MRP / Trib. Tribunal Thread - rules and offences discombobulation

[PortWTF]

Reasons:

Izak Rankine was waiting under a high ball, he moving in the same direction as the ball, his eyes were on the ball, and he was exposed and vulnerable to any forceful contact from an opposing player.

An opposing player has a clear duty of care in these circumstances not to commit an act which can be reasonably foreseen to result in a reported offense.

Houston breaches that duty of care, and his breach was significant.

He had time to think, (that's bullshit) he had time to weigh up his options. He had time and the clear opportunity to tackle. He chose to run at speed for several meters and forcefully bumped Rankine.

We are satisfied he made forceful contact to Rankine's upper shoulder and neck. His forceful contact also resulted in Rankine's head making forceful contact with the ground.

Although Houston's feet did not leave the ground, and he appears to have made some attempt to lower his body, the time he had to decide not to bump, the vulnerability of Rankine and the speed and force of his impact, lead us to conclude that this was a serious breach of the duty of care.

Rankine could have expected to be tackled, he could not reasonably have expected to be bumped high. (says who)

The sanction is to be determined in the Tribunal's discretion. We’ve taken into account Houston's guilty plea, among other things, including his good record, his contrition and the need for consistency compared with other recent comparable Tribunal decisions.

Having done so, we consider the appropriate sanction is five weeks for the reasons set out above.

His carelessness was significant, the impact was severe. The immediate consequences for Rankine were evident, he was concussed, it appears his shoulder was hurt and there was the potential for more serious injury.

We do not consider the circumstances give rise to exceptional and compelling circumstances.

We do not consider the consequence of missing finals and potentially a grand final impacts the sanction that should be imposed, particularly for such a serious breach and such a significant injury. (lets see if they say that after a SF or PF game hearing)

Appeal.

The points you have highlighted would all be debatable.

1. Rankine's upper shoulder and neck. I can't see how they can be satisfied based on the vision, it clearly looks like it is full body on body contact with Houston ever so slightly lower than Rankine at the point of impact, and their heads do not clash.
2. Can be reasonably foreseen to result in a reportable offense. But Houston is taking great care to bump Rankine in the body, according to the rules, so he should not expect to be reported for this act
3. He could not reasonably have expected to be bumped high. Back to point 1, it wasn't high. Also, if you have the ball you should be expected at all times to be tackled or bumped.

 

[PowerBaz]

5 weeks for a legal bump that didn't even yield a free kick. Absolutely no way that happens to any other Club in this league.

Question: Why did we open asking for three? Why not just say it wasn't in breach of the rules and at worst was careless to the body.

It’s legal - Rucci explained it all today. It’s a myth that it is.

 

[melanChronic]

Absolutely ridiculous that the trial was done via video link. The hearing should happen where the offence took place. If the AFL are going to insist it happens at headquarters in Melbourne then they need to pay for the player and legal team to fly over. Vic bias manifest.

 

[HighBudget]

AFL’s a joke, watch them not be consistent with similar offences in the future

 

[shewho]

I wish I knew Mr. Krupka a little bit better. I'd be asking a couple of hard questions about why are are never successful at the tribunal with his representation. May not be his fault, but it raises some doubts.

Actually, he got Butters off earlier this year.

 

[Sewer de Lance]

If we go on to win the GF the club should build a bronze statue in front of AO of the exact moment Dan sends Rankine into next week.

 

[It Just Is]

I’m not sure on the medical definition of an upper shoulder but I reckon a biomechanist worth their salt could prove that two people colliding while upright can’t touch ‘upper shoulders’.

Kenny could have drawn that with stick figures if they’d have let us in the room.

 

[MrMeaner]

MrMeaner do you know the Carlton lawyers or the one that has got Toby Bedford off twice at the Appeals Board

Yep. I know them. I also have views as to whether the media have overinflated their heroics in the tribunal.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Yep. I know them. I also have views as to whether the media have overinflated their heroics in the tribunal.

They obviously did something right.

 

[MrMeaner]

They obviously did something right.

I’m not doubting they stated the case well.

 

[Vagabond0]

So given the tribunal assessment guessing the AFL has also came out and said the umps on the night got it wrong by not awarding a free to Rankine for high contact and or rough play?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

So given the tribunal assessment guessing the AFL has also came out and said the umps on the night got it wrong by not awarding a free to Rankine for high contact and or rough play?

Laura Kane shut up shop a few weeks ago explaining good and bad umpiring decision. Think she stopped for 1 or 2 weeks then went on holiday and hasn't said anything since she got back.

 

[FishingRick04]

So given the tribunal assessment guessing the AFL has also came out and said the umps on the night got it wrong by not awarding a free to Rankine for high contact and or rough play?

Whilst Admitting Rozee marked and Bergman marked his also

 

[Vagabond0]

Love the photo AFL posted when announcing the 5 weeks..

Compare to the point of contact.

Upper shoulder and neck.

Personally more frustrated for Dan that anything else.

 

[Vagabond0]

Laura Kane shut up shop a few weeks ago explaining good and bad umpiring decision. Think she stopped for 1 or 2 weeks then went on holiday and hasn't said anything since she got back.

Lol I had to google Laura Kane, initially I thought it was the American woman you normally post

 

[240volt]

In the End.

 

[Vagabond0]

Whilst Admitting Rozee marked and Bergman marked his also

Whole night was a shit show. It wouldn't have been an easy game to officiate but they started poorly and never got control back.

Said on the night the umps partly contributed to the heat in the game.

 

[Brian McGee]

Whole night was a shit show. It wouldn't have been an easy game to officiate but they started poorly and never got control back.

Said on the night the umps partly contributed to the heat in the game.

Which also inflames the crowd too.

 

[Interstater]

Congratulations to the Adelaide Football Club for attempting to ruin Ports season by being traffic cones with punchable faces.

 

[Brian McGee]

We will still challenge this. Don’t know if there is much chance of getting it reduced but even one game could be enough. I hate both the inconsistency of the tribunal system though and the increasing size of suspensions. 5 games is nearly a quarter of a season. Are we really happy to see players getting rubbed out for that long? I think it’s madness.

 

[KrispyKremeMullanikka]

Yep. I know them. I also have views as to whether the media have overinflated their heroics in the tribunal.

100% Dan was trialled by media and they have a massive influence in this matter. Patty Cripps can knock someone out a Saints players out this week with a steel chair WWE style and he would still get off and the media would water it down like they have in the past.

 

[philreich]

They made sure he had no chance of making the GF, sons of bitches.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

He was a dead man walking as soon as the Fox Footy commentary team declared that his season is over. If it had been Patrick Cripps who hit Rankine, they would have said how out of character his actions were, and he'd be playing on Sunday.

 

[Brian McGee]

Just looked up the degoey bump from last year. The AFL wanted 4 weeks but the tribunal only gave him 3 because of his “remorse” and the “outside noise” of the media discussing it had already added to his punishment. They literally make up whatever bullshit narrative they want.

 

[GremioPower]

Absolutely ridiculous that the trial was done via video link. The hearing should happen where the offence took place. If the AFL are going to insist it happens at headquarters in Melbourne then they need to pay for the player and legal team to fly over. Vic bias manifest.

In Brazil, it's always in Rio. The Brazilian Soccer Tribunal [known as S.T.J.D.(F.), for "(Soccer's) Superior Tribunal of Sport Justice" in Portuguese] is there. Clubs must pay for their defense. It's indeed unfair.

 

[GremioPower]

Lol I had to google Laura Kane, initially I thought it was the American woman you normally post

That would be Cindye (AFLfromLA Youtube channel). She's awesome.