MRP / Trib. Week 2 vs Geelong - Ballantyne 2 weeks

[DMan 11]

Anyone else watch the vid link and get angry ? ? ?
Let me explain ...
The Sam Day case you could say was a replication of the balla's incident - similar force, hit in the same region and same outcome, yes his gets a lower grading because "he's tall" and the guy he hit was short ..
So when Taylor fumbles and falls forward to balla's height the split second before contact, and balla's makes contact first and foremost with Taylor's shoulder there is nothing taken into account here ?
Nathan snook has obviously never played the sport either - sure Nathan, it's simple to pull out of a contest at full pace with 1 step lead time - what a flog. Simple minds watch the slo mo and become physics geni overnight.

MRP - massive Rort panel.
some things will never change

 

[Palmervich]

Waste of time challenging, chose to bump, hit the head, from memory also left the ground. Not sure it was as hard as Taylor made it look, but that act is exactly what the rule is there for.
I did think however that with the new system, all previous charges wouldn't affect new charges, obviously not..

 

[clogged]

In the past I would completely agree. I've taken aim at Balla and others who put themselves into dumb situations regarding the MRP, but I think he has been hard done by a bit this time. It would be very hard for him to change the way he would approach a contest like the one he's done for. There's no way, in my mind at least, that he was going in to cause contact as such, it was split second reactionary moment of bad luck in the end.

I don't know, maybe you're right. Maybe he should just learn to take a half step off his attack in the heavy contest*, but still reckon in this instance it was a bit of bad luck/timing than a repeated mode of action that he fundamentally needs to change.


* Chris Mayne is one who does it well, he rarely will go into a congested play like a bull rush - he'll pick his moments and pounce.

Yeah, I agree. I don't think Ballantyne should be suspended. But he should change the way he plays if he doesn't want to be suspended, because the MRP are going to find a way to do it. Any contact he makes to the head or is otherwise contentious and he's gone. He should know that.

 

[yoong]

Yep, section 4.2 (B) is clear as mud as to how the decision is reached. Potential is given to all sorts of circumstances/situations, yet there is no strict definition as what is "low", "medium", "high" etc.

Interestingly in the worked examples section at the bottom, they tackle the Nat Fyfe Jordan Lewis report, saying he would still get 2 weeks due to existing bad record but don't tackle the Rischitelli incident which gave him that bad record. Hmm, wonder why? Don't like egg on your face MRP?

That was my complain about the old mrp system as well. To be fair, they cleaned up the intention part. It's now either intentional or careless.

I think they need to get rid of the medium impact part. Just low or high (and critical). I think inherently it's easier to assess and less prone to bias.

 

[yoong]

This would seem the only reasonable grounds to appeal, the impact grading.
We should be able to make a strong case on the fact he returned to the field, alone.
The cost of failing in an appeal is not prohibitive.

Actually, I wonder if he can challenge intention. "Careless" implied that Ballas was reckless, or in mrp talk, lack the duty of care to other players. If I am no wrong, Viney's argument was similar, he was playing the ball, and do so in a correct manner, so can't fault him.

That being said, I think they changed the mrp panel, but the tribunal is still the same folks, so I expect the same bad results if we appeal.

 

[Shadow Man]

Not even a free kick, disgraceful ruling and wouldn't have been applied to any other player. We should challenge on principal!

 

[Grandstan]

Anyone else watch the vid link and get angry ? ? ?
Let me explain ...
The Sam Day case you could say was a replication of the balla's incident - similar force, hit in the same region and same outcome, yes his gets a lower grading because "he's tall" and the guy he hit was short ..
So when Taylor fumbles and falls forward to balla's height the split second before contact, and balla's makes contact first and foremost with Taylor's shoulder there is nothing taken into account here ?
Nathan snook has obviously never played the sport either - sure Nathan, it's simple to pull out of a contest at full pace with 1 step lead time - what a flog. Simple minds watch the slo mo and become physics geni overnight.

MRP - massive Rort panel.
some things will never change

The confidence with which Snook decrees that Balla chose the contact is breathtaking. Has everyone forgotten that this guy broke his jaw twice last year and publicly explained that he needed to change his tackling style to protect himself more? With only one step to adjust before the contact with Taylor it looks to me like he's simply bracing to protect himself.

 

[Righteo]

Is that a problem though?

Take the plea and he misses WCE and Sydney.

Challenge and lose and he only misses Melbourne as well. Which really should be a win anyway. Of course, you probably don't want him to miss too much footy, but it's not really a massive risk. Even if it's a 30% chance we get it somehow down to 1 week i'd think about taking it.

Sorry yes that's what I meant.

 

[Simmofreo]

On 6pr Ross was very quick to say " No No I wouldn't have thought there will be an appeal" " Someone else gets a chance"

 

[thefreodockers]

There is one or two silver linings to Ballaz suspension.

1. Crozier / Mzungu / Blakely / Weller / other will get a chance to show their stuff and help our depth.

2. Ballaz has looked a little underdone in the first two rounds and seemed to miss his second/third/fourth efforts he is known for - he will be better for the rest.

 

[youmewe]

When was the last time our legal team successfully appealed an MRP verdict? I hope we don't challenge, will end up getting 3 I have very little doubt.

Round 6, 2012, the Greg Broughton case.

http://www.fremantlefc.com.au/news/2012-05-08/broughton-successfully-challenges-rough-conduct-charge

There is a recent precedent case for downgrading the impact rating - the Stevie J / Thompson case.

The tribunal downgraded the impact rating from 'low' to 'negligible'.

The catch is that Thompson testified on Stevie J's behalf - would Taylor do the same for Ballantyne?

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...r-kneeing-scott-thompson-20140805-100q39.html
http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au...hnson-suspension/story-fnjuhrxq-1227013975280

 

[go_the_dockers]

Very similar to Viney last year.

You could argue no alternative.

 

[yoong]

When was the last time our legal team successfully appealed an MRP verdict? I hope we don't challenge, will end up getting 3 I have very little doubt.

#freeballas

 

[E Shed]

I find this result typically stupid and not within the spirit of the game.
Strangely I'm not that bothered. While Balla is always first 22 I think we can cover him pretty easily with our current depth and I look forward to seeing Crozier or Duffy given a chance to show their stuff.

 

[Grandstan]

When was the last time our legal team successfully appealed an MRP verdict? I hope we don't challenge, will end up getting 3 I have very little doubt.

Just last year Ballas got off after the MRP sent it straight to the tribunal because the "high points tally under the system did not reflect the incident". Three weeks for negligent high contact, but "the Dockers argued Ballantyne had no other reasonable way to contest the ball."

 

[yakka man]

What i get the most annoyed at is the fact that the Vic biased media never mention it when it's a freo player (or an interstate player), but when it's a Victorian player we never hear the end of it.

Ballantyne is stupid though. Deserves to get suspended, just annoyed that he won't play the Swans, which will be an important game.

 

[Grandstan]

What i get the most annoyed at is the fact that the Vic biased media never mention it when it's a freo player (or an interstate player), but when it's a Victorian player we never hear the end of it.

Vic or not, when you've got a long record you'll never get the benefit of the doubt in the media.

 

[Kram]

 

[Big Animal]

It seems pretty straightforward to me. They have been giving 2 weeks for intentional hits to the heads this year, reduced to 1 with a guilty plea. Ballas just got the same but +1 for a bad record. He deserves it.

But as Eshed said, not that fussed. Gives another bloke a chance and ballas can have a break as he's been performing below par anyways.

 

[Banker]

There is one or two silver linings to Ballaz suspension.

1. Crozier / Mzungu / Blakely / Weller / other will get a chance to show their stuff and help our depth.

2. Ballaz has looked a little underdone in the first two rounds and seemed to miss his second/third/fourth efforts he is known for - he will be better for the rest.

Missing Balla this week is fine, its the week after thats the big problem! Against Sydney at home Balla would have been a great player to have.

 

[noise36]

Ballaz should have punched him in the face instead of accidental contact, would have got a lighter sentence

 

[thefreodockers]

Missing Balla this week is fine, its the week after thats the big problem! Against Sydney at home Balla would have been a great player to have.

Without doubt, but don't write off the options we have to cover him just yet - Crozier / Duffy / Mzungu / other will make life very tough for Sydney.

 

[JoseMourinho]

When was the last time our legal team successfully appealed an MRP verdict? I hope we don't challenge, will end up getting 3 I have very little doubt.

Ironically with Ballantyne hhahhahaha

 

[Purple Maverick]

He should have never have attempted to bump, it is simply too risky in this modern age of football. To be frank, I am over ballas putting himself in positions to be suspended. It's high risk for an extremely low reward. Regardless of low impact, reckless, etc, he has been suspended again, enough is enough and he needs to take ownership

 

[Admiral Byng]

Ballaz should have punched him in the face instead of accidental contact, would have got a lighter sentence

True. striking is considered less serious than a bump to the head. Even an intentional strike.