Barrybran
Premium Platinum
- Jun 18, 2016
- 54,396
- 103,466
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Perth Scorchers
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
MRP / Trib. MRP and Tribunal - 2024 - Grand Final
- Thread starter Chief
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Speculating if it is likely to cause an injury should only be needed if there was no injury in the first place but could have been.
When an injury actually occurs there is no need to speculate on its likelihood of occurring.
So he got off on a technicality.
mpal6
Norm Smith Medallist
So he did slam him but got off on a technicality. I am more confused than ever now.
mpal6
Norm Smith Medallist
Like I said earlier, there is no "slam". Charlie is bearhugging Duggan and Duggan is turning, leaning back, trying to pull away. Once they both lost footing, injury could've gone either way.
Exactly what ex-players, commentators, people who've played the game at the top level have been saying in tv, talkback for last 2 days.
Elixuh
See you on the 9th green at 9
He got off on a technicality in the sense that the tribunal at first instance didn’t actually properly consider the charge. So who knows what the outcome might have been if it actually did its job properly, ie they worked completely backwards and didn’t consider things they were required to take into account.
From my understanding.
AFL put the cart before the horse and suspended Charlie based on the concussion, not the legality of the tackle.
Brisbane lawyers argued that the AFL didn't follow their own rules, as the tackle wasn't dangerous, it was unlucky it caused said concussion.
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,094
- 108,831
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
The main way you can get off at the Appeals Board is through technicalities. That is literally how it is designed. There is a very narrow framework.
It’s not a mulligan or a fresh new hearing, you literally need to prove that the Tribunal messed up.
mpal6
Norm Smith Medallist
Finally, giving Tribunal a reason to overturn.
Art Vandelay_
TheBrownDog
- Oct 28, 2012
- 107,624
- 149,404
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers - Tottenham
He ain’t dirty at all - gave himself a wash while he was giving the tribunal an absolute bath.
Many parts of this saga are deeply concerning, but as a man of mathematics, this really struck me:
“Hannon argued … the fact there was an injury points to the incident being likely to cause injury…”
No wonder they didn’t consider the “likelihood” aspect of it in their process - they don’t even understand what an event being “likely” means!!
They do not have a grasp of the fundamentals of probability theory. This explains why they so often punish the outcome instead of the action - they think “if X occurred, then X was likely”.
It’s like saying you were likely to win the lottery after winning it. Mind boggling.
Elixuh
See you on the 9th green at 9
lol just keep arguing until the tribunal chair gives you a little nod
He did slam, he was charged and suspended for a slam, he got off on a technicality.
You got it wrong.
Move on.
mpal6
Norm Smith Medallist
mpal6
Norm Smith Medallist
There was no freekick paid at that point, Umpire calling it a perfect tackle. If it was a slam, he would've been booked for rough conduct and free kick paid. Nothing. West Coast players Yeo, Tim Kelly also supported Charlie's tackle.
You can dream on about the "slam" if that makes you sleep better.
Not a single player decided to remonstrate. Or even acknowledged the “maliciousness”.
Yeo commented during the week that the suspension was, in two words “wrong… wrong”.
Duggan said earlier today he feels for Charlie.
If you still maintain that it was malicious, I’ve got something to tell you about 5G towers.
The Flying Belgian
Third Tall
Sounds like you could sit on an AFL tribunal. "This is what it is coz I said so".
- Oct 9, 2003
- 46,893
- 45,902
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Eagles (NFL), Suns (NBA)
LOL! Giants changed their strategy once they saw Cameron get off on the "likely to cause injury" angle
Comp is ****ed!
Comp is ****ed!
mpal6
Norm Smith Medallist
Wohooo
- Aug 12, 2017
- 5,050
- 9,299
- AFL Club
- GWS
What waste of time and money …. The good guys win …. And Brisbane
ZEV
Premium Platinum
- Jul 23, 2013
- 6,192
- 7,738
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
It sucks that Duggan got hurt, but finally the right outcome
He was suspended for the concussion Duggan got during a legal, but not dangerous tackle.
Ok Charlie gets off. That’s fair, there’s an argument to be made that his conduct wasn’t unreasonable.
But how do you let a guy off, because “the tribunal didn’t consider whether his actions were likely to cause injury”, when they did cause injury? They don’t need to consider the likelihood, when we know it 100% did.
How does that not apply to Heeney last week then? Heeney grappled with a defender like happens I’d estimate over 1000 times a round. Think if you have 100 inside 50s a game, a forward has pushed off a defender at least once each inside 50. So we have ONE injury from the action performed by Heeney out of say 1000. Is that not unlikely?
But how do you let a guy off, because “the tribunal didn’t consider whether his actions were likely to cause injury”, when they did cause injury? They don’t need to consider the likelihood, when we know it 100% did.
How does that not apply to Heeney last week then? Heeney grappled with a defender like happens I’d estimate over 1000 times a round. Think if you have 100 inside 50s a game, a forward has pushed off a defender at least once each inside 50. So we have ONE injury from the action performed by Heeney out of say 1000. Is that not unlikely?
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,094
- 108,831
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
Northern states saving the VFL from itself again.
Similar threads
