MRP / Trib. MRP Lotto thread II

[Makeshift Park]

Absurd. Not sure why the AFL even bothers with MRO guidelines at this point. Just cite the vibe and Magna Carta.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Lol, archer accidentally collects clearys head in an unavoidable collision - 3 weeks.
Lobb punches a guy flush in the mouth going for the ball - The MRO is of the opinion he made a genuine attempt at the ball - 0 weeks

 

[rickety]

Far cough.

 

[Devington]

"reasonable" is such a useful word for the pricks.

 

[Hatchy1992]

 

[Makeshift Park]

"reasonable" is such a useful word for the pricks.

It does an incredible amount of lifting for them

 

[shinboner magic]

Absurd. Not sure why the AFL even bothers with MRO guidelines at this point. Just cite the vibe and Magna Carta.

Duty of care

 

[Devington]

It IS reasonable to expect that if you're trying to spoil the ball you'll hit a bloke in the head. You know how I know this? Because it happens 20 times a game. And you know what else is reasonable? That if you hit a bloke in the head you might knock them the **** out. It's even more likely when you're charging in at pace, something they were at pains to eviscerate Archer for.

Is there bad luck involved? Sure. But a badly timed and aimed spoil, aimed by someone second to the contest and coming in at speed, concussing someone is a perfect reasonable course of events.

It just makes me mad.

 

[Hatchy1992]

Even the wwe has more credibility than this s*** the afl pulls out.

 

[rickety]

It IS reasonable to expect that if you're trying to spoil the ball you'll hit a bloke in the head. You know how I know this? Because it happens 20 times a game. And you know what else is reasonable? That if you hit a bloke in the head you might knock them the **** out. It's even more likely when you're charging in at pace, something they were at pains to eviscerate Archer for.

Is there bad luck involved? Sure. But a badly timed and aimed spoil, aimed by someone second to the contest and coming in at speed, concussing someone is a perfect reasonable course of events.

It just makes me mad.

You're missing the important bit though ..... his dad is not Glenn Archer

 

[Devington]

You're missing the important bit though ..... his dad is not Glenn Archer

I think the important bit is that it WAS a spoil. Like the speccy, with a knee to the back of the head and featured in every promo video ever, it consistently involves head trauma or varying degrees. But it's integral to the game so they will use the gray area they have to let it pass by.

 

[rickety]

I think the important bit is that it WAS a spoil. Like the speccy, with a knee to the back of the head and featured in every promo video ever, it consistently involves head trauma or varying degrees. But it's integral to the game so they will use the gray area they have to let it pass by.

An attempted spoil, but yeah

 

[Samsquanch]

Absurd. Not sure why the AFL even bothers with MRO guidelines at this point. Just cite the vibe and Magna Carta.

No way. That is impossible.

 

[Roo202]

Lobb - "it was not reasonably foreseeable his actions would result in a reportable offence being committed" AFL justifying not suspending a bloke swinging a fist at the ball a few centimetres from an opponents head

Archer - "We acknowledge that the rules encourage players to keep their feet to the extent possible in contest situations, and we acknowledge that players are coached to try to keep their feet, but this does not always happen" AFL justifying suspending a player for not being able to predict the future

I get they are fixated on outcomes and when there's a concussion they are straight in to class action protection mode, but wow...

 

[Samsquanch]

Lobb - "it was not reasonably foreseeable his actions would result in a reportable offence being committed" AFL justifying not suspending a bloke swinging a fist at the ball a few centimetres from an opponents head

Archer - "We acknowledge that the rules encourage players to keep their feet to the extent possible in contest situations, and we acknowledge that players are coached to try to keep their feet, but this does not always happen" AFL justifying suspending a player for not being able to predict the future

I get they are fixated on outcomes and when there's a concussion they are straight in to class action protection mode, but wow...

A-bloody-MAZING!

 

[Hatchy1992]

I would have thought a fist to the head would have also contributed to a potential concussion but here we are. Apparently not

 

[scottywiper]

I find it very hard to maintain any faith in this league at all.
If it weren't for North I''d be out. And North haven't really given me much to cheer about lately.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Laura Kane explaining this:

 

[Roosurgence]

Good to see Christen protecting Collingwood players.

That McCreery tackle was two metres over the boundary line and the play dead and he sling tackles Lobb into the artificial grass.

You just know if that was a North player the old the potential to cause a concussion would have been trotted out to justify a suspension. Instead a dog act when the ball is dead is just a fine if you play for Collingwood.

Looks like some poor bastard is going to cop weeks for a sling tackle while the gimp has a different set of rules for his beloved Collingwood.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Good to see Christen protecting Collingwood players.

That McCreery tackle was two metres over the boundary line and the play dead and he sling tackles Lobb into the artificial grass.

You just know if that was a North player the old the potential to cause a concussion would have been trotted out to justify a suspension. Instead a dog act when the ball is dead is just a fine if you play for Collingwood.

Looks like some poor bastard is going to cop weeks for a sling tackle while the gimp has a different set of rules for his beloved Collingwood.

The ‘potential to cause injury’ is only to be applied to certain small market sides.

Along with ‘reasonably foreseeable’, ‘alternative way to contest’ and ‘entering a contest too fast’.

 

[Roo202]

The ‘potential to cause injury’ is only to be applied to certain small market sides.

Along with ‘reasonably foreseeable’, ‘alternative way to contest’ and ‘entering a contest too fast’.

The MRO finds that by playing against Geelong, it was 'reasonably foreseeable' that Byrnes should have expected to be picked off behind play by Dangerfield..... and being the dirty sniper he is, Dangerfield had NO 'alternative way to contest'

 

[Makeshift Park]

Its 'reasonably foreseeable' that the AFL have no problem with bringing the adjudication of the game into disrepute.

 

[Passmore]

Absurd. Not sure why the AFL even bothers with MRO guidelines at this point. Just cite the vibe and Magna Carta.

So we're supposed to feel sorry for them after last night? **** them.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

 

[Samsquanch]

The MRO finds that by playing against Geelong, it was 'reasonably foreseeable' that Byrnes should have expected to be picked off behind play by Dangerfield..... and being the dirty sniper he is, Dangerfield had NO 'alternative way to contest'

Obviously a "football action" but provided there's no damage to Dangerfield's elbow the Saints bloke should probably get off or at worst a week or two.

 

[Ashley B]

Obviously a "football action" but provided there's no damage to Dangerfield's elbow the Saints bloke should probably get off or at worst a week or two.

Dogs new patented spoiling technique