Ivan Soldo v Mason Cox

[Elton Johns Wig]

It simply comes down to the force which was graded as low by Christian. That should have been the argument at the tribunal and he was a good chance of getting the charge downgraded to a fine.

Or cleared.

 

[_RT_]

Two entirely different incidents that shouldn't have been compared from the beginning.

Both off the ball incidents, both involve a significantly taller player making high contact with the opponents head/neck(high contact guidelines). The only difference is Cox deliberately changed direction and bumped an unsuspecting player high. Soldo braced for impact after the opposition player initiated contact.

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

Cockarfitt and I could literally count on one finger the times we've agreed on something.

And this is it.

I laid it out clearly earlier on. This was a bonehead defence from RFC.

 

[_RT_]

No it hasn't. The MRP guidelines are black and white and fairly simple to understand.

Richmond simply ****** it up by not contesting the force of the contact. It was intentional - he didn't need to raise the forearm/elbow - as it was avoidable.

It simply comes down to the force which was graded as low by Christian. That should have been the argument at the tribunal and he was a good chance of getting the charge downgraded to a fine.

Cox was charged with an off-the-ball bump that was deemed to be intentional with low impact and high contact.

The 211cm Magpie pleaded not guilty to the charge, with his legal counsel arguing that he braced for contact with Grimes, rather than electing to bump.

So why wasn't Cox suspended?





Can clearly see a raised elbow rather than his arms being tucked in as Gleeson suggests a reasonable person would have done.

 

[living_in_syd]

Lol at tribunal

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Any intentional hit that’s judged as intentional which makes contact to the head is a suspension so the Tigers never “****** it up” by arguing it as careless.

If Fyfe and Ablett were seen as careless I don’t see how Soldo’s was any more intentional than his.

You can see him instantly apologetic as soon as he made contact. Soldo’s arms were at the level of his chest and he carelessly pushed into him without taking their size into account.

No mate, Fyfe and Ablett were both cleared due to insufficient force which is what Soldo should have contested. He'd have probably been cleared too given Worpel got straight back up and played out the game.

Cockarfitt and I could literally count on one finger the times we've agreed on something.

And this is it.

I laid it out clearly earlier on. This was a bonehead defence from RFC.

When I heard you were contesting the grading from intentional to careless rather than the impact, I knew Soldo was in trouble.

Why on earth would they do that?

 

[Ron The Bear]

No it hasn't. The MRP guidelines are black and white and fairly simple to understand.

Richmond simply ****** it up by not contesting the force of the contact. It was intentional - he didn't need to raise the forearm/elbow - as it was avoidable.

It simply comes down to the force which was graded as low by Christian. That should have been the argument at the tribunal and he was a good chance of getting the charge downgraded to a fine.

Are you ****ing ******ed? It was so obvious from Soldo's reaction that it was NOT intentional. He immediately throws up his hands in apology and says sorry to Worpel.

I hope we appeal this on "the decision was so unreasonable that no tribunal acting reasonably could have come to that decision having regard to the evidence before it" grounds.

If not I'm sitting the game out in silent protest. I don't have to go along with this shit.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Are you ******* ******ed? It was so obvious from Soldo's reaction that it was NOT intentional. He immediately throws up his hands in apology and says sorry to Worpel.

I hope we appeal this on "the decision was so unreasonable that no tribunal acting reasonably could have come to that decision having regard to the evidence before it" grounds.

If not I'm sitting the game out in silent protest. I don't have to go along with this ****.

It was most certainly intentional regardless of any apology.

 

[Ron The Bear]

It was most certainly intentional regardless of any apology.

Wouldn't have a problem with him getting a week in Round 1, but there have been multiple precedents this year that were treated differently.

 

[_RT_]

It was most certainly intentional regardless of any apology.

So why wasn't Cox suspended?

Intentionally changed direction to make contact with Grimes. Was charged with intentional, high contact and low impact.

Defence was he braced for impact, same defence as Soldo used.

Again the inconsistency of the tribunal is what causes the outrage.

 

[romeohwho]

Go check who the first one to bring up ablett was....

Yep - I did. Post 3 . Richmond supporter.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

So why wasn't Cox suspended?

Intentionally changed direction to make contact with Grimes. Was charged with intentional, high contact and low impact.

Defence was he braced for impact, same defence as Soldo used.

Again the inconsistency of the tribunal is what causes the outrage.

Different incidents. Soldo didn't brace for contact. He raised his elbow and struck Worpel in the head ... it wasn't a brace at all.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Different incidents. Soldo didn't brace for contact. He raised his elbow and struck Worpel in the head ... it wasn't a brace at all.

Rubbish. Worpel came into his path so it can't be intentional. He raised his arm to brace for contact. Worpel actually dropped his knees at the last split second to get high contact in a bid to probably milk another free for a shot at goal. So it was clearly never intentional.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

All this jargon bullshit of intentional, impact, intent, potential blah blah is what has made a mockery of the whole thing in today’s footy.
Bring back common sense,no nonsense tribunal hearings and get rid of all this nonsense.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Rubbish. Worpel came into his path so it can't be intentional. He raised his arm to brace for contact. Worpel actually dropped his knees at the last split second to get high contact in a bid to probably milk another free for a shot at goal. So it was clearly never intentional.

No, It's not rubbish at all.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

No, It's not rubbish at all.

Worpel dropping his knees before impact. Are you sure you're not spouting crap?

 

[_RT_]

Different incidents. Soldo didn't brace for contact. He raised his elbow and struck Worpel in the head ... it wasn't a brace at all.

It was a brace similar to how Ablett braced for contact with Wright the previous week, using the bumper bar technique that all players are taught.

 

[10571z]

Speechless. Absolutely horrible decision. Really feel for soldo

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

It was a brace similar to how Ablett braced for contact with Wright the previous week, using the bumper bar technique that all players are taught.

Ablett didn't brace for contact.

 

[Big Hotdog]

Poor call.
Soldo can count himself unlucky

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Well, be interested how this goes. Richmond not contesting the gradings of low impact high contact!!!!

Contesting intentional.


Would have thought they were better off contesting force

Absolutely baffled reading the article. Force was clearly the play here.
No idea who your daft QC was this time but i'd be declining his services next time.

 

[_RT_]

Ablett didn't brace for contact.

So why were his arms up then?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Absolutely baffled reading the article. Force was clearly the play here.
No idea who your daft QC was this time but i'd be declining his services next time.

Why? It actually wasn't intentional. So why shouldn't they argue that?

 

[Sterge]

Absolutely baffled reading the article. Force was clearly the play here.
No idea who your daft QC was this time but i'd be declining his services next time.

Board full of lawyers and we hire this guy every time without fail

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Why? It actually wasn't intentional. So why shouldn't they argue that?

Intentional v careless is debatable and line ball. It fell on the other side of the coin this time.
Impact down to insufficient was the safer argument.