MRP / Trib. Tribunal Thread - rules and offences discombobulation

[Duckimus Prime]

Viney could've been fined for the unnecessary cheap shot on Boak.

Should've been at least fined for the cheap shot on Boak.

Based on Ollie Lord's fine, he should've been fined for the slide in the third quarter that the MRO and umpires ignored.

And should've copped a suspension for the two footed slide tackle on Houston in the last.

 

[Mufc1975]

Should've been at least fined for the cheap shot on Boak.

Based on Ollie Lord's fine, he should've been fined for the slide in the third quarter that the MRO and umpires ignored.

And should've copped a suspension for the two footed slide tackle on Houston in the last.

omg that slide would of got a straight red in soccer

 

[PA88]

Vic club player Viney avoids suspension for two sinister and cowardly acts, and in the same game you got the Jonas situation. Intentional Vic bias continues on. Farcical.

 

[JimmyBC]

Viney was on a good bloke mission for sure, you would've had Byron run straight through him in the early 2000's.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Viney was on a good bloke mission for sure, you would've had Byron run straight through him in the early 2000's.

Maybe we should've recruited Sydney Stack just for that.

 

[Jonts]

Its tough cause on one hand its a lowkey good thing Jonas is suspended

But its such a bad call that the club needs to stand up here

 

[Jonts]

Maybe we should've recruited Sydney Stack just for that.

Or if Jonas was gonna get suspended it shouldve been for something worth it

 

[Festerz]

Deliberate. Not a tackle. Off the ball. Boak subbed off and eventually sent to hospital.

But nothing to see here apparently..

View attachment kIYCxPLoxsswlMri.mp4

 

[Brian McGee]

Suspendable or not, that’s also clearly a free kick for in the back that didn’t get paid at the time.

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

Deliberate. Not a tackle. Off the ball. Boak subbed off and eventually sent to hospital.

But nothing to see here apparently..

View attachment 1692645

How is that off the ball? He has the ball in his hands. That isn't a reportable offence, it's just a football act.

That slide tackle definately should be looked at but that one is a perfectly legal bump on the body.

 

[Capital Power]

Wasn't the slide tackle rule specifically introduced to outlaw dangerous acts like that? I daren't ask what the reaction would be if the jumpers were swapped.

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

In soccer if you did a slide tackle like that you would be sent off and get weeks. It's pretty dumb to not outlaw it in AFL and a free kick is not enough. It should be looked at in the same context as a bump.

Concussion isn't fun but neither are broken legs.

 

[Pafcsince86]

Viney was disgrace even his swinging arm on JHF should be looked at. Between that the boak shoulder charge and the slide there's more there the afl should be trying to get out of the game than the tackle Jonas laid

 

[Sunshine81]

McDonald looks to hit the ground head first. His reaction appears genuine. Fair enough it was looked at.

I'm pretty sure there was a tackle on JHF where he was slung head first into the deck, but haven't heard anything about that.

EDIT:
From 4:33 JHF gets tackled by May.

 

[Sneeky]

The two footed, studs up Viney slide was the worst of the lot. Kevin Muscat would be proud of that one

 

[1954]

Like no doubt many I have no issue with Jonas missing games for legitimate reasons but not for complete MRO BS like that, the club has to challenge it!

As for that dirty sniping campaigner Viney, I suspect it will only be a matter of time before the footy gods catch up with him!

 

[LeoMessi]

If the club doesn’t challenge this, then we stand to let VFL shit all over us whenever they feel like it.

Did that sniper Van Rooyen cop anything for his punch on Finlayson?

 

[Long live PAFC]

It’s no doubt a dangerous tackle that went high. Question is how much did McDonald shrugging the shoulders and attempting to break the tackle force the tackle high?

Jonas doesn’t get him high initially but, I would suggest McDonald shrugs him high and momentum carry’s the tackle to its conclusion. What could Jonas’ have done to change the outcome?

 

[Festerz]

How is that off the ball? He has the ball in his hands.

Yeh fair point. Don't post in the middle of the night on return from having a few is the answer.

 

[Windy Cindy]

Deliberate. Not a tackle. Off the ball. Boak subbed off and eventually sent to hospital.

But nothing to see here apparently..

View attachment 1692645

Just a dirty act hitting a bloke with his back turned..

how that was missed is a disgrace.

 

[Coobk001]

McDonald looks to hit the ground head first. His reaction appears genuine. Fair enough it was looked at.

I'm pretty sure there was a tackle on JHF where he was slung head first into the deck, but haven't heard anything about that.

EDIT:
From 4:33 JHF gets tackled by May.

Undoubtedly there might be some head into the ground here but there's layers to this.

Was it a double movement - no
Was the player injured - no
Was there a reasonable alternative for Jonas - no
Did the evading player contribute to the resultant tackle - yes

Honestly, I understand the AFL has a duty to protect the head, but the purpose of the sling tackle rule was to protect against secondary actions. Not to suspend players for super quick, singular moments, with incidental and unavoidable repercussions.


By suspending him here, we are saying that Jonas in that split second as McDonald tries to evade, has to decide, can I hold onto the tackle, plus can I also tackle him safely and therefore be gentle in the tackle in the direction I'm going, despite the opposition player putting all of his strength into going the other way.

It's unreasonable.

Especially given the fact there was no real impact on McDonald.

 

[HugeJohnson]

Look as much as I seriously want Jonas suspended for eternity to never return, that is just a riduculous call. Firstly, where is the high contact? Frame by frame it. Looks like the best you could argue is he takes him high on the jumper after Mcdonald stopped, propped and tried to evade the tackle.
Secondly, how can it be deemed 'careless' when Jonas whole and sole intention was to tackle him. And then if you grade it intentional, can you really say his actual intention was to hit him high and give away a free kick rather than win a holding the ball that he was actually given in game?
And after those questions, ask yourself, how many other tackles just like this one are made every single game? And why is it just this one that is singled out for a suspension?
The competition loses more and more credibility every single week. Sooner or later we will reach a breaking point. If you watched the end of the North Melbourne game today you would have seen a sign of just how sick the fans are getting of this farcical 'competition'. There were not many there but I truly felt those boos at the end. They were loud, passionate and honest boos, I can't actually remember a time so much stuff was thrown on to the ground at the final siren. There are seriously big issues brewing in this sport and sooner or later it's all going to come to a head.

 

[Waspy79]

Just a dirty act hitting a bloke with his back turned..

how that was missed is a disgrace.

Wasn’t missed, was overlooked. Protecting vulnerable body parts other than the head not yet on the radar in this poorly administered league.

 

[Malibu#27]

Has buddy yet been cited for his similar tackle inside the last 30 seconds or with Michael apply his buddy rule once again.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Appeal this stupid decision, put Gleeson under pressure at the tribunal and explain to him what a reasonable player does, tell the 2 players on the panel to explain what a reasonable player is and what they would do in the same circumstances, and if they stuff it up, pay the $5k and take it to the appeals board. If the MRO's Van Rooyen decision was questioning the fabric of the game, then so is this decision.