Roast MRP

Remove this Banner Ad

CotchIsKing

CotchIsKing

All Australian
Veteran Richmond Tigers - 2015 Player Sponsor Richmond Tigers - 2014 Player Sponsor Richmond Tigers - 2013 Player Sponsor
Oct 8, 2011
793
2,650
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Spurs, 49ers, SF Giants, GS Warrio
Just heard on SEN, Buddy and Tippet can both get a week with a guilty plea. No action on Goodes or Gordon.

I don't think the MRP have it right at the moment. They are basing everything on how injured player is. I am not sure Buddy's contact with Titch could have been much more high impact. Did he knock him out, no but I thought injury to the player hit was an aggravating factor not mitigating.

My view was Buddy's was worse than Tippet's and should have been graded appropriately.

With the outcome of Gibbs' tackle last week, I just don't see how that can be seen as being materially worse than Buddy who runs past the ball and collects Titch high.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Cant understand it... The action surely has to carry some consequence. Just because you didn't knock the bloke out doesnt mean it was a fair hit.

Gordon buddy and tippet all lucky.
 
mrp now confirmed as a bunch of soft utensils, how can you run over the ball , bump someone intentionally, high! and only get one week? the fact that the was not injured doesnt matter , its a dangerous act, which caused him to need to have a concussion test. and as for tippett, he raised his elbow intentionally to his face. since when were those acts worth only one week?

franklin should of got at least 3
tippett 2
gordon 1 or 2
 
Tigerforlife78 said:
Got to have at least 1 Sydney team in contention for the top 4 and a finals run for market share in Sydney v the NRL is all I have to say. Oh that and ****ing bullshit :mad:
Click to expand...

Exactly, cannot have one of the AFL's lovechilds punished. The fact that no action on Goodes is the biggest puzzler to me.......and the silence from the media about it.......nothing to see here, move on.....but don't you dare boo him though!
 
As much as I hate Goodes, nothing in it, watch the video not the still, wasn't close to a grab.
Franklin should be 3 down to 2 minimum though.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

No dramas with any of them. Goodes incident wasnt that bad in real time. Although buddys and tippets incidents were reckless neither of them would have knocked the skin off custard
 
no orange peeler said:
No dramas with any of them. Goodes incident wasnt that bad in real time. Although buddys and tippets incidents were reckless neither of them would have knocked the skin off custard
Click to expand...
That is unusually reserved for you mate, the newborn and lack of sleep drained some of the fight from you or something? :p
 
Tippett's decision was right according to the rules, Buddy's should have been 3 down to 2. Not sure how they can classify it as 'careless' instead of 'intentional'. Gordon's is correct, careless, low impact, high contact - 0 weeks.

[EDIT] Probably helps that they categorized Buddy's hit as 'rough conduct', instead of 'forceful front on conduct'. It's easy to claim he didn't intend to have 'rough conduct', but he clearly did intend to lay 'forceful front on contact'.
 
Last edited:
Agree with all except the buddy one. That could have done some serious damage and he just doesn't learn and now that he plays for the Swans, the AFL seem reluctant to punish him for it. They really should, he'll be playing the game for another 7 years. Supposedly.

Like I said last year when he got away with another dodgy hit, he would have copped a longer ban if he was playing for the Hawks.
 
Heisenberg_ said:
As much as I hate Goodes, nothing in it, watch the video not the still, wasn't close to a grab.
Franklin should be 3 down to 2 minimum though.
Click to expand...

This, and Gordon should have got a holiday too
 
Transplant posts from the post-mortem thread (more relevant here):

Buddy and Tippett each take a one-match ban through guilty pleas to "careless, medium impact, and high contact" incidents (both were classified as such), avoiding the possible two-match bans on the table had they contested the findings. Story here (among other places, of course):

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...tippett-offered-one-week-20150629-gi0lsq.html

While I'm more willing to accept Tippett's elbow as a lapse in concentration (he looked lackadaisical in the air and was almost facing away when the blow connected), I struggle to see Buddy's hit on Edwards as "careless." To me, it looked like he purposely abandoned the football and squared up on Edwards who had eyes only for the pill. He's getting off lightly in my view.

Anyway, bring on the "Sydney loses $1.8 million" story lines!

and:

Also, this is much better footage of the Goodes-Hunt incident. It seems that "SquirrilGate" may be just a molehill that looks like a mountain.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...onds-taylor-hunt/story-fni5f22o-1227417503604
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top