MRP / Trib. Nankervis Straight To Tribunal

Remove this Banner Ad

They need to be consistent though. I have no arguments if they are consistent Nank's bump was clumsy. If Nank gets 4 Stewart should have got 5 or 6. And what's the bet if one of the media darlings like Cripps will get zero if it means they will be out for finals.
Consistency is a major challenge sadly as incidents that look the same generally have marginal differences.

Nank's was less brutal and late than Stewart's IMO.
Stewart aught to have got 5 but got 4 - without this years AFL "added loading" I would say Nank aught to be 2 or 3 but will get 4 I think.

& then you throw in the Cripps debacle last year, I'm happy to say he was contesting for a very hard ball in dispute and got 'unlucky' but due to the outcome should have got 2 regardless - but of course somehow he got off.

Compare this to our Mansell one this year - 3 for that very very 'normal' football contest was ridiculous IMO.
 
Last edited:
Consistency is a major challenge sadly as incidents that look the same generally have marginal differences.

Nank's was less brutal and late than Stewart's IMO.
Stewart aught to have got 5 but got 4 - without this years AFL "added loading" I would say Nank aught to be 2 or 3 but will get 4 I think.

& then you throw in the Cripps debacle last year, I'm happy to say he was contesting for a very hard for ball in dispute and got 'unlucky' but due to the outcome should have got 2 regardless - but of course somehow he got off.

Compare this to our Mansell one this year - 3 for that very very 'normal' football contest was ridiculous IMO.
Stewart’s hit was also last year

The landscape has changed so no point trying to draw a comparison in terms of the punishment
 
Stewart’s hit was also last year

The landscape has changed so no point trying to draw a comparison in terms of the punishment
I think that's what I said - last year v this year being considering significantly differently.
Based on this years criteria and trends Stewart would be looking at up to 6.
Based on last years criteria and trends Nank would be looking at 2 -3 IMO.

BUT - he will get 4 and probably fair enough....
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I think that's what I said - last year v this year being considering significantly differently.
Based on this years criteria and trends Stewart would be looking at up to 6.
Based on last years criteria and trends Nank would be looking at 2 -3 IMO.

BUT - he will get 4 and probably fair enough....
Yeah 100% agree
 
I think Nank will get 4 weeks. The AFL seem to be going extra hard on Richmond this year and Nanks act was more severe than Mansell's. I honestly think the AFL is scared shiteless over all this class actions and are trying everything they can to prove how seriously they are taking it. They always seem to have a bugbear they focus on each and every year - centre circle, hands in the back, slide rule, rushed behind, deliberate out of bounds, protected area, stand rule, abusing/touching umpires, etc etc etc and they almost always are reacting to an event or incident. This year, its all about the head and will continue to be until the law suit has run its course.

I just hate it when the powers that be, add extra wood to the tribunal fire, just so that our players are burnt to a crisp on yet another AFL witch hunt.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2023-07-11 at 3.07.14 pm.png
    Screenshot 2023-07-11 at 3.07.14 pm.png
    429.3 KB · Views: 12
Surely it couldn't be more than degooey's
Wouldn’t think so but who knows

Think it will be 3 but wouldn’t be shocked if it’s 4 either and both probably in the range of being the correct punishment as well imo
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

kill me death GIF by Cartoon Hangover
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Nankervis Straight To Tribunal

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top