MRP / Trib. Joel Selwood CLEARED over striking Flog Thomas

[Zouz Kitty]

Pretty good argument from the defense. I'm thinking he might get downgraded to a fine, if any reprimand at all.

Please God?

 

[bigblackboz]

Mitchell - insufficient force
Selwood - you might have grazed him lightly or you tried to graze him lightly

 

[Jemaine]

So a deliberate stomp on a defenseless player, an elbow to the head and a blind-sided bump resulting in plastic surgery for the victim amount to the same as a guy grabbing a guy by the jumper. Seems legit. This, coupled with last year's home final debacle is why my membership will likely lapse after 20+ years this September. The AFL is as rigged as the WWE.

 

[Pack Specialist]

Sounds like common sense is going to prevail

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

Cue the melts.

 

[frggr]

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

I think they were saying that the intention to strike was enough to prove doubt about Joel's explanation.

 

[devilsnap]

QC unable to prove intent (ie. disprove Joel move forward because and only because he was pulled)
QC unable to prove a strike (no indication by LT of a strike, chairman even questioning the force).

If it's no and no, then Joel is acquitted. Simple.

 

[Pack Specialist]

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

Sicily.

Who just stood on Atley's leg.

 

[Zouz Kitty]

At least the Chariman is getting to the main issue. How Selwood pushing Thomas becomes "striking" yet Mitchell elbowing Goldstein in the head becomes "misconduct" I'll never know.

Well, that's easy! Geelong are always made an example of at the Tribunal + AFL/MRP/Tribunal are Hawthorn 'Fan Boys'

 

[Jensen]

Regardless of whatever the result ends up being, I'm glad our QC actually put forward a decent case this time, our last few attempts at appeals from what I remember were pretty pathetic.

 

[selwoodsbandage]

He will get off. That dog pulled Joel down and off balance. This was a well argued case. We need a retainer on this lawyer.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Mitchell - insufficient force
Selwood - you might have grazed him lightly or you tried to graze him lightly

Good post. This is the main problem IMO.
It's just such a farce.

 

[Boxhead_31]

 

[Strange Cat]

QC unable to prove intent (ie. disprove Joel move forward because and only because he was pulled)
QC unable to prove a strike (no indication by LT of a strike, chairman even questioning the force).

If it's no and no, then Joel is acquitted. Simple.

Find it hard to understand why he was cited in the first place, with no marks or medical report indicating any impact it should had been a fine at worse.

 

[frggr]

Regardless of whatever the result ends up being, I'm glad our QC actually put forward a decent case this time, our last few attempts at appeals from what I remember were pretty pathetic.

Don't think he's a QC. Very astute lawyer, and better than the last few we've had, it seems.

 

[Pack Specialist]

Regardless of whatever the result ends up being, I'm glad our QC actually put forward a decent case this time, our last few attempts at appeals from what I remember were pretty pathetic.

Different liar.

Oops, meant lawyer.

 

[Strange Cat]

Don't think he's a QC. Very astute lawyer, and better than the last few we've had, it seems.

Very well handled this one, agreed it’s much better than the last few years.

 

[Zouz Kitty]

Sicily.

Who just stood on Atley's leg.

No, not that one PS, it was a deliberate stomp from a Hawks player on the head of a Geelong player, in our game

 

[DangerHere]

No, not that one PS, it was a deliberate stomp from a Hawks player on the head of a Geelong player, in our game

It happens regularly

 

[frggr]

"Ihle also argues Selwood's contact with Thomas was at best incidental contact and, therefore, not sufficient to sustain a striking charge. That concludes his closing submissions."

 

[Pack Specialist]

No, not that one PS, it was a deliberate stomp from a Hawks player on the head of a Geelong player, in our game

Must have missed it!

Could have been Burton who is also a campaigner.

 

[you pick one]

Don't think he's a QC. Very astute lawyer, and better than the last few we've had, it seems.

Feel sorry for the bloke that tried to defend SJ.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Don't think he's a QC. Very astute lawyer, and better than the last few we've had, it seems.

Acted for the Essendon players v ASADA.

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

A full transcript of the case is on the afl app/site for those interested.

 

[devilsnap]

He will get off. That dog pulled Joel down and off balance. This was a well argued case. We need a retainer on this lawyer.

The truth is easy to defend.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Feel sorry for the bloke that tried to defend SJ.

Impossible job, simply couldn't get SJ to shut up.