Jones should get a week or 2 and probably would if it was mid season. We know you have to kill someone to get weeks for finals
MRP / Trib. MRP and Tribunal - 2024 - Grand Final
- Thread starter Chief
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Jul 13, 2015
- 38,629
- 43,771
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Yep. They found a way to make it a fine, despite the fact that it has been a week all year.
The class action lawsuits really cant come fast enough because the AFL should be taken for billions. They simply dont give a shit about the health of the players.
Owies copped a week and Jones cop a fine for near identical incidents with the same outcome just this week let alone previous rounds
- Jul 13, 2015
- 38,629
- 43,771
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
AFL didnt want the Hawks winning by 15 goals in their marquee timeslot.
SHOGUN_31A
Debutant
- Feb 24, 2011
- 121
- 129
- AFL Club
- Sydney
The tackles are different. Owies pins both arms and Jones does not.
Owies doesn’t drive his opponents head into the ground while jones does. No sane person could judge owies to be worse than Jones
- Jul 13, 2015
- 38,629
- 43,771
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Ash didnt either. Jones did quite literally what Ash did. And the AFL fought the appeal and won.
Correct
My wife that hardly watches any AFL, and has fresh eyes on it, thought that Jones tackle was way worse.
Owies-Higgins was very similar to Danger-Walsh, and it makes chase-down tackles very risky for the tackler.
If someone is chase-down tackled both players are going to have lots of forward momentum, and the player getting tackled will almost always be brought to their knees which will cause them to pitch forward head-first. The tackler has no real chance to 'turn' them because they're at full stretch themselves, and in Owies' case he had to actually dive to make the tackle.
Can only assume we're going to see more tackles like these penalised, which is a shame because run-down tackles are some of the best moments in games.
All that aside, as others have mentioned, in terms of force applied I have no idea how Jones' tackle is considered less impact than Owies.
If someone is chase-down tackled both players are going to have lots of forward momentum, and the player getting tackled will almost always be brought to their knees which will cause them to pitch forward head-first. The tackler has no real chance to 'turn' them because they're at full stretch themselves, and in Owies' case he had to actually dive to make the tackle.
Can only assume we're going to see more tackles like these penalised, which is a shame because run-down tackles are some of the best moments in games.
All that aside, as others have mentioned, in terms of force applied I have no idea how Jones' tackle is considered less impact than Owies.
Owies and Higgins both has forward momentum. There is not much else he could do other than somehow let him go on the way down which I'm not convinced is really possible in the heat of battle. Jones on the other hand literally tackles him and then pile drives him into the turf
Well, I guess that settles it then.
An alternative for rundown tackles from behind could be the horse-collar tackle, which can cause far worse injury.
Has this been specifically outlawed in the AFL?
Not that I'd ever seen it, but noticed a free against in our game against Blues when our player did exactly that - grabbed the collar from behind and dragged the player down. It was called for a 'high tackle' despite the tackle being completed under their arms around their torso. When our player went to argue, the umpire grabbed his own collar to demonstrate.
Maybe it's just an "interpretation"?
Its not similar to Danger-Walsh. Dangerfield never had to dive to make the tackle. And he was able to successfully argue that he took steps to try and protect Walsh.
And maybe that's exactly something the AFL wants to remove from the game, diving at an opponent in order to make a run down tackle. When you're doing that, as you stated you can't do anything to protect the player being tackled.
What it was actually similar to was Bedford's tackle. However, the Blues won't be able to successfully go through the Appeal process like GWS did.
Bedford (like Charlie Cameron) got off through the Appeal process by arguing that the Tribunal never took into account the "chance of causing injury". This has simply meant that now the Tribunal's findings include an extra statement where they simply state that the dangerous tackle was likely to cause an injury.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 38,629
- 43,771
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Richards throwing gut punches not sanctioned?
I guess the MRO was too busy trying to get the hottest ticket in town - entry to the Hawks change room post-game.
josephine666
Team Captain
Excuse the dodgy camera work. No damage done but hard to believe this isn't even worth a mention from the match review.
View attachment Video.mov
- Jul 13, 2015
- 38,629
- 43,771
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Ran up to him and threw a punch. Intentional, Body, Low impact - and given the MRO usually increases the severity for Intentional acts, Medium impact.
So Richards should have got a week.
The media said nothing, so the MRO doesnt care. He really has the easiest job in the country.
The Mares Leg
L.A.M.F.
- Jun 30, 2024
- 913
- 972
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Banned
- #1,125
He is a class A goose. Just dead set obtuse when it comes to reading the room.
Similar threads
