MRP / Trib. The MRP/Tribunal Thread - 2024 Edition

Remove this Banner Ad

I think it was when he tried to use a Bunnings lawn chair as part of the defence to get Gov off in the GC hubs

+ squirting round packs
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Nonsense.
She was covering her mouth in awe of Harley reid tackling and gaining a free kick for holding the ball.


She and we would assumed it was holding the ball and would be filthy it was overturned.

Yeah and it was second only to the reaction from Wilson which was to appeal for a free with 2 hands (rather than any attempt to protect himself).

He didn’t seem that concerned for his safety… probably because he was well aware that he would land on his back.

I understand in the current climate a low impact aggressive tackle gets upgraded to medium (and a week), but HR is suffering from an unfair double upgrade here.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Well done. Identifying instances where we can Integrate family wherever possible

Can some of your band up supporters make your way down to the tribunal and hold up free Harley Reid signs?

Ramp up the clown tribunal to full nuffies as they deserve that
 
Last edited:
Harley Reid gets suspension reduced to 1 week.

"Dom Sheed" for some reason has long blonde hair and a hairband against the Kangaroos and has implemented the fend off into his game to great affect.

Unfounded rumours of someone looking a lot like Dom Sheed relaxing down in Margaret River on game day.

Dom Sheed bald again against the Bombers (but looking well rested) as Harley Reid comes back in.
 
AFL website says we're looking at downgrade from high to medium. Not sure how they know that, but if true we're not even going to try to get Reid off.

Show them Darcy's hit as high impact and then compare it to Reid's.

Clear difference in impact, with one charging at full speed and jumping into the back of a player coming back, the other almost stationary as a player tries to side step him.

Also result of Darcy's hit had greater after effects, with Wilson getting up pretty much straight away.

Although as Liam showed, Maynard is a bit soft!
 
Pissed off all the reports are saying we're focussed on trying to get it down from 2 weeks to 1.

Argue to have it reduced to 0 and if it's reduced by 1, so be it.
Bizarrely I don’t think it works like that. They’ll either say yes it’s 0 or no, you’ve failed to get it to 0, so therefore it stays at 2.

They’re not getting him off, so arguing it to one gives us a chance at getting it to one in a way arguing for zero doesn’t, for all the sense in the world that makes.
 
Bizarrely I don’t think it works like that. They’ll either say yes it’s 0 or no, you’ve failed to get it to 0, so therefore it stays at 2.

They’re not getting him off, so arguing it to one gives us a chance at getting it to one in a way arguing for zero doesn’t, for all the sense in the world that makes.

Hence the reason that he got 2.

We were always going to challenge, but ‘winning’ in getting it downgraded to 1 week (where it should have been rated) will spark less outrage and discussion than if he got off.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
So Harley was scragged for the whole second half but had 4 free kicks paid against, was fined $3600 for two separate "careless" contact with umpires, was slapped with 2 weeks for a tackle and ruled ineligible for the rising star? Right.

The hate is already strong in some, cue Gary Lyon.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

View attachment 2010485

AFL official website has already decided

We have already conceded that Harley will get at least a week. We're only attempting to downgrade the charges, not to dismiss them.

That we had Laura Kane commenting on us attempting to downgrade the impact to medium tells you everything you need to know, I reckon. Would be staggered if it's left at 2 weeks.
 
Bizarrely I don’t think it works like that. They’ll either say yes it’s 0 or no, you’ve failed to get it to 0, so therefore it stays at 2.

They’re not getting him off, so arguing it to one gives us a chance at getting it to one in a way arguing for zero doesn’t, for all the sense in the world that makes.
Pretty sure there's nothing in the rules preventing an "if not X, then Y" argument. Agree that it would be silly not to argue "if not low, then medium". But the rules allow the shitmixer of "potential to cause injury" to arbitrarily elevate the impact rating, so there's absolutely a world in which "high" is inexplicably upheld.
 
Pretty sure there's nothing in the rules preventing an "if not X, then Y" argument. Agree that it would be silly not to argue "if not low, then medium". But the rules allow the shitmixer of "potential to cause injury" to arbitrarily elevate the impact rating, so there's absolutely a world in which "high" is inexplicably upheld.
We have definitely used that strategy before.
 
The other challenge is being held now, so based on form it’ll take about three hours for a verdict then we’re up.
Quick update: the West case has been going for just shy of 2.5 hours, and the deliberation component has just cleared the hour mark.

At this rate, Reid will miss two weeks anyway as he waits in his suit and tie.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. The MRP/Tribunal Thread - 2024 Edition

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top