Retired #45: Conor McKenna ☘️ - Returning to the AFL to play with Brisbane - 17/11

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

"Jury members have returned. Have been instructed lowest possible penalty they can give is two matches, highest possible penalty is four matches."

AFL:
Gleeson concedes there is no clear footage of McKenna biting Dickson. Says another player could have lied and denied charge, which weighs significantly in his favour. There should be a significant discount for his guilty plea. To his significant credit that he has done that.
Gleeson notes there was no provocation by Dickson.
Gleeson notes it was a bite to the neck and could reasonably conclude from the video evidence that McKenna moved towards neck before biting it.
Said more luck than good management that Dickson's skin wasn't broken.

EFC:
Anderson for McKenna. Says:
- McKenna is remorseful and sorry for his actions
- A bite that is at the low end of the scale; described by Dickson as "a quick nip"
- Was an instinctive, spur of the moment action while they were grappling on the ground
- Out of character
- Asks jury to deal with proportionately and fairly with other offences that have occurred for biting and other offences in AFL guidelines

Anderson arguing offence at low end of scale, refers to Bulldogs' medical report. Dickson came off for a scheduled rotation, no further treatment required. Red mark of skin with no penetration and no bleeding.
Now offers to investigation officer's report and Dickson's statement that he felt a "quick nip".


http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-04-10/tribunal-live-mckenna-bite-charge-from-515pm-aest
 
Chairman is a ******* flog campaigner
 
I concur.

Now character references... Tadhg Kennelly first up.

This begs the question, can anyone understand what Conor/Tadgh are even saying?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This thread is great
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top