He intentionally went to strike, does not matter where it lands from there, absurd classification
-
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. Hawkins 2 weeks, Duncan 1
- Thread starter catempire
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
****ing lol.... Strong troll. Was he trying the old dead arm trick?
Premier League is starting back up and the Cricket is on
Legs don't count.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Wonder if its reasonable of the club to issue a media release to its fans.
Already thrown under the rug.. weak as piss and a reflection of the club's behaviour in recent times.
They must be aware of the interest surely
- Aug 12, 2015
- 17,835
- 31,430
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Toronto Raptors - Maple Leafs
dazbroncos
Max Rooke Appreciation Society
- Oct 9, 2010
- 55,887
- 96,429
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Denver Broncos, Red Bull Racing
- Moderator
- #784
Im a Broncos fan #1.
After that - Id probably go Steelers - They always have a great defense and their linebackers are just brutal.
for a third - maybe the Patriots - have to respect what they have done - and Brady is a freak.
NOT - Raiders, Cowboys, 49ers, Chiefs, Chargers. All w***ers.
GO Catters
After that - Id probably go Steelers - They always have a great defense and their linebackers are just brutal.
for a third - maybe the Patriots - have to respect what they have done - and Brady is a freak.
NOT - Raiders, Cowboys, 49ers, Chiefs, Chargers. All w***ers.
GO Catters
Last edited:
I'm sure if Blicz had broken Sloanes leg the Crows fans would be totally clear headed and understanding about it.
I mean, this is the group that tried to start a witch hunt over an imagined eye gouge - they're obviously very reasonable people.
Cardinals?
Yes something from the club other than booking seats for round 23 would be good. But they have never been good at communication with members or supporters, or engaging with members to ensure that we as the stakeholders of the club are informed, on side and take out our memberships next season.
dazbroncos
Max Rooke Appreciation Society
- Oct 9, 2010
- 55,887
- 96,429
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Denver Broncos, Red Bull Racing
- Moderator
- #789
Not the most hated by me... such a grease fire for so long...
You could do worse.. going into a rebuild
Go Catters
You're kidding, surely. What a crock of shit. A coathanger that was not intentional because he meant to hit him on the shoulder. Now I have heard it all.
Apologies for going over old ground now but they've replayed on The Front Bar the Duncan/Papley incident and it's outrageous that Duncan went for that. Papley took the biggest dive since the last Red Bull Cliff Diving comp. Disgraceful.
Spot on. The fact that if we challenged and lost he'd get 2 was more of a farce.
Would love to see the Swans medical report as that certainly played a part in both suspensions. Wonder if they put something in about Papley just in case the MRP put him up on a flopping charge...
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
Were our players elsewhere when the notifications about penalties for jumper punches and gut punches were released?
Seems so.
Totally oblivious evidently, and they get what they deserve given the current climate.
These incidents are unnecessary and are being stamped out for the betterment of footy in the long run.
About time our boys paid attention and thought about the ramifications.
Punch to the upperchest - no mention by MRP... Absolute joke.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Those sorts of things are just part of the Showdown so there was nothing in it.Punch to the upperchest - no mention by MRP... Absolute joke.
I remember seeing Robbie Gray jumper punch one of the Adelaide players.
- May 5, 2016
- 52,328
- 59,283
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I think I can offer a somewhat balanced perspective on the challenge-no challenge argument.
I got given a job this year - when I say job, it's called an honorarium, I got given $2000 to co-ordinate the match review panel for the local rugby league competition.
Basically my job is this:
- Assess a bunch of referee reports whereby they've seen an in-game incident and put a player on report. They send written details on these incidents to me, I then track down the footage (it's compulsory in the top tier competition to video first grade, reserve grade and under 18s matches - the second tier comp only has ladies league tag and seniors and it is a weaker competition for the small towns and they don't video it so all I've got to go on is referee's report).
- Decide if the report matches the incident
- issue a charge notice
- collate responses to charge notices
- attend judiciary hearings if the charges are challenged and occasionally sit on the judiciary panel if one of the other panel members has an interest in the case. Ie. if a former club of theirs is the club in question.
Frequently the panel see the evidence and hear the defence when the players challenge their charge, and they are sympathetic to things like exaggerated contact, self-defence, retaliation etc but at the end of the day, most - perhaps all - judicial codes, have NO provision for retaliation and even self defence only applies if the player's safety is at stake when they deliver a blow. Issues like high tackles are a bit less clear because frequently you see unintentional high tackles but they are the result of poor technique.
The bottom line is, if the vision in any way supports the charge, no matter how insignificant, they will have to cop their charge. Frequently the line is trotted out "we don't believe there was significant force but nonetheless you still struck him."
Can we really afford to challenge the Duncan case, with an extra week at stake, when in reality, as stupid and inoffensive as the incident was, he DID hit him?
You don't win anything by standing up for the right values but ultimately losing the battle.
The Hawkins one could be fought. They could prove that he didn't punch him - Hawkins' palm in my opinion was facing the player and therefore was as much a close fisted push as anything. But when you're facing 3 weeks it is too great a risk anyway.
So they're basically left in this predicament:
- Fight the charge that they can't fight, and guarantee themselves the maximum penalty with Duncan
- Fight the charge that they could potentially win but risk the rest of the home and away season.
I'd love them to have fought both but ultimately a footy club's job is to try and win the competition and playing the percentages is the best way to do that.
I got given a job this year - when I say job, it's called an honorarium, I got given $2000 to co-ordinate the match review panel for the local rugby league competition.
Basically my job is this:
- Assess a bunch of referee reports whereby they've seen an in-game incident and put a player on report. They send written details on these incidents to me, I then track down the footage (it's compulsory in the top tier competition to video first grade, reserve grade and under 18s matches - the second tier comp only has ladies league tag and seniors and it is a weaker competition for the small towns and they don't video it so all I've got to go on is referee's report).
- Decide if the report matches the incident
- issue a charge notice
- collate responses to charge notices
- attend judiciary hearings if the charges are challenged and occasionally sit on the judiciary panel if one of the other panel members has an interest in the case. Ie. if a former club of theirs is the club in question.
Frequently the panel see the evidence and hear the defence when the players challenge their charge, and they are sympathetic to things like exaggerated contact, self-defence, retaliation etc but at the end of the day, most - perhaps all - judicial codes, have NO provision for retaliation and even self defence only applies if the player's safety is at stake when they deliver a blow. Issues like high tackles are a bit less clear because frequently you see unintentional high tackles but they are the result of poor technique.
The bottom line is, if the vision in any way supports the charge, no matter how insignificant, they will have to cop their charge. Frequently the line is trotted out "we don't believe there was significant force but nonetheless you still struck him."
Can we really afford to challenge the Duncan case, with an extra week at stake, when in reality, as stupid and inoffensive as the incident was, he DID hit him?
You don't win anything by standing up for the right values but ultimately losing the battle.
The Hawkins one could be fought. They could prove that he didn't punch him - Hawkins' palm in my opinion was facing the player and therefore was as much a close fisted push as anything. But when you're facing 3 weeks it is too great a risk anyway.
So they're basically left in this predicament:
- Fight the charge that they can't fight, and guarantee themselves the maximum penalty with Duncan
- Fight the charge that they could potentially win but risk the rest of the home and away season.
I'd love them to have fought both but ultimately a footy club's job is to try and win the competition and playing the percentages is the best way to do that.
Pure_Ownage
TheBrownDog
You can walk and chew gum at the same time.
A) hawkins and duncan were undisciplned idiots to do what they did
B) papley is a dirty little diving cheater who faked injury
C) based on previous precedents for punches this year it was insufficient to suspend meaning the afl can't consistently police it's own rules.
All of these things are true.
It's not a case of one or the other and it annoys me when people make out like it is.
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
Good points.
Sadly for us A leads to the others.
Omit A and we have zilch to worry about this week.
If I was fronting up to papley in the gf, **** the tribunal loading xtra for the last dance. I'd be giving him a gut punch to really go on with, regardless the consequences.
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
Knowing our luck, we'd be the first to inherit the send-off rule.
Similar threads
- Locked
