MRP / Trib. Tribunal Thread - rules and offences discombobulation

[1954]

I thought that initially then saw another angle where he appeared to drive the other player into the ground, rugby style.

My default position is Cameron is a grub, so deserves the penalty.

Agreed, Charlie Cameron has been treading a very fine line between tough play and borderline thuggery for years, and whilst a 3 match suspension for his recent effort may be viewed by some as a tad harsh his intent has always appeared to me to hurt the opposition player as much as possible whether that be by foul means, or fair.

 

[StrappingTape]

anyone who thinks that Bedford should be suspended is an idiot. Absolutely nothing wrong with it, you'll then turn around and sook that the games lost AFTER being complicit in it.

How about the AFL stand up for itself against the law suits and instead of bending over make the players sign waivers etc? Setup a permanent fund out of the TV rights to cover medically effected players post career etc. No one is putting a gun to these guys heads and forcing them to earn huge salaries to play a dangerous game. The ambulance chasing lawyers are more than encouraged by the AFL running scared and changing stuff now instead of being on the front foot. You've got a heap of people now who missed out on long AFL careers and raking int he dollars jumping in because there is a sniff of a huge payday that they didn't get playing.

 

[Grave Danger]

The bloody gall of challenging

Some were saying it was Lachie's fault for poor technique

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Some were saying it was Lachie's fault for poor technique

I heard that, I mean he put his head over the ball because that's what you're meant to do and players don't expect to get a hip rammed into their cranium. So more fool him, hey?

 

[raptalia]

There's been about half a dozen players forced into retirement due to brain injuries in the last year alone. Countless others with unknown long term damage. I don't know about you but I'm not sure I really want to be watching a sport knowing that many of its participants will end up with brain injuries down the track. Yes the AFL itself is largely concerned with the legal side but that doesn't mean making the game safer is not a worthwhile thing to do.

Go and watch something else then. As I posted it is a contact sport and always has been. No one forces anyone to play Australian Rules or you to watch it and those that do play and watch have to accept some element of risk. There is an argument for making head protection mandatory but I realise there is also a school of thought that suggests that headwear may not be effective. At least mandatory headwear might cover the AFL's arse and persuade them to stop using the Tribunal to cover their arses.

From where I sit a lot of what I have seen penalised in recent weeks is purely incidental and some of the guilty verdicts have been nothing short of ridiculous. I really fear for the future of the game as we know it and I see Australian Rules evolving into field basketball.

FOOTNOTE- I am not suggesting that all cases bought before the tribunal are without substance. Some of them, as was the case with Lachie Jones, are justified but in many of them the head contact is purely incidental. Some of the charges and subsequent verdicts as was the case with the Isaac Heeney have been plain absurd.

 

[Portology]

That's not a rule. A rule is 'you cannot do x'. What you're describing is 'you can do x, but if you do x and something bad which is entirely out of your control happens, we will punish you'. That's absurdity.

You'll also notice the umpire didn't even call it a dangerous tackle on the ground either. Because it wasn't any more dangerous than the 150 other tackles that took place in that game. Bedford didn't sling, he didn't make high contact, he didn't apply excessive force. Taranto's head inexplicably jerking forward and hitting the ground was a freak accident.

Then they should do that. But until they do, Bedford didn't do anything against the rules and shouldn't have been suspended.

Oh you’re right by your mechanistic definition but defining “rule” too narrowly for the sloppy cynics at AFL House.

It’s a catch all clause designed to allow the house to always win, urgh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Just saw 6 matches for Collard for multiple homophobic slurs against multiple opponents.

Thought it would be more severe, given Finlayson was given 3 games and was excoriated in the media for one comment which he owned up to immediately.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

2 out of 3 ain't bad according to Meatloaf. Brisbane and GWS are taking the tribunals ruling to the appels board tomorrow night. The Suns knew Davies had no chance of getting off or games reduced.

Clubs launch last-ditch AFL appeals after controversial 0-for-3 Tribunal night

Clubs launch last-ditch AFL appeals after controversial 0-for-3 Tribunal night

www.foxsports.com.au

The Lions and Giants will challenge Charlie Cameron

23

Charlie Cameron

Age

30

Ht

180cm

Wt

76kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.1

3star

K

8.4

3star

HB

3.7

3star

M

3.0

3star

T

3.2

5star

G

1.5

5star

D

9.6

2star

K

7.9

3star

HB

1.7

1star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.7

3star

G

1.9

5star

D

9.6

3star

K

5.4

2star

HB

4.2

4star

M

1.4

2star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.2

4star

and Toby Bedford

14

Toby Bedford

Age

24

Ht

179cm

Wt

75kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.0

2star

K

2.0

1star

HB

6.0

4star

M

1.0

1star

T

2.0

4star

G

0.0

1star

D

8.0

2star

K

2.0

1star

HB

6.0

3star

M

1.0

1star

T

2.0

3star

G

0.0

1star

D

8.0

2star

K

2.0

1star

HB

6.0

4star

M

1.0

1star

T

2.0

4star

G

0.0

1star

’s respective three-match bans at the AFL Appeals Board after both players had their suspensions upheld at the Tribunal.

The AFL handed down a massive 10 weeks worth of suspensions from Round 18, with the Cameron and Bedford sanctions seeing Brisbane great Jonathan Brown expressing concerns for the “fabric of the game”.

But Cameron and Bedford’s suspensions were both upheld in another reminder of the strict sanctions looming for incidents resulting in concussion.
.....................

The 10th game was the 1 match suspension for Rosa's drive by elbow to Logan Evans neck.

 

[Port 2004]

Just saw 6 matches for Collard for multiple homophobic slurs against multiple opponents.

Thought it would be more severe, given Finlayson was given 3 games and was excoriated in the media for one comment which he owned up to immediately.

Has there been the same outcry from the self righteous ones such as Ian Robert’s and other rainbow wearing w***ers over Collards words or was it only reserved for Jeremy?

 

[backtozero]

Just saw 6 matches for Collard for multiple homophobic slurs against multiple opponents.

Thought it would be more severe, given Finlayson was given 3 games and was excoriated in the media for one comment which he owned up to immediately.

Increasing in threes. The next guy to say a naughty word will get 9.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Its gone;

3 Jezza
5 Will Powell of GC in May to Brisbane player
6 Collard in VFL

Next one will be 7.

 

[bomberclifford]

Just saw 6 matches for Collard for multiple homophobic slurs against multiple opponents.

Thought it would be more severe, given Finlayson was given 3 games and was excoriated in the media for one comment which he owned up to immediately.

Quite ironic that it was a St Kilda player.

 

[Windy Cindy]

I heard that, I mean he put his head over the ball because that's what you're meant to do and players don't expect to get a hip rammed into their cranium. So more fool him, hey?

Should have been increased on appeal, the worst bump this year.

 

[Handyandy]

Should have been increased on appeal, the worst bump this year.

Yeah I agree
I thought that was the risk of reckless appeals. You waste their time & you could get more games
But sure Hardwick has a line to mates in AFL house

 

[Handyandy]

Agreed, Charlie Cameron has been treading a very fine line between tough play and borderline thuggery for years, and whilst a 3 match suspension for his recent effort may be viewed by some as a tad harsh his intent has always appeared to me to hurt the opposition player as much as possible whether that be by foul means, or fair.

Agree
Just saw his tackle on Lever for which he got of using the good guy defence
Clearly lifted lever off his feet & tried to perform a ‘flying suplex’ move but wasn’t strong enough to fully lift him

Did something similar on the weekend
Not buying the accidental part

Sniper

Funny how he has gotten off 5 times & managed to successfully use the good guy defence last time compared to the tribunal/ media lynch mob set up for our indigenous boys

 

[Handyandy]

Interesting to read all the divided opinions on here
Certainly seems like the afl has made a statement
My takeaway is that if you tackle aggressively & injure your opponent you are in trouble
Similar to the bump
I don’t have an issue with it
So long as they are consistent
Would hate to see some thug lift then dash butters head on the ground

 

[Grave Danger]

Interesting to read all the divided opinions on here
Certainly seems like the afl has made a statement
My takeaway is that if you tackle aggressively & injure your opponent you are in trouble
Similar to the bump
I don’t have an issue with it
So long as they are consistent
Would hate to see some thug lift then dash butters head on the ground

That's the shit part of it though, there's never any consistency - it's Chook Lotto.

 

[It Just Is]

Its gone;

3 Jezza
5 Will Powell of GC in May to Brisbane player
6 Collard in VFL

Next one will be 7.

Hmm no white private school boys in that list.

Aboriginal players are massively over indexed in suspensions this year. 30% of weeks missed for on field incidents and 100% of vilification suspensions.

 

[TeeKray]

Hmm no white private school boys in that list.

Aboriginal players are massively over indexed in suspensions this year. 30% of weeks missed for on field incidents and 100% of vilification suspensions.

Will Powell isn't Aboriginal and even if he was your call would still be ridiculous.

 

[Sewer de Lance]

If the AFL Match Review Committee was in charge of lasts night State of Origin, some of those players would have been rubbed out for months.

Someone needs to tap the AFL on the shoulder & tell them to pull back before the game is ruined forever.

 

[jac147]

If the AFL Match Review Committee was in charge of lasts night State of Origin, some of those players would have been rubbed out for months.

Someone needs to tap the AFL on the shoulder & tell them to pull back before the game is ruined forever.

It was gladiatorial, even the smaller blokes could do severe damage. I would suggest that 30 players would have up before the AFL tribunal for head high tackles. It was like chalk and cheese when comparing it with AFL.
However it must be remembered that those players out on the pitch last night were the crème de la crème of the NRL.

 

[Handyandy]

Will Powell isn't Aboriginal and even if he was your call would still be ridiculous.

Even so, our indigenous boys get the hanging judge every time they front the tribunal, media jumps in too.

But I guess we have bad black fellas who deserve the maximum penalty

Whilst vic clubs have good black fellas like Pickett & Rioli & brissy have Cameron
Who can go around whacking people & get off 5 times & are permitted to use the good guy defence denied our bad black fellas

 

[El_Scorcho]

I can understand Cameron's suspension albeit harsh.

But Bedford's? Wow. That sort of tackle happens at every other stoppage. Absolutely no slamming or forceful action to the tackle at all. Not really sure what a player could be expected to do differently apart from not tackle.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Tribunal Reasons in the Davies bump on Lachie Jones case.

Reasons:

We are satisfied that Alex Davies bumped or made contact that was at least low impact to Lachlan Jones from front-on when Jones had his head over the ball.

Two questions that then arise are was Davies contesting the ball and If so, was it reasonable to contest the ball in that way?

Our answer to number one is yes and to number two is no.

As to one, although we find Davies was second to the ball, he was attempting to gather the ball while bumping or making contact with Jones.

As to two, Davies hit the contest at some speed. He was aware, or should reasonably have been aware, that Jones had touched or fumbled the ball and was attempting to gather it.

We find he could and should have seen that Jones’ head was over the ball and he was not side on.

Davies could have turned or moved in such a way as to avoid or minimise impact to Jones’ head and shoulders.

We have viewed the training videos and have no difficulty in accepting that what is shown is good technique for gathering a ground ball.

A reasonable player would not use that technique if, as here, he should realise that his opponent has his head down over the ball.

We are clearly satisfied this was forceful front-on contact.

 

[Handyandy]

I don’t recall so many players being concussed in tackles 20 years ago. Is this a new phenomenon? An unforeseen result of rule changes & evolution of the game?

Players are taught not to bump, the game is faster, but with more congestion/ flooding, players are very good at riding through the tackle & still disposing the ball effectively & players are receiving all sorts of novel tackling coaching, from rugby & judo specialists

Perhaps the tackle is one of the few mechanisms still open for the thugs to hurt people?