No Oppo Supporters OPPOSITION OBSERVATION XXXIV

[Spagman]

Oh well, now instead of losing their next two games without Cripps, Carlton can lose their next two games with Cripps.

 

[tigs2010]

Oh well, now instead of losing their next two games without Cripps, Carlton can lose their next two games with Cripps.

Certainties to make finals now. How can the Dees stop them?

 

[tigerdan]

Saw the cripps thing in real time, didnt think it was too bad in the scheme of things.

All the better when carton finish 9th.

 

[energyquant]

Marlion Pickett

50

Marlion Pickett

Age

33

Ht

184cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.0

3star

K

7.5

3star

HB

5.5

4star

M

2.4

3star

T

3.3

5star

CL

1.5

4star

D

11.7

3star

K

6.7

3star

HB

5.0

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

3.6

4star

CL

1.3

4star

D

12.8

4star

K

7.2

3star

HB

5.6

4star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

5star

CL

1.6

4star

misses a game because he might have hurt a player by applying a shepherd (a football act).

Patrick Cripps

9

Patrick Cripps

Age

29

Ht

195cm

Wt

93kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

25.9

5star

K

9.8

4star

HB

16.1

5star

M

3.4

3star

T

5.8

5star

CL

7.4

5star

D

21.0

5star

K

10.1

4star

HB

10.9

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

3.8

4star

CL

6.3

5star

D

12.6

4star

K

4.8

2star

HB

7.8

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.2

5star

CL

1.4

4star

gets off when he concussed a player by crunching him mid-air.

Yeah, that's fair.

 

[TigFan1966]

They say he had his eyes on the ball, have they never heard of peripheral vision, and why did he have his elbow out if he was only watching the ball? It's laughable, just shows that it's not if your innocent or guilty it's who has the best lawyer, even OJ got off.

 

[tony__montana]

comeon guys, if his arms were outstretched to get the ball in midair or to knock it on and the contact came then fair play, but he clearly braced for a bump and collected him. Should never have got off

 

[Roksman]

They've only done this for Richmond (Houli).

We are everyone's Grand Final

 

[CASEYS9420]

Marlion Pickett misses a game because he might have hurt a player by applying a shepherd (a football act).

Patrick Cripps gets off when he concussed a player by crunching him mid-air.

Yeah, that's fair.

I think he got off on a legal technicality rather than the footy act in its self, which is ridiculous

 

[SavDog23]

Inb4 Cripps goes and knocks someone out again this week

 

[Groupie_]

if pies loose to swans this week next week vs carltoon means if they loose they miss top 4 and if they win carltoon miss the 8

win win

 

[Groupie_]

rfc players should now attack anyone on the way to a premiership during the finals

attack anyone who gets in our way and play the cripps tape and walk out

 

[Groupie_]

ah choo gonna miss 2 weeks with concussion while cripps is free to play

seems fair

 

[Muddiemoose]

Marlion Pickett misses a game because he might have hurt a player by applying a shepherd (a football act).

Patrick Cripps gets off when he concussed a player by crunching him mid-air.

Yeah, that's fair.

Tbf my understanding is that it was only due to a technicality of how the case was handled at the tribunal that got Cripps off, the afl still think he should be getting the two weeks but at this point the only way the afl can get it looked at again is by taking it to actual court

 

[Area51]

Tbf my understanding is that it was only due to a technicality of how the case was handled at the tribunal that got Cripps off, the afl still think he should be getting the two weeks but at this point the only way the afl can get it looked at again is by taking it to actual court

That's my understanding also. "How it was handled" = how the AFL ****ed it up.
Looking at the inconsistency across outcomes, the whole tribunal system is incompetent. Someone should lose their job over it but they won't because it's a conga line of ********ers.

 

[Groupie_]

Tbf my understanding is that it was only due to a technicality of how the case was handled at the tribunal that got Cripps off, the afl still think he should be getting the two weeks but at this point the only way the afl can get it looked at again is by taking it to actual court

 

[Muddiemoose]

That's my understanding also. "How it was handled" = how the AFL *ed it up.
Looking at the inconsistency across outcomes, the whole tribunal system is incompetent. Someone should lose their job over it but they won't because it's a conga line of **********s.

Got to be one of, if not the most inept professional sporting organisation in the entire world

 

[biaseddustyfan]

Tbf my understanding is that it was only due to a technicality of how the case was handled at the tribunal that got Cripps off, the afl still think he should be getting the two weeks but at this point the only way the afl can get it looked at again is by taking it to actual court

why don't they just say anyone with last name Cripps is banned this week. They make up the rules. Steve Hocking already brought in like 11 random untested rules just to hurt one club that he personally hated, that's way worse than saying crippo can't play for 2 weeks

 

[Muddiemoose]

why don't they just say anyone with last name Cripps is banned this week. They make up the rules. Steve Hocking already brought in like 11 random untested rules just to hurt one club that he personally hated, that's way worse than saying crippo can't play for 2 weeks

AFL wouldn’t want to hurt west coasts flag chances by having Jamie Cripps caught up in the mess

 

[Sir_Rancelot]

Seriously Carltank have been kissed on the dick by the fairies.
I hate that s**tstain of a club.

 

[rfctigerarmy]

Different set of rules, for different players, for different clubs, for different times of the season.

Imagine running an organisation like that and it being OK?

 

[All Aust]

I am sure tiggywigs can defend his own post but I think you have a couple of things wrong here.

Procedural fairness needs to be extended in all employer/employee, club/member or similar disciplinary cases or the outcomes may not have any legal force for that reason alone. I have been perplexed about the way the tribunal operates in this regard and have written about it on this forum. I mean could you imagine losing your job in a disciplinary hearing in which you had no chance to explain yourself or cross-examine people making allegations against you?

Also in the Tribunal working out the player’s intent, how can it be preferable to infer the player’s intent over using a combination of questioning the player and making reasonable inferences? Quicker maybe.

Regarding your comment about a person on a murder charge, if it had been established the accused committed the act that caused the death of the victim, the whole case would then revolve around the intent of the accused. And there is no way you could establish the same satisfactorily without questioning the accused about their intent and giving consideration to their answers.

Putting aside the differences in our views, I think it is very clear there are flaws in the procedures the Tribunal follows. They possibly work fine while all clubs recognise it is preferable to expedite proceedings but in any crucial cases like this Cripps one, it would always be open to appeals on the grounds of lack of procedural fairness.

There are some other obvious issues as well. For example the MRO can effectively cap the penalty the Tribunal gives to a player because his submission is what the AFL argues for at the Tribunal. This is best understood by looking at the Stewart case. The MRO(effectively Brad Scott) submitted for a 4 week suspension. And Stewart’s advocate was arguing for 3 weeks. So very little difference between one side and the other, but the Tribunal is more or less compelled to decide one or the other. What should be happening of course is the AFL arguing for the maximum possible penalty and the player arguing for the least possible pemalty according to his plea. And the Tribunal having to decide on either penalty or something in between according to their judgement.

So what we saw in the Stewart case was the twin brother of the Geelong coach effectively capping his maximum penalty at 4 weeks. And of course because we never got to hear Stewart’s explanation as to wtf he was thinking when he cleaned Prestia up. For all we know under questioning he may have revealed his coach told him if he gets a chance to make vigorous contact with an opponent, take it. Unlikely I know, but if you don’t ask you definitely don’t find out.

So to my way of thinking the MRO is there to expedite cases. Once it gets past him you should be conducting a proper hearing.

Match Review is not based on anything procedurally legal, rather heavily reliant on both parties reaching agreement. In the workplace it is akin to counselling.

Like any other workplace, an employee
can escalate to higher (legal) if unhappy with the counselling and discipline outcome. Carlton persued this option.

The outcome is most damming for the AFL particularly at board level. It has been shown that the AFL process and procedure to protect the welfare of a player has failed.

Based on this decision Brisbane on behalf of its player should take compensatory action against the AFL.

 

[kozi]

And Ah Chee cops a barrage of racist abuse on his insta from Carlton fans today

For what? F me

 

[Nostradumbass]

And Ah Chee cops a barrage of racist abuse on his insta from Carlton fans today

For what? F me

That whole club is garbage, from their dopey pres to the trash that support them.

 

[lumpinee]

My thoughts exactly SW. It’s an absolute farce.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

the thing in this whole scenario is its corporation v corporation,these players (actors) represent a corporation,not a club,the participants are ALL
incorporated,the AFL is incorporated,the legalise fraternity is incorporated and so they can make deals to suit,the moment it was clear that Ah Chee was
concussed and not killed Carlscum knew they could deal,was just a question of how much $$$,because that is the only realm a corporation can operate in(legal corporation) legal realm
it cannot and does not operate in a fair and just society where theres a meeting of the minds to get a fair outcome
the lawyers are the debt collectors,they operate in the corpse realm only ($$$$) & they own all debt
& they need someone else to pay it,come on down Carlscum

 

[Area51]

Wonder how the umps will treat Cripps now that Carlton have shone a light on the AFL's incompetence. Embarrassing for the AFL and we know they are vindictive campaigners.