We're not the only ones

[Ford Fairlane]

who think Burton's case was not that different to Choppy's ... so did Patrick Smith in today's Australian (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15698587%255E12270,00.html).

This season Byron Pickett was suspended for six matches on a rough-play charge that was similar in circumstance to the Burton incident. One player gets six matches, another is free to play immediately.

The two collisions were hardly that different. Pickett's past record could not have told against him for he had only been suspended once before - a week for striking in 2002.

In the Pickett case, the Port Adelaide player struck James Begley who was bending over to gather the ball. Burton struck Hyde who was upright but looking down as he sought to take possession. Contact in both cases was high.

These cases not only highlight the indefensible contradictions of the new tribunal system but the league's inability to police the hip-and-shoulder bump. The AFL rules the hip-and-shoulder legal but high contact illegal. When a player is attempting to gather the ball you cannot have one without the other.

When this new tribunal system was introduced, Anderson said it would in part reduce damage done to the credibility of the process. Gehrig one week, Pickett six, Burton off, suspended players eligible for the Brownlow Medal.

What a miserable failure.

[wharfie_1870]

You shouldn't read too much into that article. Any Camry supporter will tell you that Patrick Smith is a whinging, no good, Port Adelaide biased joke of a journalist and that is why they have boycotted The Australian :rolleyes:

[Paralowiepower]

Good article.
I think most of us think the same way.

[Powerstufff]

who think Burton's case was not that different to Choppy's ....Pretty well everyone, even many of the delighted Cow's supporters on their own Board.
But I think I've worked out the scale.
Pickett = black skin, black hair: 6 weeks
No-one yet = black skin, bleached blonde hair: 5 weeks
No-one yet = olive skin, black hair: 4 weeks
No-one yet = olive skin, bleached blonde hair: 3 weeks
Shattock = white skin, black hair: 2 weeks
Gehrig = white skin, brown hair: 1 week
Burton = white skin, blonde hair: nil, plus a lift to the airport.

:rolleyes:

[wharfie_1870]

Pretty well everyone, even many of the delighted Cow's supporters on their own Board.
But I think I've worked out the scale.
Pickett = black skin, black hair: 6 weeks
No-one yet = black skin, bleached blonde hair: 5 weeks
No-one yet = olive skin, black hair: 4 weeks
No-one yet = olive skin, bleached blonde hair: 3 weeks
Shattock = white skin, black hair: 2 weeks
Gehrig = white skin, brown hair: 1 week
Burton = white skin, blonde hair: nil, plus a lift to the airport.Good theory Powerstuff but I believe you are giving the MRC and the tribunal credit for actually working to some sort of consistent plan when in fact they are actually using a highly technical tool to decide the length of suspensions, see below.

http://www.cyberdarts.com/graphics/nodor1.gif

[dyertribe]

But I think I've worked out the scale.
Pickett = black skin, black hair: 6 weeks
No-one yet = black skin, bleached blonde hair: 5 weeks
No-one yet = olive skin, black hair: 4 weeks
No-one yet = olive skin, bleached blonde hair: 3 weeks
Shattock = white skin, black hair: 2 weeks
Gehrig = white skin, brown hair: 1 week
Burton = white skin, blonde hair: nil, plus a lift to the airport.

Explain to me Jeff Farmer's cheekbone busting knee on Michael Doughty which didn't garner so much as a week?

I realise that was under the old system, but if the WAP is alive and well at the Tribunal, you'd think young Jeffrey would have done some time.

Going back even further, Dermott Brereton and David Rhys-Jones were Aryan.

[Crowked]

Jeez, your grasping at straws when you go to the depth of using Patrick Smith's garbage to support your arguement.

but seriously, I'm sure most if not everyone on the Crows board agrees that Pickett got probably 2 games too many and Burton was very lucky not to get 1 or 2 himself. Saying they were very similar in all aspects is drawing a very long bow though. Picketts was much more aggresive and the contact was much harder, luckily for Begley the consiquences werent much worse.

IMO, Pickett = 3-4, Burton =1-2

Its funny how none of you are all that concerned that Wangas got off for that trip, when last year he would have almost certainly got a game. Also didnt Shattock get his penalty reduced just like Burton?

To suggest it depends on skin colour is just crap. Not buying that at all.

[deeps]

Its funny how none of you are all that concerned that Wangas got off for that trip, when last year he would have almost certainly got a game. Also didnt Shattock get his penalty reduced just like Burton?

To suggest it depends on skin colour is just crap. Not buying that at all.

would he have got a week? it's not for sure. Dustin Fletcher did the exact same thing,and with the help of a human movement expert, was acquitted.

If fletcher had NOT been acquitted, and got a week, and then wangas got a week as well, not many port supporters would be complaining.

Shattock's initial penatly before reductions was much too harsh. After reductions, again it was slightly too harsh. Only after appeal was it the right amount.

Stenglein started off too high as well, but after reductions was right. Appeal should not have been withheld.

The system is flawed, and i'm sure u can see that as much as we can. At times, it has been to our disadvantage, and you can argue at times it's been to our advantage.

Either way, it's inconsistent and needs a major upheaval.

i'd take the old system in the blink of an eye

[Paralowiepower]

Its funny how none of you are all that concerned that Wangas got off for that trip, when last year he would have almost certainly got a game.

That is one charge this year they have been consistant on. Three have gone up, none have got games so why should we be concerned? Oh yeah, he plays for Port!

[power_86]

would he have got a week? it's not for sure. Dustin Fletcher did the exact same thing,and with the help of a human movement expert, was acquitted.

If fletcher had NOT been acquitted, and got a week, and then wangas got a week as well, not many port supporters would be complaining.

Shattock's initial penatly before reductions was much too harsh. After reductions, again it was slightly too harsh. Only after appeal was it the right amount.

Stenglein started off too high as well, but after reductions was right. Appeal should not have been withheld.

The system is flawed, and i'm sure u can see that as much as we can. At times, it has been to our disadvantage, and you can argue at times it's been to our advantage.

Either way, it's inconsistent and needs a major upheaval.

i'd take the old system in the blink of an eye

I agree with you, I find it laughable that Burton got off. The tribunal system has to be reviewed, its a joke. Its not consistant enough :mad:

[wharfie_1870]

Jeez, your grasping at straws when you go to the depth of using Patrick Smith's garbage to support your arguement...........
QED :D


In fairness to Crowked he did start his next statement with "but seriously" but that was lost in my very selective edit ;)

[Sandola]

Mike Sheehan in his Herald Sun column did an analysis of how the decisions are being made that pretty much covered everyone. However, he did end it, "always excepting Byron Pickett, of course". Apparently plenty of people are just possibly beginning to think something's fishy.

[wharfie_1870]

Mike Sheehan in his Herald Sun column did an analysis of how the decisions are being made that pretty much covered everyone. However, he did end it, "always excepting Byron Pickett, of course". Apparently plenty of people are just possibly beginning to think something's fishy.Good find Sandola. I hadn't read that one. Here's the link to the article (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,%255E20123,00.html) for any one else who hasn't read it.

[Powerstufff]

....I'm sure most if not everyone on the Crows board agrees that Pickett got probably 2 games too many and Burton was very lucky not to get 1 or 2 himself........That's true, a credit to so many Crows supporters that they were willing to post along those lines.
.....Its funny how none of you are all that concerned that Wangas got off for that trip, when last year he would have almost certainly got a game. Also didnt Shattock get his penalty reduced just like Burton?.....We were ridiculously lucky with Wanganeen. Shattock however got 2 games, Burton got sweet f.a.
.....To suggest it depends on skin colour is just crap. Not buying that at all.Of course it's a load of rubbish. I mean I thought the whole scale thing was obviously a p*ss take on those who claimed Choppy got a shocking deal because he was aboriginal. It just amused me how these claims have tended to hold up on a scale of darkness. I'll edit in a smiley or two.

[Powerstufff]

Explain to me Jeff Farmer's cheekbone busting knee on Michael Doughty which didn't garner so much as a week?
I realise that was under the old system, but if the WAP is alive and well at the Tribunal, you'd think young Jeffrey would have done some time.
Going back even further, Dermott Brereton and David Rhys-Jones were Aryan.As you say, all under the old system.

[MrMeaner]

Good find Sandola. I hadn't read that one. Here's the link to the article (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,%255E20123,00.html) for any one else who hasn't read it.

Bloody hell! In one day, I find that I agree with both Patrick Smith and Mike Sheehan. I need to go home now. My head hurts!

[RussellEbertHandball]

Just because Humpty Dumpty doesn't like the tribunal, from day one, doesn't mean it's a complete failure. With the benefit of hindsight the MRP and the Tribunal understand that they got the Pickett descion wrong and have backed off from making severe rulings.

Having watched the points system operate in Rugby League I reckon it still has the potential to be a good system. If any of you remember my long post comparing the Pickett and Miller cases, you will recall that I said if I was a registered player in 2004 I would have asked the AFLPA to call for a strike unless the AFL fixed up last year's system. That system was completely incompetent. Some of Humpty Dumty's mates were on the Tribunal, they got sacked and he has had a bias against the new one from day one.

When the AFL review and refine the Tribunal process at the end of the year, they must state that the number 1 philosophical reason for the tribunals exixtence is to obtain consistent decisions. If this is not documented as the mission statement of the tribunal, then expect all this crap you have seen this year to occur again and again until they set the goal of consistent decisions.

I have said before that I don't expect perfection, but I do expect a very high degree of consistency. The Tribunal and the appeals board will always have the right to overturn the MRP's decision because they will see evidence that the MRP does not get to see, (ie the Burton case and Shattock's case when the DVD issued at the start of the year was used).

The inconsistencies will continue until a series of DVDs are produced, where every decision reviewed is put on the DVD, whether they involve a penalty or not, and every week they add to it with the new cases. Every new case looked at must be compared to all previous cases and explained why a penalty given in the current case is similiar or different to previous cases.


I just can't get too worked up about Burton's case as it's in the realms of what I expected and it confers the Pickett decision was wrong and too harsh. The MRP and Tribunal have realised this and have corrected their ways, which is too late for Choppy.

[dyertribe]

As you say, all under the old system.

The new system being to persecute Aborigines, or non-Aryans.

Interesting logic.

[RussellEbertHandball]

I don't buy into the crap that the 2005 system is anti-Aboriginal, anti-Port, anti-non Victorian teams etc etc. It just doesn't really worry to much about comparing past rulings to present cases. Schwab has publicly said that if they are inconsistent then it's up to the AFL to fix it and/or sack he MRP members.

[Porthos]

I just can't get too worked up about Burton's case as it's in the realms of what I expected and it confers the Pickett decision was wrong and too harsh. The MRP and Tribunal have realised this and have corrected their ways, which is too late for Choppy.Yeah, but the thing is that its not entirely too late. Yeah, he's done the six weeks, but the problem now is that those six weeks will magnify any future suspension.

Say he does a Wanganeen trip, then the severity of that penalty is increased for six weeks, instead of 3 or 4. Suddenly he's missing 3 weeks instead of 2 (or something)...so its the blatant error that keeps on erring, because then -that- extended sentence applies as well.

[gbear]

You shouldn't read too much into that article. Any Camry supporter will tell you that Patrick Smith is a whinging, no good, Port Adelaide biased joke of a journalist and that is why they have boycotted The Australian :rolleyes:

It appears as though crow supporters do not like any football journalists :rolleyes: Simple fact is that Burton should have at least got 2 matches, but because he is from the chardonay sipping part of town he got off :(

[RussellEbertHandball]

[QUOTE=Porthos]Yeah, but the thing is that its not entirely too late. Yeah, he's done the six weeks, but the problem now is that those six weeks will magnify any future suspension.

QUOTE]

If you believe that Pickett should have got 4 weeks, as I do, or 3 at best then it wont have any compounding impact.

From page 9 of the AFL Tribunal Reforms 2005, documents

"ADDITIONS
If a player has been found guilty of a Reportable Offence or Reportable Offences or taken an Early Plea within the previous three years resulting in any suspension of three or more matches, an automatic 30% of the base points will be added for each suspension."

I was at the Sydney pre match function when John James said he was upset about the Pickett incident as he would have a 60% loading because of his 6 game suspension. This is wrong as the Reform docuements say 30%.

IF the reform documents are wrong then Port should be publicly pointing it out.

Pickett should have got 4, 3 would have been generous. So if he got 3,4 or 5 instead of 6 he would still only be subject to a 30% addition to his base points if he gets suspended again in the next 3 years.

[portentous]

If he doesn't get suspended in the next 3 years, he has nothing to worry about...ditto P Burger, Monty, Broges et al.

I think our frustration with the MRP has masked the fact that our players are getting reported far too often in the first place for stupid things.

[Powerstufff]

....Yeah, he's done the six weeks, but the problem now is that those six weeks will magnify any future suspension.......Exactly. An admission from the AFL/the tribunal that they erred and were far too severe is still a reasonable ask. It won't give us the Carlton and Geelong games back, where one Choppy goal could've won the game. But it will mean the error isn't carried over if Choppy faces the tribunal in the future.

[noddy]

It appears as though crow supporters do not like any football journalists :rolleyes: Simple fact is that Burton should have at least got 2 matches, but because he is from the chardonay sipping part of town he got off

Wrong, the fact he got off so lightly was due to the fact that the AFC done it's home work, thanks in part to the way PA handled the Shattock appeal. :)


You scratch our back we'll scratch yours, ;)

[Powerstufff]

.....You scratch our back we'll scratch yours, ;)Brandeen, pass me my no.2 diamond tipped scratching tool.

[Sandola]

Brandeen, pass me my no.2 diamond tipped scratching tool.
Goes without saying that that would be a Power tool.