MRP / Trib. Tom Hawkins "made an example of" - accepts 1 match suspension

[Sttew]

Tom did the crime, do the time.

No question. Tom and everyone else was on notice.

Just seems unfair that he is the bunny yet again. It is easier to stomach a rule change at season's end, than mid-way through a season. The AFL is such an inconsistent beast. Who knows Gillon may come out in 3 weeks and say it was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to suspend guys so let's go with bigger fines

 

[Jimmy Yamazaki]

Patrick Keane also saying 1 week so it's true.

His fault for being dumb.

 

[rickster]

Now official.

 

[candiehappy]

The problem with that is he would be missing for 3 out of every 4 games. He needs to thrown his weight around more in the contest. That's how to put fear into an opponent.

I wasn't clear, I'm not advocating more jumper punching. Just want more aggression in his general demeanour and play. A bit more Mumford ....

 

[STPer18]

Not even sure what he did but it's comical seeing Hodgey get off with the fine.

 

[Willo_]

Was never in doubt,
As I said earlier if he had done it a month ago he would have gotten off.
but it was his own fault for putting himself in that position, especially given the talk and focus on it of late.

 

[Grimoz]

Geelong will challenge that

 

[Tony Barber]

and let's be honest (and maybe slightly tin foil hatted) but the AFL don't want the MRP to be challenged, or to be seen as making the incorrect call.
So the system is designed to make it too great a risk to challenge, and then to be too ambiguous to be have many decisions overturned if they are challenged

Personally I think the early plea deduction is rubbish. I understand the good behaviour bonus. Not the early plea.
And if I remember correctly they put in the early plea to stop clubs and the afl spending 10k on qc's every week.

Which definitely did happen for a long time.

 

[Baudolino]

Club response to this will be very interesting. Most likely scenario is we'll be pragmatic an accept the one-match ban, but given Chris Scott's stated position on this, there's an outside chance we may challenge.

 

[Tony Barber]

Geelong will challenge that

Not a chance in hell.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Geelong will challenge that

Nope. Would risk an extra week.
As long as extra weeks hang over players there will be minimal challenges

 

[FredLeDeux]

Not a chance in hell.

Correct, assuming it's two down to one, we'll cop the one.

 

[fpm84]

Fremantle at Geelong the week after the Eagles.

We must challenge.

Will be interesting to see Scott's response on AFL360 tonight, given how strongly he felt about the incident post-match.

 

[catpremier 07]

Tom the scapegoat again. Insufficient force doesn't apply for him

 

[STPer18]

It'll be the 'we don't agree but we accept the penalty - risk too great' approach. Which is most logical. Would almost certainly cop the 2 weeks if he goes to the tribunal after the recent talk.

 

[Grimoz]

Fremantle at Geelong the week after the Eagles.

We must challenge.

Will be interesting to see Scott's response on AFL360 tonight, given how strongly he felt about the incident post-match.

Agree, think we can do without him for Freo at home if it comes to that, would rather try and beat the charge.

 

[Willo_]

Fremantle at Geelong the week after the Eagles.

We must challenge.

Will be interesting to see Scott's response on AFL360 tonight, given how strongly he felt about the incident post-match.

I think the club and Scott knew Hawk was in trouble.
His comments after the game were just trying to throw out some cloudiness and to try change the way it was being looked at.
I don't think anyone actually brought it, and I doubt Scott actually believed what he was even saying

 

[Scorpio]

The club won't challenge because odds are they wouldn't win. As annoying as it is, the AFL made it clear that this is their new "rule of the week".

He'll miss the trip to Perth, but be back for the Dockers game in Geelong.

 

[lionbear]

So the Richmond and Sydney players get away with it 7 days earlier and now they suspend, well as long as they suspend everyone going forward.

 

[Mr Blicavs]

People in shock or upset over this are delusional and clueless........it was always going to be a week.
Instead of focusing on the negatives, focus on the positives and the upcoming debut of Wyle Buzza

 

[Scorpio]

So the Richmond and Syndey players get away with it 7 days earlier and now they suspend, well as long as they suspend everyone going forward.

And I guarantee there will be an outcry once more players get done for these "jumper-punches", and we'll go full-circle back to it just being a fine at worst. It's farcical.

 

[Willo_]

And I guarantee there will be an outcry once more players get done for these "jumper-punches", and we'll go full-circle back to it just being a fine at worst. It's farcical.

yeah I wouldn't be surprised to see no one else go for it.
The example has been made now, the players will behave for a few weeks and then business will resume as normal

Basically just like the last time Hawk was suspended for this

 

[Mr Blicavs]

No question. Tom and everyone else was on notice.

Just seems unfair that he is the bunny yet again. It is easier to stomach a rule change at season's end, than mid-way through a season. The AFL is such an inconsistent beast. Who knows Gillon may come out in 3 weeks and say it was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to suspend guys so let's go with bigger fines

You said it yourself......everyone was on notice, and I reject the idea he was some kind of bunny.

He was just the next to digress

 

[Down at K Park]

So it's ok for Cotchin to smack a bloke right in the jaw with more force than Hawkins and get no suspension, but tommy get's one. The MRP is a firkin joke.

 

[MarkCatsFan]

For those interested, Cotchin's punch to Neale's jaw that yielded a fine:

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-16/mrp-handcuffed-over-cotchin-jumper-punch-bartel

What a ****ing joke, that incident is identical. Once again we are screwed over by the corrupt, anti-Geelong establishment that runs the show in the AFL.