MRP / Trib. James Sicily - 3 weeks for dangerous tackle - SUSPENSION STANDS!

[SC fish]

Is there still any avenue for appeal outside the AFL, and if so when does that need to be done?

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Is there still any avenue for appeal outside the AFL, and if so when does that need to be done?

Club can get an injunction, and then challenge the validity of suspension in court

No idea on the time frame

Has the club actually made comment yet?

 

[Sturty]

Club can get an injunction, and then challenge the validity of suspension in court

No idea on the time frame

Has the club actually made comment yet?

No comment yet

Surely we take it further.

 

[Sixpence]

As much as I'd love the club to take it further and stick it up the AFL, I think it's done and we now have to suck it up.

There's no justice to be found here.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

As much as I'd love the club to take it further and stick it up the AFL, I think it's done and we now have to suck it up.

There's no justice to be found here.

Lack of comment from the club is interesting.
Reckon our prez and lawyer board members have been at afl house mediating a positive outcome for the AFL

 

[SC fish]

Club can get an injunction, and then challenge the validity of suspension in court

No idea on the time frame

Has the club actually made comment yet?

They'd have to rush it through pretty quick if they want a ruling prior to Sundays game

 

[Steven Tyler]

Shit outcome for a sport that is getting harder and harder to watch, but………


On a more positive note, how quickly did Brockman get to his feet ready for the next contest!

Almost cat-like!

 

[Bugs1977]

s**t outcome for a sport that is getting harder and harder to watch, but………


On a more positive note, how quickly did Brockman get to his feet ready for the next contest!

Almost cat-like!

Cat like you say?



If you know you know

 

[Dazza the Viking]

Going to be a lot of soft tackling in the finals, then again by time the finals come around, they will probably go soft on the dangerous tackle

 

[Mitchell Madness]

They'd have to rush it through pretty quick if they want a ruling prior to Sundays game

They could literally lodge it at the 11th hour.
No court date would be set for at least a month anyway (hence the injunction)

 

[SC fish]

They could literally lodge it at the 11th hour.
No court date would be set for at least a month anyway (hence the injunction)

So Sicily would have served his suspension by then?

 

[eldorado]

Taking it to court is not really our style, I think...

We'll suck it up, as shit as it is...

 

[Mercy Seat]

Ce sera. Hopefully our minds are now on bigger things.

Absolute dogshit of an outcome but I don’t think we argued it that well truth be told.

I just hope we see some consistency with similar decisions moving forward…. Lol

 

[moginie]

Going to be a lot of soft tackling in the finals, then again by time the finals come around, they will probably go soft on the dangerous tackle

My belief is that come round 22 or 23 Bontempelli or Petracca or another Brownlow favourite will do something identical, with the same outcome and nothing will happen to them.

And I despise the fact that the way the tribunal has been run has made me this cynical.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

So Sicily would have served his suspension by then?

The injunction would stop the suspension until the court date, so he could play.
It's really not that difficult to understand

 

[SC fish]

The injunction would stop the suspension until the court date, so he could play.
It's really not that difficult to understand

Ah yeah that makes sense

 

[Agent Smith]

Taking it to court is not really our style, I think...

We'll suck it up, as s**t as it is...

Yeah, the AFL is well aware. I'm sure they love our "don't explain, don't complain" mantra also... easy pickings...

 

[Simon Crawshay]

My belief is that come round 22 or 23 Bontempelli or Petracca or another Brownlow favourite will do something identical, with the same outcome and nothing will happen to them.

And I despise the fact that the way the tribunal has been run has made me this cynical.

Agree 100%, its a fait accompli that its going to occur exactly as you have said.

And because the tribunal use such double talk bs it will be easy for them to justify their decision.

"Oh the Bontempelli tackle which knocked a player out is completely different to the Sicily tackle as Bontempelli only swings the player 359.9 degrees as apposed to the Sicily tackle which was a full 360 degrees rotation"

We should call it for what it is, corruption.

 

[JohnHinckleyJr]

I don’t think they’ve finished yet. They won’t be happy until they have a game so soft, so benign, so sterile it’ll make AFL-X resemble cage fighting. I have no idea why an organisation would want to ambush its own product but that’s a dictatorship for you. The peasants and workers must suffer for the AFL’s greater good, i.e. pockets.

Tackles will soon go, no coach wants to commit a player to ******ing another player if it’s too risky to pin their arms. Tackler is out of the mainstream contest, tacklee is still able to get a handball away. You’ll probably see players trying to corral or knock the ball clear rather than commit to a fruitless and risky tackle.

The next time Joe Daniher or Jack Reiwoldt collect a head with a knee going for overly ambitious marks and a concussion results, let’s see the narrative from AFL house. Deliberate football act with a resulting concussion. Hmmmm. Over to you Andrew. You and your mates are going to run out of advertising material.

I am amazed the hanger wasn't the first to go to be honest one big knee to the skull will kill ..

And next the soccer kick will go cop a way ward one of them kinda like Jeff white ..

 

[Yardie]

This is the crux of the issue. If you are caught in a tackle and you don't dispose of it correctly straight away it should be HTB. Bet you'd suddenly see the number of tackles drop because players would be getting rid of it earlier.

Clarkson has been saying this for years and I agree with him. Just pay the free kicks that are already in the rules. It reduces congestion ("Players are like seagulls fighting for the chip" - Clarkson) and would limit the tackling required. Remember when a player was rotated 360 and it was holding the ball.

 

[offtherails9]

This is the crux of the issue. If you are caught in a tackle and you don't dispose of it correctly straight away it should be HTB. Bet you'd suddenly see the number of tackles drop because players would be getting rid of it earlier.

I find this a really hard one though because how would it be interpreted by the umpires?
The idea of the game of footy is that you do want to reward the player courageous enough to win the ball first, and if they are infringed upon (held, hit high), they receive a free kick. But if people are putting their head over it then immediately being awarded a free against, does that then encourage players to not win the ball and instead concede possession?

 

[cyrilicious]

Going to be a lot of soft tackling in the finals, then again by time the finals come around, they will probably go soft on the dangerous tackle

absolutely no way anyone will get suspended for that tackle in finals. esp if its by a swans or cats player

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Clarkson has been saying this for years and I agree with him. Just pay the free kicks that are already in the rules. It reduces congestion ("Players are like seagulls fighting for the chip" - Clarkson) and would limit the tackling required. Remember when a player was rotated 360 and it was holding the ball.

I tend to blame umpiring for the way the game is being played. Notice i said "umpiring", not umpires. Umpires are only performing under instruction from the game's overlords. They have created a situation where a player is tackled with the ball, but they wait to see if the player can dispose of it, thus creating Clarko's "seagulls fighting for a chip" scenario.

The tackler is not rewarded immediately so therefore feel they have to make it clear to the umpire by wrestling their opponent to the ground. This brings the sling tackle into play.

 

[Stranglers]

I find this a really hard one though because how would it be interpreted by the umpires?
The idea of the game of footy is that you do want to reward the player courageous enough to win the ball first, and if they are infringed upon (held, hit high), they receive a free kick. But if people are putting their head over it then immediately being awarded a free against, does that then encourage players to not win the ball and instead concede possession?

You are rewarded because you get possession and then have a chance to get it off to a team-mate on the outside. If you are tackled before you have a chance to do so, it's play on of course so the situation remains neutral. But if you have a chance to get rid of it and get tackled, unless you dispose of it correctly immediately, it should be a free kick against you.

Umpires are erring far too much in favour of the player with the ball - if 50+ tackles are executed in a without a single one deemed HTB (as happens quite regularly) then either players have absolutely no idea how to tackle effectively or it suggests the rule isn't being applied correctly.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

You are rewarded because you get possession and then have a chance to get it off to a team-mate on the outside. If you are tackled before you have a chance to do so, it's play on of course so the situation remains neutral. But if you have a chance to get rid of it and get tackled, unless you dispose of it correctly immediately, it should be a free kick against you.

Umpires are erring far too much in favour of the player with the ball - if 50+ tackles are executed in a without a single one deemed HTB (as happens quite regularly) then either players have absolutely no idea how to tackle effectively or it suggests the rule isn't being applied correctly.

This.
It slows down play so much.

Also, constantly making players go over the mark. If they play on, they play on!