MRP / Trib. Tribunal Thread - rules and offences discombobulation

[Sir Watchalot]

Very hard to say this is not a dangerous tackle.

I was interested to see what the media would say because for me this was one of those incidents that club loyalty makes difficult to see clearly. Even mentally swapping jumpers on the players I couldn't be sure the suspension was legit. But the Channel 9 Sunday Footy Show hosts didn't even blink at Jonas being rubbed out. Their only (brief) interest was in how it was a holding the ball free to Jonas at the time.

 

[Windy Cindy]

pathetic from the footy club.

i cant believe we accepted..

what has happened to us.. how many more times do we just roll over for the tribunal

shit i hope mckenzie comes up

 

[Grave Danger]

So that's that then.

I bet the umpire that paid Jonas the free still gets a gig this week.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

I was interested to see what the media would say because for me this was one of those incidents that club loyalty makes difficult to see clearly. Even mentally swapping jumpers on the players I couldn't be sure the suspension was legit. But the Channel 9 Sunday Footy Show hosts didn't even blink at Jonas being rubbed out. Their only (brief) interest was in how it was a holding the ball free to Jonas at the time.

Of course they didn't blink at Jonas being suspended because he's a thug from dirty Port. They'll also sit there and comment about how Lachie Hunter is unlucky to be suspended. And come up with all sorts of excuses for him, despite the fact that he lined Rozee up and made no effort to contest the ball.

What is Jonas supposed to do there? Let go of the tackle just because Tom MacDonald has tried to break it by ducking and thus put himself in a vulnerable position? This is why we should be appealling against this crap. Make the AFL actually have to point out what a player should be doing.

And there is no soft-cap issue with taking a charge to the Tribunal, that doesn't come in until you go to the Appeal Board.

 

[Grave Danger]

Meanwhile Naan have appealed the Hunter suspension.

 

[Willsy10]

Meanwhile Naan have appealed the Hunter suspension.

of course, media will get right behind it too.

 

[Powertron]

Very hard to say this is not a dangerous tackle.

How is it more dangerous than any other tackle? He’s got him by the collar and pulled him to ground. There isn’t a sling or slamming motion.

It’s physical, yeah, but it’s not inherently dangerous. Also, since when is the action the measure of a suspension and not the outcome?

Junior got two weeks based on outcome not action, as have several others who were suspended based on a concussion not their action.

It’s chose your own adventure again by the MRO.

 

[Spadge]

You watch Hunter get off, while Jonas takes a week off for a good tackle

I am so disappointed the club didnt appeal this

 

[Brian McGee]

I would like to know what rule Jonas actually breaks in this tackle. Both his arms are free. It’s not a 360 sling to the ground. He literally grabs him and drags him down as ge tries to break the tackle. You literally cannot tackle a guy to the ground anymore.

 

[shewho]

I would like to know what rule Jonas actually breaks in this tackle. Both his arms are free. It’s not a 360 sling to the ground. He literally grabs him and drags him down as ge tries to break the tackle. You literally cannot tackle a guy to the ground anymore.

Not head first. From that reverse angle it’s difficult to see how he doesn’t break his neck.

 

[Brian McGee]

Not head first. From that reverse angle it’s difficult to see how he doesn’t break his neck.

But what action if Jonas’ causes this. He doesn’t pick him up, doesn’t sling him, doesn’t pin his arms. He drags him down. You cannot control every single body movement of your opposition in a tackling situation.

 

[Brian McGee]

And speaking of actions that could break a neck, hunter bumped a player front on with his head down over the ball. Yet melbourne still have the balls to challenge it.

 

[Powertron]

You watch Hunter get off, while Jonas takes a week off for a good tackle

I am so disappointed the club didnt appeal this

The only rationale I can think of is they don’t particularly want/need Jonas to be in the 22. This provides the out (again) to not have to drop him.

I think they like Aliir, McKenzie as the two key defenders with Burton as the third “tall”. Matchup wise should be ok against Richmond with this setup.

 

[PAFC66]

Clubs loves to bend over.
Should have been challenged

I assume that controlling umpire that paid holding the ball will be dropped then

 

[Power Raid]

Yeah, but can you bench 130kg? That's the crucial thing here.

I used to work for the government, so I can confirm like Puddy, I do my best work laying down

My wife has her doubts though

 

[ibd77]

Nah the club had to challenge this one. Now it just opens them up later in the year including finals to get a critical players rubbed out nice and conveniently.

 

[jac147]

The only rationale I can think of is they don’t particularly want/need Jonas to be in the 22. This provides the out (again) to not have to drop him.

I think they like Aliir, McKenzie as the two key defenders with Burton as the third “tall”. Matchup wise should be ok against Richmond with this setup.

The only trouble with that is that it weakens the Maggie’s. One less player for them. I wouldn’t be confident of McKenzie playing and if he did he could still end up on the bench with an occurrence Of his injury. So inclusion we should have appealed.

 

[MrMeaner]

I don't mind Jonas being out but I cannot fathom why you wouldn't challenge this. Perhaps it was a decision made in consultation with Tom.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

The only rationale I can think of is they don’t particularly want/need Jonas to be in the 22. This provides the out (again) to not have to drop him.

I think they like Aliir, McKenzie as the two key defenders with Burton as the third “tall”. Matchup wise should be ok against Richmond with this setup.

Oh if only this conspiracy theory were true!

 

[snozulu]

MATCH REVIEW: Daicos, Steele, Frost learn MRO fates

The Match Review is in for Sunday's round 10 games

www.afl.com.au

Daicos was also hit with a fine after the Match Review Officer graded his strike on Carlton's Blake Acres

13

Blake Acres

Age

29

Ht

193cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.5

4star

K

8.9

3star

HB

8.6

5star

M

3.7

4star

T

3.2

5star

CL

1.9

4star

D

12.7

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

7.7

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.7

4star

CL

1.0

3star

D

8.2

2star

K

3.8

2star

HB

4.4

4star

M

1.2

2star

T

2.4

4star

CL

1.8

4star

as intentional and low-impact.

 

[jakey]

I don't hate the Jonas suspension in context of everything thing else that's been to the MRO this season. A match for the Rozee hit and nothing for Viney's trip is criminal though.

Check out this trip a few seasons back - Howe got 3 weeks for it and I'd argue Viney did far worse: WATCH: Hawk in trouble for trip and Cripps hit?

 

[PAFC66]

Why wouldn't we? Isn't it free

 

[El_Scorcho]

Why on earth is Hunter challenging? Ran up and smashed his hip into the head of someone who had his head over the ball. Bizarre.

 

[Sir Watchalot]

I don't mind Jonas being out but I cannot fathom why you wouldn't challenge this. Perhaps it was a decision made in consultation with Tom.

All such decisions would be made in consultation with the player affected. But there's not a word anywhere credible that there's a problem with the charge.

 

[JimmyBC]

Stupid not to challenge it gives the MRO affirmation on a football act, every other club should be pissed off with us.