The Association Football AFL Thread 3.0

[Jatz]

I think it's ridiculous that it's 3 weeks when Butters gets a fine for punches. The tweet above about saying these players should have just gut punched them instead of tackling them is spot on.

It's so sad that's true haha

 

[DBAH0]

 

[DBAH0]

 

[Jatz]

****ing hell.

How was the flight not forced to land as soon as they found that out?! That's disgraceful.

 

[RPCB]

Should we file this one under #VICBIAS?

 

[Bojan KantKick]

That is ****ing disgusting

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Laura Kane:

 

[gaskin]

So Freo fans told to stop whinging because it was the correct call were actually correct that it was wrong? I am shocked.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

The Bedford decision is going to make it interesting in the finals when pressure’s up and those tackles are more frequent. Player risks missing rest of the series

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Giants Lawyers argument.

"Yeah.... What they said"

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Took until Thursday but we got there in the end.

 

[DBAH0]

That's a pretty astounding finding and whack to the tribunal and Michael Christian I would have thought.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

AFL Tribunal system made to look foolish this week with two players getting off on legal technicalities.

VFL Tribunal: Hold my beer.



Suspended for a bump to the body.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

The AFL is still run by complete **** heads and mostly lawyers. The only constant is change. Umpiring, MRP and NGA. Basketcase.

 

[Jatz]

AFL Tribunal system made to look foolish this week with two players getting off on legal technicalities.

VFL Tribunal: Hold my beer.



Suspended for a bump to the body.

Find it pretty impossible to tell exactly where the contact was from that clip. I assume medical reports/concussion came into play?

 

[Jatz]

Sydney's lawyers must be feeling pretty inept right about now...

 

[SM]

Sydney's lawyers must be feeling pretty inept right about now...

Not sure it has anything to do with us really. It was an entirely different piece of law. Unless you're referring to the fact they went from 3 to 0, which again feels more to do with the nature of the law employed.

 

[Jatz]

Not sure it has anything to do with us really. It was an entirely different piece of law. Unless you're referring to the fact they went from 3 to 0, which again feels more to do with the nature of the law employed.

Not the direct comparison, more I just think a better set of lawyers would've been able to get Heeney off. Hypothetical of course, just the impression I've had over the last week and a half.

It was shown last week your lawyers didn't even really understand the point of the second appeal. I'd be very curious to see if they continue to use them.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Find it pretty impossible to tell exactly where the contact was from that clip. I assume medical reports/concussion came into play?

That's hardly the point. The tribunal concluded contact was to the body and still suspended the player.

Think it through. Suspended for a body bump.

 

[Jatz]

That's hardly the point. The tribunal concluded contact was to the body and still suspended the player.

Think it through. Suspended for a body bump.

They've always been an outcome based system. The concussion is what's thrown it over.

I agree with you though, absolutely absurd.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

 

[SM]

Not the direct comparison, more I just think a better set of lawyers would've been able to get Heeney off. Hypothetical of course, just the impression I've had over the last week and a half.

It was shown last week your lawyers didn't even really understand the point of the second appeal. I'd be very curious to see if they continue to use them.

I don't think a better set of lawyers gets Heeney off at the appeal, the issue was with the original argument.

 

[SM]

That's hardly the point. The tribunal concluded contact was to the body and still suspended the player.

Think it through. Suspended for a body bump.

Parker got 6 weeks for a body bump. The suspension was for the whip lash/head on head contact, and I suspect it was the same here?

 

[Jatz]

I don't think a better set of lawyers gets Heeney off at the appeal, the issue was with the original argument.

That I absolutely agree with, was only making my point that I'm not convinced they were all that good.

You're right in that the initial appeal was the major problem.