MRP / Trib. Joel Selwood CLEARED over striking Flog Thomas

[Zouz Kitty]

They should send him to I’m a celebrity, but leave him there

Classic!

"Selwood will plead not guilty on the basis (1) his conduct was careless rather than intentional and (2) the impact was negligible rather than low."

What sanction would Joel receive for that, do you know?

Corrupt AFL will give Joel 2 weeks- and will reverse Thomas to a fine

Thomas has gone straight to the Tribunal, are you saying that Port will mount a Defence to have him cleared?

 

[Pack Specialist]

"Ben Ihle re-examines Selwood
- again says he only went forward because Thomas pulled his jumper"

We're going to be here all night I reckon.

 

[Grimoz]

They will probably give him an extra week for swearing in the hearing

 

[selwoodsbandage]

They will probably give him an extra week for swearing in the hearing

Twice.

I really wish he added ‘weak’ in the middle of it.

 

[Boxhead_31]

 

[you pick one]

Twice.

I really wish he added ‘weak’ in the middle of it.

Needed to throw campaigner in somewhere.

 

[Pack Specialist]

If only Essendon were questioned like this!

 

[DangerHere]

Add Sam Midget, Lewis + Hodge

But they won’t make that retrospective, Lewis a thug, but right now Tom Mitchell is an Angel

 

[Munich]

An opportunity to strike... what a spurious claim.

Deny deny deny.

 

[frggr]

"Nick Pane QC says key point of charge are few frames where Selwood is standing over Thomas and hand moves right towards Thomas. Says shows intention to strike.

Chairman Howie asks whether there has been a blow of sufficient force to constitute a strike. If not, there is no charge to answer.

Pane says there was when Selwood moved towards Thomas with clenched left first.

But he concedes if Selwood's explanation of a stumble is accepted then he would have to be acquitted."

 

[r32godzilla]

When Joel gets off...

 

[Pack Specialist]

Needed to throw campaigner in somewhere.

Nah, Thomas didn't show up.

 

[Mahlepi]

This is just qc earn

Bartel said today he should have been charged with misconduct

This is a farce

 

[Munich]

If the fist don't fit you must acquit.

End this charade for god's sake...

 

[Zouz Kitty]

I really do not think Selwood made contact with Thomas, it looks to me as if, Joel, when pulled down by Thomas, grabbed Thomas' guernsey, then over-balanced, moving the guernsey up + over Thomas' shoulders + Joel's fists landed on the grass. It's certainly not the intentional punch that Thomas made to Selwood's head!

 

[Strange Cat]

Sounds like common sense is going to prevail

If Joel gets off I hope serious questions are asked of the MRP/christian original findings

 

[Catsfan999]

Nick Pane QC says key point of charge are few frames where Selwood is standing over Thomas and hand moves right towards Thomas. Says shows intention to strike.

Chairman Howie asks whether there has been a blow of sufficient force to constitute a strike. If not, there is no charge to answer.

Pane says there was when Selwood moved towards Thomas with clenched left first.

But he concedes if Selwood's explanation of a stumble is accepted then he would have to be acquitted.

 

[devilsnap]

But he concedes if Selwood's explanation of a stumble is accepted then he would have to be acquitted."

Absolutely massive. The QC basically has to disprove Selwood's story for this to stick.

All he's got is "Selwood's fist moved towards LT's face and touched it".

Chairman questioning if there was even enough force to constitute a strike (ie. it's not obvious and QC has to prove there was)

 

[Gogeelong]

"Nick Pane QC says key point of charge are few frames where Selwood is standing over Thomas and hand moves right towards Thomas. Says shows intention to strike.

Chairman Howie asks whether there has been a blow of sufficient force to constitute a strike. If not, there is no charge to answer.

Pane says there was when Selwood moved towards Thomas with clenched left first.

But he concedes if Selwood's explanation of a stumble is accepted then he would have to be acquitted."

So now he may be reported for intention to strike even though he does not.
Are they for real???

 

[Grimoz]

When Joel gets off...

This will have to happen first!!!

 

[Zouz Kitty]

You walk on a player one week
You knee drop one week

Joel 5 weeks because hawthorn didn’t draft him

Who was the Hawks player who stomped on (was it) Joel's head? ??? Another Cats player?

 

[Sttew]

Sounds like common sense is going to prevail

If Joel gets off I hope serious questions are asked of the MRP/christian original findings

I’d just let it go if he gets off

 

[Munich]

Absolutely massive. The QC basically has to disprove Selwood's story for this to stick.

All he's got is "Selwood's fist moved towards LT's face and touched it".

Chairman questioning if there was even enough force to constitute a strike (ie. it's not obvious and QC has to prove there was)

Beyond reasonable doubt. Where are the jurors!

Sorry. I'm finding this entire process utterly ridiculous.

 

[Mahlepi]

Sounds like common sense is going to prevail

If Joel gets off I hope serious questions are asked of the MRP/christian original findings

And dickhead hockin

 

[frggr]

"Ihle for Selwood giving closing submissions. Says to establish intention the evidence has to be of a sufficient quality to establish he intended to strike. Says nothing in video does anything to contradict Selwood's explanation of the incident."

Good point.