MRP / Trib. Lynch To Tribunal

[Sir_Loin]

This is going to be the biggest non event in history. They’ll throw the book but who cares. The AFL will just make a rod for their own back. Which they will do.

 

[Groupie_]

Lynch should walk in, take a big dump and leave.

and play the tape

 

[Daka]

This will be a travesty for the game if he gets weeks when you see Dangerfield getting off for knocking Vlastuin senseless only a few years ago.

 

[Rioli2Rioli]

Gary Rohan Sling Tackle

 

[rfctigerarmy]

Gary Rohan Sling Tackle

View attachment 1656656

Officially?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

As I just posted above here are the guidelines that the MRO is bound by when assessing this incident.

1. Rough Conduct (High Bumps) The AFL Regulations provide that a Player will be guilty of Rough Conduct where in the bumping of an opponent (whether reasonably or unreasonably) the Player causes forceful contact to be made with any part of his body to an opponent’s head or neck. Unless Intentional, such conduct will be deemed to be Careless, unless: » The Player was contesting the ball and it was reasonable for the Player to contest the ball in that way; or » The forceful contact to the opponent’s head or neck was caused by circumstances outside the control of the Player which could not be reasonably foreseen. In the interests of Player safety, the purpose of the rule dealing with high bumps is to reduce, as far as practicable, the risk of head injuries to Players and this purpose needs to be kept firmly in mind by all Players and will guide the application of the rule. Any high bump which constitutes Rough Conduct that has the potential to cause injury will usually be graded at a minimum as Medium Impact, even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low. For the purpose of these Guidelines, head clashes that result when a Player has elected to bump are circumstances that can reasonably be foreseen. Players will ordinarily be liable if they elect to bump if not contesting the ball.

The 2 sections I've highlighted are what sent Lynch to the tribunal and as much as we all say what could Tom possibly do to avoid contact, the MRO/tribunal will say he could have pulled out/side stepped Keath once he realised he was out of position instead of continuing through to make contact with Keath who had also pulled out once he realised he wasn't going to make the contest.

The AFL for better or worse are going to do all they can to stop incidents like this happening and it's going to cause issues like this where a lot of supporters who grew up with blokes getting crunched in packs and nothing coming from it are going to shake their heads when players, not just Richmond players, but players across the league get rubbed out for similar incidents as the season/following seasons unfold.

This is from what you have posted above.

unless: » The Player was contesting the ball and it was reasonable for the Player to contest the ball in that way; or » The forceful contact to the opponent’s head or neck was caused by circumstances outside the control of the Player which could not be reasonably foreseen.

For that condition not to have been met it would need to be accepted that Lynch was able to control the circumstances of the bump AND that he was not contesting the ball, AND that Lynch could have reasonably foreseen the circumstances that arose. To accept that you come back to my calculations and you would have to show Lynch had sufficient time to do some alternative action. You have posted Lynch could have tried to avoid contact with Keath as if that being a viable alternative for Lynch is understood. To me it is extremely doubtful Lynch could have made that choice because insufficient time elapsed between him being fully committed to contesting the ball in the first photo, and Lynch realising he:

a) had misjudged the flight, and

b) in the second photo, was heading for an inevitable collision with Keath - at least as much or more of Keath's making as Lynch's.

I mean why would you find it is incumebnt upon Lynch to try to avoid contact with Keath, but not incumbent upon Keath to try to avoid contact with Lynch?

 

[Rioli2Rioli]

Officially?

have not seen or read anything about it

texted SEN 3 times today with the same text

NOTHING !!!!!

 

[biaseddustyfan]

lynch stops looking at the ball 3 frames before hitting keath, which is a 10th of a second or some shit, so it's not a lined up bump or anything. note that he doesn't even look at keath, he looks the opposite way as he's flinching due to seeing keath in peripheral vision (a reaction he can't control mind you)

also he still tries to contest the ball after being hit by keath (the ball hasn't arrived yet when they hit), raising his arms to reach for it. obviously doesn't get near it due to running under the ball and getting hit, but he's still trying to contest it

they should throw this shit out in 2 seconds and fine the MRO $50k for wasting their time

 

[Lacustrus]

So let the Lawyers, Advocates, Baristas argue the technicalities and Slo-Mo replays of Tommy's brace to protect hisself from possible injury by an illegal tackle front on in a highly physical sport! A protection he is entitled to!
We ought to argue this charge from the oppo side...what was Keath's intention in this collision?!? What was Keath thinking?!?
Where were Keath's eyes looking in this attempt to collide with Lynch?!? Where was Keath moving to and from?!?
Where was his duty of care to Lynch by attempting an illegal front on tackle/block...
And no free kick paid to Tommy for front on tackle/tunnelling..

They need to look at his facial expressions/reaction(s) like in the goal review in Brissy.
Does he look guilty in the video?

 

[Rioli2Rioli]

OK question

Does Lynch hit Keith
or Keith Hit Lynch ?

can you or should you be suspended for a player running into you and knocking himself out ?

 

[rfctigerarmy]

have not seen or read anything about it

texted SEN 3 times today with the same text

NOTHING !!!!!

Is it not the same as Broads? I assume he'll get four weeks.


Which...





...we know he wont.

 

[Karp3_dm]

AFL gonna implement new rule that Lynch has to serve his suspension when he’s back fully fit for match selection

 

[biaseddustyfan]

OK question

Does Lynch hit Keith
or Keith Hit Lynch ?

can you or should you be suspended for a player running into you and knocking himself out ?

keath takes his eyes off the ball 1-2 frames earlier than lynch and hits lynch before the ball arrives

as we review every AFL suspension in 4k super slowmo, and players should be expected to be able to react in a time that's physically impossible for humans, we should suspend keath for 4 weeks for causing a consussion to himself

 

[tigs2010]

AFL gonna implement new rule that Lynch has to serve his suspension when he’s back fully fit for match selection

Just say he’s perfectly good now

 

[_RT_]

Well this is the part that gets interesting

How much time does Lynch have when he gets to the point of no longer being able to contest the ball ?
With that same criteria how about Keith ? He had as much time probably more going by the still pictures to avoid impact , Why didnt he do the same ?
where is his obligation to avoid impact/bump

If you watch the footage, Keath pulls up well before the contest once he realises he can't impact and/or is called out by teammates as strange as that may seem players still call teammates out of contests if another is in better position.

 

[TigerTime17]

Officially?

Rohan offered 1 week and Day offered 2. What a joke.

 

[tigers12]

The bulldogs game could be the last game I ever watch of afl if Lynch gets rubbed out had enough of this bullshit pussy rules and accidental contacts that get players suspended

 

[Rioli2Rioli]

Rohan offered 1 week and Day offered 2. What a joke.

That is a F*** Joke !!!!

 

[Rioli2Rioli]

The bulldogs game could be the last game I ever watch of afl if Lynch gets rubbed out had enough of this bullshit pussy rules and accidental contacts that get players suspended

3 weeks

Lynch gone .......

 

[Gunit]

Death row in a couple of hours.

 

[_RT_]

This is from what you have posted above.

unless: » The Player was contesting the ball and it was reasonable for the Player to contest the ball in that way; or » The forceful contact to the opponent’s head or neck was caused by circumstances outside the control of the Player which could not be reasonably foreseen.

For that condition not to have been met it would need to be accepted that Lynch was able to control the circumstances of the bump AND that he was not contesting the ball, AND that Lynch could have reasonably foreseen the circumstances that arose. To accept that you come back to my calculations and you would have to show Lynch had sufficient time to do some alternative action. You have posted Lynch could have tried to avoid contact with Keath as if that being a viable alternative for Lynch is understood. To me it is extremely doubtful Lynch could have made that choice because insufficient time elapsed between him being fully committed to contesting the ball in the first photo, by flying for the mark and Lynch realising he:

a) had misjudged the flight, and

b) in the second photo, was heading for an inevitable collision with Keath - at least as much or more of Keath's making as Lynch's.

I mean why would you find it is incumebnt upon Lynch to try to avoid contact with Keath, but not incumbent upon Keath to try to avoid contact with Lynch?

All I've done is put forward the alternatives that I believe Christian would have asked himself if Lynch was capable of taking to avoid the contact and in his opinion he thinks Lynch did have those alternatives hence the charge being laid. If our defence advocate can make a good case that Lynch didn't have those options available then he gets off, if not then he gets rubbed out and the debate no doubt continues among some of us. As for me I'm pretty much done with it and will be happy if Lynch gets off, but I'm not going to be shocked or angry if he gets rubbed out because having looked into why the charge was laid I understand how it was reached.

 

[Rioli2Rioli]

Harry McKay

10

Harry Mckay

Age

27

Ht

200cm

Wt

106kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.9

3star

K

7.5

3star

HB

2.4

2star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.4

5star

D

6.6

1star

K

4.6

2star

HB

2.0

1star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.4

2star

G

1.4

5star

D

8.8

3star

K

6.8

3star

HB

2.0

2star

M

4.4

4star

T

0.8

3star

G

2.0

5star

's lawyer

Lynch's Lawyer

 

[Roachy8]

AFL gonna implement new rule that Lynch has to serve his suspension when he’s back fully fit for match selection

Probably
Considering late last year they enacted the “Crippa Brownlow favourite- can’t be suspended so his totally deserved 2 week ban will be served retrospectively during his under 12 season” rule

Allowed for a maximum good news story and enabled him to play and ultimately claim a Charlie…

 

[Roachy8]

All I've done is put forward the alternatives that I believe Christian would have asked himself if Lynch was capable of taking to avoid the contact and in his opinion he thinks Lynch did have those alternatives hence the charge being laid. If our defence advocate can make a good case that Lynch didn't have those options available then he gets off, if not then he gets rubbed out and the debate no doubt continues among some of us. As for me I'm pretty much done with it and will be happy if Lynch gets off, but I'm not going to be shocked or angry if he gets rubbed out because having looked into why the charge was laid I understand how it was reached.

Christian was a lumbering dinosaur when he played - could not get out of the way of a flying nurf ball

 

[TigerTime17]

That is a F*** Joke !!!!

It really does highlight the inconsistencies in punishment. McKay from Blues gets impact upgraded on ‘potential to cause injury’. Rohan had the potential to kill Jiath and he gets 1. This is disgusting.