Live Event Toby Greene fronts the tribunal - Suspension appeal

[Arctic fox]

It's quite simple folks. He is out to hurt the opposition players.

 

[Gigantic]

It's quite simple folks. He is out to hurt the opposition players.

I'd say most AFL players are trying to do the same

 

[Outback Footy]

The line to seriously hurt or injure someone, like your man Bont did with his suplex.

62860517, member: 185545"]
Hasn’t crossed a line? Pulling hair is not part of the game. It’s a dog act. Yo smokin’ crack!
[/QUOTE]
I want some of what you’re taking. I’m seeing everything too clearly atm and I didn’t see any suplexing.

 

[Outback Footy]

I'd say most AFL players are trying to do the same

No. They’re not.

That right there is the problem.

 

[Credit2thaB0is]

Are people so dense that they don't understand how bad eye gouging is? It's not like belting someone in the stomach - it is an incredibly violent, malicious act with the potential for permanent serious injury.

Which is why eye gouging is being improperly bandied about in reaction to these incidents. By all reports from players involved none have claimed to have their eyes gouged. Contact across the face including the eye region is what’s been confirmed. He’s conscious of what he’s doing so it would be extraordinary for him to be actually trying to gouge people’s eyes. He’s getting in their faces, quite literally, but his intent is clearly to niggle and annoy and provoke rather than to cause injury. Kind of like a flash bang.

I get that is not something most people want to see either way. Players in the past just worked on doing it subtly and as long as people didn’t have to confront it in their news feed they couldn’t have cared less. But as vision across the ground gets better and better no amount of subtlety will let players go under the radar with these things.

What I don’t understand is if you’re so against the niggle why do you need to ham it up by calling it murder? Just own the fact that you don’t like the niggle and want it stamped out of the game.

 

[Credit2thaB0is]

No. They’re not.

That right there is the problem.

Are you saying most players are too soft?
If you really don’t want to hurt the opposition - no tackles, bumps etc. then. Even if you’re not aiming to hurt them as such the risk is too high. It’s too easy to hurt someone doing things footy players do.

 

[Sentinel]

Going to be interesting to hear if Brisbane's medical report played a role in this suspension. I suspect there'll be something in there which, along with Neele's immediate reaction, was enough evidence for Christian to pull the trigger.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Going to be interesting to hear if Brisbane's medical report played a role in this suspension. I suspect there'll be something in there which, along with Neele's immediate reaction, was enough evidence for Christian to pull the trigger.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit, the lovey dovey Brisbane Lions (these days) strike me as a club that would be snitches/dibby dobbers.

Call me old fashioned, but I still firmly believe in the old footy ground players code that no players clubs should deliberately go out of their way to ''stitch up opposition players/give damning evidence at the Tribunal"

There are some unwritten rules in footy that should still be sacrosanct, and that is one of them (imo)

 

[The Filth]

Under the MRP guidelines, there isn't a difference. It's about conduct, impact and contact. That determines the sentence. Nowhere does prior record come into it.

Ah, I understand where you're coming from now. Sorry.

I know the changes made by the AFL to the MRP in 2017 (ie when Michael Christian was appointed MRO) was partially in response to clubs concerns about over emphasis on automatic penalties on players prior records and consistency of penalties handed out for offences.

However, my understanding is that there were still provisions in place to take into account a players prior conduct. (Please correct me if I'm wrong)
i)- in respect of the player being referred directly to the tribunal irrespective of the offence.
ii) - in regards to Specific Directions to the Tribunal Jury.
(I believe there may be others including in relation to applying fixed penalties but I'm no expert and may be thinking of the old tribunal rules)

Referral to Tribunal: The sanction for Classifiable Offences will not be automatically increased where a Player has a bad record. However, the MRO has the discretion to directly refer the Player to the Tribunal in their absolute discretion.

Tribunal Jury: Specific Directions will be given when appropriate to do so.
Matters that may be the subject of specific directions where relevant includes 'prior offences'.
Specific Directions are considered in conjunction with the General Directions for the Tribunal Jury in their deliberations.
A players prior record may reflect on a players Conduct - for example indicate that an act was more likely to be 'intentional' than 'careless' to the which can affect the penalty, or for determining the level of the penalty applied (eg size of fine given within scope)

The application of a suspension for the latest incident after issuing a fine (for last weeks incident) is a legal nightmare for the MRP.
It will be interesting to see if some of the discretionary powers have been applied in this case or how the MRO has Graded the offence.
Perhaps they will go with the line that the previous weeks incident was different, has no relevance, and that the latest Tribunal decision is just merit based.

I think Greene may get off on appeal and the AFL may need to change some of their Tribunal Guidelines/Rules. Consistency again.

 

[TwiggleyFanClub]

Are you saying most players are too soft?
If you really don’t want to hurt the opposition - no tackles, bumps etc. then. Even if you’re not aiming to hurt them as such the risk is too high. It’s too easy to hurt someone doing things footy players do.

Disingenuous.
Yeah it’s footy and people get hurt legitimately playing the game.
But there is no legitimate reason to deliberately put your hands on someone’s face, especially when they’re on the ground.
He wasn’t the tackler and hands got loose. He came in after the fact, when the other player was down. Not to aid the tackle, but to put hands to the face, and only that. The “lucky recipient” moves their head the wrong way and it’s an eye gouge, even if he didn’t intend it to be.

He needs to sit out a week. Doesn’t care about a fine, obviously. So he needs a lesson that affects the team and not just him. Maybe then he’ll remember where the line is.

 

[Credit2thaB0is]

Disingenuous.
Yeah it’s footy and people get hurt legitimately playing the game.
But there is no legitimate reason to deliberately put your hands on someone’s face, especially when they’re on the ground.
He wasn’t the tackler and hands got loose. He came in after the fact, when the other player was down. Not to aid the tackle, but to put hands to the face, and only that. The “lucky recipient” moves their head the wrong way and it’s an eye gouge, even if he didn’t intend it to be.

He needs to sit out a week. Doesn’t care about a fine, obviously. So he needs a lesson that affects the team and not just him. Maybe then he’ll remember where the line is.

I’m not fussed about Greene sitting out now - in his own words “it is what it is” and he and the team need to live with it. Some things go your way, others don’t. That’s footy, that’s life. But I said in my other post that his intentions in those incidents are to annoy and provoke the opposition rather than to really hurt them. I just don’t assume the worst about his actions like many are, especially with the social media hysteria concocted charge of eye gouging.

By all means argue that any deliberate contact to the face should be reportable and result in some sort of punishment. That really wouldn’t bother me if that becomes the rule. But neither am I going to sit here and think “well he’s just out to hurt everyone”. How could he be? He’s one of the best players going right now - you can’t be that if your goal is to just hurt the oppo. By the same token you can’t be that if you’re afraid of hurting the oppo.

 

[Demontim275]

Firstly, it wasn't the same s**t.

Secondly, it doesn't matter. I was all for giving him weeks from what he did last week, but last night's incident was nowhere near as bad. A s**tload of priors doesn't make a fineable incident (at worst seemingly) a suspendable one.

Yeah it was

and you’ll find it does

 

[Demontim275]

Yes they can.

That’s the point. Priors are irrelevant on the new grading system. Carryover points etc were dispensed with a few years ago. This incident needs to be viewed as though it was commited by someone who has no priors. It wouldn’t even have been looked at in that case.

There is no way this stands up in the tribunal hearing if they review the facts of this case in isolation.

As I said. This isn’t an actual court

And where is this “needs to be looked at as if he has no priors”. This isn’t the legal system. I’d say even at the tribunal the afl will argue that his priors will show intent. It’s been done before

 

[Demontim275]

I’m not fussed about Greene sitting out now - in his own words “it is what it is” and he and the team need to live with it. Some things go your way, others don’t. That’s footy, that’s life. But I said in my other post that his intentions in those incidents are to annoy and provoke the opposition rather than to really hurt them. I just don’t assume the worst about his actions like many are, especially with the social media hysteria concocted charge of eye gouging.

By all means argue that any deliberate contact to the face should be reportable and result in some sort of punishment. That really wouldn’t bother me if that becomes the rule. But neither am I going to sit here and think “well he’s just out to hurt everyone”. How could he be? He’s one of the best players going right now - you can’t be that if your goal is to just hurt the oppo. By the same token you can’t be that if you’re afraid of hurting the oppo.

What an idiotic and disingenuous post

Who here has said that his only goal in football is to hurt people? His goal when he does stupid shit like this is to hurt people. As evidenced by his priors and his off field behaviour.
He has a short fuse and resorts to this shit

What is with people thinking that playing afl makes someone an amazing person who is only wanting the best for the game? The bloke can kick a ball, but is like the 1000s of blokes in local footy who pull this same shit.

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Under the MRP guidelines, there isn't a difference. It's about conduct, impact and contact. That determines the sentence. Nowhere does prior record come into it.

There is no such thing as the MRP.
The MRO however has the ability to refer him to the tribunal so they can view his actions over the past season combined.
He didn’t do that and just suspended him which was weird.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

There is no such thing as the MRP.
The MRO however has the ability to refer him to the tribunal so they can view his actions over the past season combined.
He didn’t do that and just suspended him which was weird.

The MRO was shat off that the tribunal (AFL) downgraded the charge last time and decided to cut out the middle man

 

[Dayan Warna]

Indeed - Libba Snr unfortunately was the worst eye gouger in the history of the game.

Pretty sure toby will cover that soon.
Sadly the AFL want this team to do well, so will turn a "blind eye" to a filthy sniper like Toby

 

[compact72]

 

[sedders]

Must have missed the unsociable hawks era or the Danny southern choke holds or Libbas eye gouging and pinching. Why does the biased opinion of this nobody matter?

 

[Colonial]

Lol he must of missed an awful lot of footy.

Salt showing through more like it.

 

[VL3OJ]

Briiing briiing
Hi Jimmy, it's Michael again...
Gil reckons we might have a problem after all. He's done a pulse survey and your man Tobias is on the nose.Gil says we can't have another guilty downgraded to a fine so we are going to give him a week but stuff the paperwork up for you so you can appeal that. You ok with that Jimmy?

 

[WestCoast05]

Must have missed the unsociable hawks era or the Danny southern choke holds or Libbas eye gouging and pinching. Why does the biased opinion of this nobody matter?

He must've missed both three-peat eras.

 

[Colonial]

Briiing briiing
Hi Jimmy, it's Michael again...
Gil reckons we might have a problem after all. He's done a pulse survey and your man Tobias is on the nose.Gil says we can't have another guilty downgraded to a fine so we are going to give him a week but stuff the paperwork up for you so you can appeal that. You ok with that Jimmy?

 

[giantsully]

In one of the very early contests in this game, Greene jumps on Hodge's back while he's on the ground and reaches over with his hands. When Hodge gets up, he appears to say something to the umps that suggests Greene may have had a go at his face. Did anyone else notice this?

 

[Credit2thaB0is]

What an idiotic and disingenuous post

Who here has said that his only goal in football is to hurt people? His goal when he does stupid s**t like this is to hurt people. As evidenced by his priors and his off field behaviour.
He has a short fuse and resorts to this s**t

What is with people thinking that playing afl makes someone an amazing person who is only wanting the best for the game? The bloke can kick a ball, but is like the 1000s of blokes in local footy who pull this same s**t.

Settle down. I clearly said before that his intention is not to harm when he does his niggling. So I’m completely rejecting the idea he was trying to hurt Bontempelli or Neale. He was niggling them - annoying and provoking them and not trying to cause harm. You think that is his intention but it doesn’t make my post idiotic or disingenuous in the slightest.