Live Event Toby Greene fronts the tribunal - Suspension appeal

[Whiskers]

Ok I’ll give my opinion although no one has asked for it.
Greene is a grub BUT he gets off this.
Contact to the nose? Pfft let’s move on. If it was a cat I would be saying he should get off so I’ll be consistent.

 

[sedders]

Isnt the charge "unneccessary contact to the face"? Every face Ive seen contains a nose. In neither case did Christian cite "eye gouging". The media and fans have jumped there because its the most obvious hing to do that causes damage. And if he gets off this week, misjudges next week and gets the eye? What then? Visually damaged player purely because the AFL dont make the face sacrosanct.

But GW$ discount/AFL'$ love child - so who knows. Given the evidence from last week and the immediate tribunal referral I was sure he was gone. And disappointed the tribunal has set such a very poor precedent.

players punch each other’s chest every game, no one is hurt and no one suspended. One player horribly misjudged it and broke a young blokes jaw. Got weeks and missed the GF. They didn’t ban all chest punches did they.

You can’t suspend players because they might misjudge and might cause injury. Punish them hard when they stuff up, that’s all you can do.

 

[Smoky]

The nose, however near the eyes it is, isn’t the eyes

Correct. The bridge of your nose is actually 100% the centre of your "Eye Region" (which is the charge).

When you wear a pair of Sunny's where do you put the centre of the sunglasses to sit on your face?

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

So the general consensus now is that Greene gets off on appeal at the Tribunal ?

 

[sedders]

Correct. The bridge of your nose is actually 100% the centre of your "Eye Region" (which is the charge).

When you wear a pair of Sunny's where do you put the centre of the sunglasses to sit on your face?

I also rest them on on my ears, sometimes they’re on my head. Irrelevant.

eye region - Google Search

 

[teddies]

he'll get off. He needs to stop being a grubby little campaigner though.

 

[Young Gun #6]

 

[Blueboys11]

Isnt the charge "unneccessary contact to the face"? Every face Ive seen contains a nose. In neither case did Christian cite "eye gouging". The media and fans have jumped there because its the most obvious hing to do that causes damage. And if he gets off this week, misjudges next week and gets the eye? What then? Visually damaged player purely because the AFL dont make the face sacrosanct.

But GW$ discount/AFL'$ love child - so who knows. Given the evidence from last week and the immediate tribunal referral I was sure he was gone. And disappointed the tribunal has set such a very poor precedent.

Unnecessary contact to the eye region is the charge.

The nose is not the eye region. It’s the nose or face.

There appears to be zero evidence there was eye contact other than grainy unclear footage. The medical report according to Robbo made no mention of the eyes. And the victim has stated there was no eye contact.

This is a hatchet job from ex Collingwood player Christian who was probably annoyed at no suspension last week and as clear a case dismissal as you could possibly have.

 

[hebog]

I would feel uncomfortable and annoyed.

More so I’d be confused as to why an AFL player is lying on top of me. I don’t even play AFL.

Not sure what my feelings had to do with this.

Did I say AFL players?

 

[Credit2thaB0is]

Isnt the charge "unneccessary contact to the face"? Every face Ive seen contains a nose. In neither case did Christian cite "eye gouging". The media and fans have jumped there because its the most obvious hing to do that causes damage. And if he gets off this week, misjudges next week and gets the eye? What then? Visually damaged player purely because the AFL dont make the face sacrosanct.

But GW$ discount/AFL'$ love child - so who knows. Given the evidence from last week and the immediate tribunal referral I was sure he was gone. And disappointed the tribunal has set such a very poor precedent.

That's the other thing, I heard initially that it was "unnecessary contact to the face" but now all the reports are saying "unnecessary contact to the eye region". Now you got to interpret what the "eye region" is? To me it sounds like that's talking about the eyes themselves and/or the area immediately around the eye socket.

A "protect the face" rule seems reasonable. I know any high contact is out of the rules already but they need to make facial niggling a suspension offence. They're doing that now it seems but they need to make it clear that facial niggling will earn at least a match ban.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Holding a Candlelight Vigil at Flagstaff Gardens from 5 pm tonight for a #FreeToby peaceful rally. All are welcome.

 

[kylegee28]

Would be insulting to the Lions if he gets suspended this week after being let off last week.

 

[Art Corvelay]

People are actually defending Greene scratching at someone’s face?

Deserves a week for been a dumb kent and doing it a week after getting a fine for it. I mean, it’s surprising a $2k fine for someone on $700k didn’t change their behaviour, but still.

 

[Blueboys11]

People are actually defending Greene scratching at someone’s face?

Deserves a week for been a dumb kent and doing it a week after getting a fine for it. I mean, it’s surprising a $2k fine for someone on $700k didn’t change their behaviour, but still.

We are defending that he shouldn’t be suspended for the biggest final in his career for an offence with zero evidence and conflicting witness testimony.

Plus the majority of supporters want to see him out there to beat the pies!

 

[Art Corvelay]

We are defending that he shouldn’t be suspended for the biggest final in his career for an offence with zero evidence and conflicting witness testimony.

Link above has Neale saying he made contact to the face. Maybe he should have thought about “the biggest final in his career” before acting like a grub. Why’s he anywhere near Lachie’s (or Bont’s) face to begin with?

 

[Blueboys11]

Link above has Neale saying he made contact to the face. Maybe he should have thought about “the biggest final in his career” before acting like a grub. Why’s he anywhere near Lachie’s (or Bont’s) face to begin with?

Charge is not the face. It’s the eye region.

Any force to the face would of had insufficient force so Christian has thrown a Hail Mary guess that there was eye contact. That’s been disproven by the victim. Case dismissed. Toby has 30, kicks 5 and giants win by 10 points.

Everyone’s happy

 

[mcgleereturns]

Toby Greene is clearly on a mission to identify and eliminate all loopholes in the AFL’s rules so he should be congratulated for his tireless efforts to fix the system!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Smoky]

Unnecessary contact to the eye region is the charge.

The nose is not the eye region. It’s the nose or face.

There appears to be zero evidence there was eye contact other than grainy unclear footage. The medical report according to Robbo made no mention of the eyes. And the victim has stated there was no eye contact.

This is a hatchet job from ex Collingwood player Christian who was probably annoyed at no suspension last week and as clear a case dismissal as you could possibly have.

The charge wasn't "contact to the eye ball", saying the nose is not in the eye region is laughable...

 

[davemc_lions]

2 weeks in a row he gone into a pack you would say with the intention to grab the star mids face.
No idea why pretty stupid.
Although he get off. Probably deserves a few weeks for being stupid

They probably change a rule because of him again
then change it again later.

He is a grub of a player..

 

[Art Corvelay]

The charge wasn't "contact to the eye ball", saying the nose is not in the eye region is laughable...

Have to cut him some slack, he’s following the Chris Judd guide to Chicken Wings, Pressure Points & Eye Gouging.

 

[XhazzafootyX]

Will Maynard go to Greene this week?

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

2 weeks in a row he gone into a pack you would say with the intention to grab the star mids face.
No idea why pretty stupid.
Although he get off. Probably deserves a few weeks for being stupid

They probably change a rule because of him again
then change it again later.

He is a grub of a player..

Be honest, you would love him at your club, grub or not. Also The Lions 3 peat team wasn't exactly a team of choir boys either.

 

[davemc_lions]

Also you expect Neale to not say eye unless he had some medical problem from it.
Most teams play hard. GWS go past the line with Mummy and Greene. Although snitches get

 

[Credit2thaB0is]

The charge wasn't "contact to the eye ball", saying the nose is not in the eye region is laughable...

The nose has it's own nose region.

 

[Blueboys11]

The charge wasn't "contact to the eye ball", saying the nose is not in the eye region is laughable...

Lol, what!?!

The eye region is a very specific charge and is associated with a highly vulnerable part of the body.

The nose is..well it’s the nose. Sitting out there exposed to the world and the first part of the face that would be contacted.

We know you don’t want him to play this week, but you are being a bit ridiculous now