-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
MRP / Trib. Taylor Walker
- Thread starter DREAM TEAM BUFF
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Moderator
- May 24, 2006
- 86,180
- 179,821
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Redbacks, Sturt, Liverpool, Arizona
- Moderator
- #202
I hadn't seen the Lovett-Murray one.
Wow. The very definition of two actions right there.
"Deemed medium impact because Taylor came back on the ground."
Whereas Priddis didn't come back on the ground, which meant a lower impact rating
Frickin disgrace. Hope we raise hell.
Wow. The very definition of two actions right there.
"Deemed medium impact because Taylor came back on the ground."
Whereas Priddis didn't come back on the ground, which meant a lower impact rating
Frickin disgrace. Hope we raise hell.
The worst thing abot NLM's tackle in my opinion is if you watch his legs he looks (to me anyway) that hes trying to hook his leg with his own to trip him up thus causing a face first fall.
Haha, imagine explaining this to someone who is new to the game!I hadn't seen the Lovett-Murray one.
Wow. The very definition of two actions right there.
"Deemed medium impact because Taylor came back on the ground."
Whereas Priddis didn't come back on the ground, which meant a lower impact rating
Frickin disgrace. Hope we raise hell.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Bacon8
Cancelled
That tackle was Low impact. (I went looking cos I thought he appealed it)
And thanks for the NLM vision. Driving head into ground mean no case now (sorry Jack Trengove, your tackle was the wrong year obv)
Anyone seen Nahas' online anywhere?
Definitely does this.
If the AFL wanted clear passage to indigenous round for NLM then they should've let Walker off too, has drawn far too much attention to the MRP's inconsistency.
Yep, as Brian Taylor says he has tried to hook the leg around to trip him which would also result in a faceplant for Priddis..
This is one of the most amazing.... Wow..
Racing To Win
Team Captain
Gentleman,
Unfortunately, as the AFL continues to state (even though I am not sold on it), the Match Review Panel is an independent body. The AFL (apparently) is not to blame.
The AFL and the Match Review Panel are a joke of an organisation run by a bunch of money hungry hypocrites.
Unfortunately, as the AFL continues to state (even though I am not sold on it), the Match Review Panel is an independent body. The AFL (apparently) is not to blame.
The AFL and the Match Review Panel are a joke of an organisation run by a bunch of money hungry hypocrites.
That NLM tackle was disgraceful. Not only did he drive him face first into the ground with arms pinned, he actually hooked the legs to deliberately drop him. He should have got weeks for just for the trip!
1st qtr, Jenkins does the exact same thing to Guthrie at the top of our goal square. Guthrie gets his arm free and breaks his fall. The only difference between JJ's and Tex's is that Taylor hit his head. One is legal, the other isn't? It was a shame Taylor hit his head, but he was fine.
Consistency. That's all I ask for.
Consistency. That's all I ask for.
No, the tribunal is an independent body, not the MRP.
Also, the more I see the incident, the more I can see why he should at least get a week, but there is no way it is medium impact given the NLM precedent. I think we can contest this part of the charge successfully, and will the the most logical route to take IMO.
Sux not to have walker and not saying I agree with MRP but....
We all said in the offseason that one thing we needed to do was push the boundaries with being physical, niggle, stuff that can potentially be reportable. We needed to find the line and once we did come slightly back from it.
Just a pity the line seems different for us than others.
If I was Sando, wouldnt even talk to Walker about it. The sliding thing was unlucky, this pretty much is too, would have to have a couple more of these before I'd worry.
I havent seen Smack's effort but by all accounts he could have refrained, that would be the one where you might talk to the player. Be interested to see if he comes back in this week or is penalised by being sent back to SANFL as well.
We all said in the offseason that one thing we needed to do was push the boundaries with being physical, niggle, stuff that can potentially be reportable. We needed to find the line and once we did come slightly back from it.
Just a pity the line seems different for us than others.
If I was Sando, wouldnt even talk to Walker about it. The sliding thing was unlucky, this pretty much is too, would have to have a couple more of these before I'd worry.
I havent seen Smack's effort but by all accounts he could have refrained, that would be the one where you might talk to the player. Be interested to see if he comes back in this week or is penalised by being sent back to SANFL as well.
The injury factor has been a trend for over a year now with MRP decisions, nothing new there. It is the fact they turned a blind eye to the NLM incident which has got me fuming. If he had got a week (which would have been 2 as well given his poor record) then I could swallow it.
I completely agree. However, NLM getting off will hopefully help our appeal should it happen. (doesn't make it right though)
Just seen the Nahas tackle..
He should have gone too.. While not as much force, it was probably the most dangerous of the 3 tackles which could have had neck and spinal repercussions..
Article on the dangerous tackles:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...anderson-concern/story-fnca0u4y-1226354309487
He should have gone too.. While not as much force, it was probably the most dangerous of the 3 tackles which could have had neck and spinal repercussions..
Article on the dangerous tackles:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...anderson-concern/story-fnca0u4y-1226354309487
wasnt the smartest tackle from tex. i dont like to see players get rubbed out for these tackles but thats the way the game is going. not surprised he has got games.
dissapointing but not surprising.
a lot of adelaide posters are just embarassing themselves the way they are carrying on about it.
dissapointing but not surprising.
a lot of adelaide posters are just embarassing themselves the way they are carrying on about it.
needs to appeal... what a disgrace of a decision.
When there are 2 other incidents in the same week which are worse that don't get anything, it will always cause outcry from supporters, what did you expect?
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
i expect ppl to be upset, rightly so, but when ppl are coming out with conspriacy theorys and so on its embarassing and over the top.
FR0GGY
Busy
Surely it wouldn't be hard for a lawyer to slam dunk this case. Its so easy, so many precedents
I think people are just searching for any kind of reason that can explain why Tex gets 2 weeks and the other guys have no case to answer.
Logic and the AFL don't go together anymore, so people start are forced to start think illogically. When in Rome.
Does the MRP even allow use of precedents anymore?
he also had control of priddis' movement much longer than tex did with harry. so the argument regarding it not being neccessary for tex to bring harry to ground becomes null & void.
absolute disgrace. must challenge the lot. not guilty and if lose, challenge it through the courts. eff them.