Prediction Round 21 Changes vs. Essendon
- Thread starter YelloMit
- Start date
- Tagged users None
freo84
Norm Smith Medallist
Lol it was barely a free kick...
Some strange decisions this year for sure. Hogan smacks a guy in the face all good. Fyfe pushes a guy away that runs at him...1 week.
That’s annoying. I know people were advocating for a rest etc but I would’ve rathered not mess with a humming midfield.
Personally would like to get a look at Brodie in if Johnson is not 100%
Personally would like to get a look at Brodie in if Johnson is not 100%
- Sep 13, 2016
- 3,466
- 8,493
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I suppose one thing is that Essendon don’t seem to have a big bodied midfield so we really should be winning this without Fyfe throwing his huge frame around.
- Apr 22, 2017
- 11,086
- 10,204
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Nationals, Pelicans
Not a big deal to give him a rest given Johnson has trained fully, although we should think about changing our legal representation. Our record at the tribunal is shocking
That's interesting wording on the statement.
"We will now take time to review this decision"
I don't think it's entirely over yet.
"We will now take time to review this decision"
I don't think it's entirely over yet.
Eh surely just take the forced rest. You’d like to think we can beat Essendon without Fyfe. I know he plays a specific role within the team but surely we adapt.
It will be Johnson but if not, I reckon O'Driscoll would get a game next ahead of Erasmus or Brodie; over the last two or maybe even three weeks he has been way just more impactful with his possessions than either of those other two and he has better burst speed around the packs.
I think so.
But I could swear every time we've lost at the tribunal before we've just accepted it on the spot not left the door open.
I'm probably reading into it too much but I think at this point any club would be foolish not to go over everything with a fine tooth comb in terms of error of process or law given we've seen 3 players get off on technicalities in the last 12 months.
None of those two deserve a shot ahead of Johnson. We would’ve tried to fit him in even if Fyfe had got off imo. Was very good for at least a month there before the injury.
Wouldn’t mind getting a look at NOD if match committee feels we need a new sub this week and isn’t bringing Aish into the 22.
Your problem is thinking that the MRO actually takes anything we say into consideration. Every single summary of why we’ve failed to overturn is literally just the jury ignoring all evidence just presented and explaining their initial line of reasoning. The very clearly have favourites
Yes.
“We respect the Tribunal’s decision, however, we are disappointed that Nat will be unavailable for this weekend’s fixture against Essendon,” said Brierty.
“We will now take time to review this decision. Meanwhile, Nat will now do everything to assist his teammates in their preparation for this weekend and be available to return against Geelong.
“The Club would like to acknowledge the services of Seamus Rafferty SC and thank him for his efforts at tonight’s hearing.”
DRAGONS FFC - Moderator
- #270
We will now be firing him
Into the sun and looking for someone who can match the corruption of the VFL
We failed because we tried to say a push wasn't an intentional strike when the rules were changed in the offseason that a push is classified as an intentional strike.
Of note it's a different lawyer to when we challenged O'Meara's tackle on Spargo.
That was the last time we went to the tribunal I believe.
freo84
Norm Smith Medallist
We need to hire Carlton's lawyer.
Though the same thing reading his argument. Needs to study the technicalities to get players off rather than just relying on common sense. That's what Carlton do.
