mental and physical.

 

[Section 5]

Thought i would check out the main board on the Rioli incident.
The big issue for me was that only one footage version and images was repeated time and again over various media outlets
Below 3 images taken from AFL's initial video on the incident
These images are taken in the first 5 seconds of this video.
That's all they show on the video . The rest is what has been played repeatedly on the media

.....
Bottom image
Ball kicked from bottom right where WCE player on ground.
Rowell clearly going back with the flight as head looking up.
Rioli coming in quickly from the right
Middle image
Rioli leaves ground hands out in front to take a standard chest mark
Top Image
Rioli slightly changes direction. Only he can answer why

Was it to protect Rowell, protect himself or to hurt Rowell

This all unfolded in 1 or 2 seconds. Look at where players are in bottom image to top image

 

[Has No Rules]

Yes, an AFL agenda because a sports reporter got fired. Not the far more likely and logical reason, that someone jumped in the air had taken his eyes off the football and hit someone high with their body at force, didn't get suspended in 2022. Completing contradicts the whole protect the head thing that has been happening for 15 odd years now.

You like them are confusing bump logic with a marking contest

Next time one of your players flies for a mark and collides with an opposition player I fully expect you and the Vic media demand a 2 week suspension
Dont be a hypocrite !!

 

[SnusCG]

Take your suns glasses off, of course he's going to jump to out mark his opponent

That's not the debate though is it, and it's just shifting the goalposts.

Is a player likely to try and out mark his opponent? yes

If the player is late to the contest, leaves the ground and elects to bump the other player while collecting them high, should they then receive a suspension? also yes

 

[Drought Break]

There is no argument about Vic media bias. It's engrained, systematic.

So many factual examples it isn't funny.

Remember the 2015 GF week. Do you want to guess what some of the Vic media ran with pre grand final? The Eagles drug scandal from 10 years earlier. TEN years earlier without a single player of that era playing.

Now tell us, why would they do that? What the relevance to the 2015 grand final what happened 10 years earlier. Piss poor mud raking at it's blatant finest from the Vic media. Gutter journalism.

Can you explain a single valid reason why they would run with that story?

You had a look at the amount of negative articles Robbo writes against the Pies?

 

[SuperMal]

You had a look at the amount of negative articles Robbo writes against the Pies?

Touche.

 

[Obeanie1]

You had a look at the amount of negative articles Robbo writes against the Pies?

Not recently. He's on my ignor list.

 

[Obeanie1]

That's not the debate though is it, and it's just shifting the goalposts.

Is a player likely to try and out mark his opponent? yes

If the player is late to the contest, leaves the ground and elects to bump the other player while collecting them high, should they then receive a suspension? also yes

Depends how late doesnt it?

And electing to bump? That isnt black and white either.

As Healy described his veiw was Rioli was jumping to mark and at the last milli second realised he was 2nd, turn his head and body to avoid front on contact and a head clash.

The tribunal had to decide was it all a planned intended act or was it a last second adjustment to avoid a worse outcome.

What was Rioli's intent.

Hense the split in opinions on this. Each person has their own.

 

[Obeanie1]

‘Nothing’ is all it deserved of my time and energy,

Obviously you went for a nana nap. You seem to have found lots of energy. Maybe you are sleep posting because what you posted after that is a rambling ditrade of personal insults with no substance.

For someone claiming to be older and wiser you dont act like it.

 

[Farang83150]

Loved seeing how absolutely gutted Whatley and Robinson were when Lewis explained it to them.

 

[Obeanie1]

The sooner people realize that the Tribunal doesn't rule on the action, but rules on the outcome- the sooner people will stop getting worked up over the same discrepancies each and every week of every year.

If Rowell had of got concussed or suffered an injury like Duursma did - then Rioli would have been directly sent to the tribunal and likely got 4+ weeks.

The precedent has been set for years, and one of the biggest ones I can remember, is when every player that dished out dangerous tackles that resulted in their head hitting the ground with arms pinned,, was getting a week...then Burgoyne slammed Dangerfield into the ground and he was down for a while...but eventually he got up because he's built like a brick shithouse, and suffered no ill effects. The next week I think, Nic Nat tackled someone small and they got concussed - and he was ruled out.

The AFL has obviously made a conscious decision to 'look' like they're doing something, whenever it comes to serious incidents - so when future legal issues arise like this CTE saga that's emerging, they have a defence of sorts.

I said it back then, and it's as clear as day to me now - the AFL has basically said 'if you're tough enough to take a hit, then we won't ban you based on the action.'

Same goes for Draper striking Ratugolea on the weekend. Merrett did that a few years back and broke a player's ribs - and copped weeks. Draper does it to Sav, and he goes off the ground and plays out the match - cops a fine. The situations are no different, but one player copped ill effects and the other didn't - so Merrett was given weeks and Draper was not.

If the results were reversed, and Robinson had of collided with say a bull like Ollie Wines, and Rioli had collided with say a small player like Izak Rankine and the former group both got up and played the game out/the latter incident left Rankine with an injury - I can 99.9% guarantee you that they would have said 'no case to answer' for Robinson and 'weeks' for Rioli.

This is the only template the AFL operate on, and it's getting more and more apparent each and every week, IMO.

Well Willie tackled and concussed LDU.

Will he get weeks for that?

The player tackled was injured.

 

[Obeanie1]

Yes, an AFL agenda because a sports reporter got fired. Not the far more likely and logical reason, that someone jumped in the air had taken his eyes off the football and hit someone high with their body at force, didn't get suspended in 2022. Completing contradicts the whole protect the head thing that has been happening for 15 odd years now.

Did Crotin knock out Shiels and got off 15 years ago?

Nah, didnt think so. And that wasnt even a marking contest.

In a combat contact sport like AFL with contested marking legal these things will happen from time to time.

Still legal to run, jump and hit a player in the head going for a mark = ongoing concussions.