MRP / Trib. Tribunal Thread - rules and offences discombobulation

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

We've had Houston saying he's adamant that the bump has no high contact. But we're accepting the judgement of high contact because the head hit the ground.

That part of the guidelines only counts for dangerous tackles, not for rough conduct bumps.

FFS we should be arguing the grading to body contact and pushing for two weeks.

Of course the AFL flogs want a bigger suspension than Rankine for Intentional, high contact with severe impact.
 
Let’s face it, despite volumes of rules and definitions, this whole process is a complete dog's breakfast. There’ll be no consistency, rhyme or reason to whatever they decide.
.... With KC's at 30 paces for clubs with the deep pockets, who wait for their chance to idly pick at the seams of the tribunal's cheap suit.
 
Fingers crossed this comes into play:

"if a Classifiable Offence is contested or referred to the Tribunal, a Player with an exemplary record could argue it constitutes exceptional and compelling circumstances (which would make it inappropriate to apply the sanctions in this document to the determined classification). In such circumstances, the Tribunal would determine the appropriate sanction in its absolute discretion"

Kinda doubt it though.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Tribunal Thread - rules and offences discombobulation

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top