We all know there are at least two sets of rules.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
We all know there are at least two sets of rules.
Gee those cats deserve to have four points added because of that appalling error.Someone should really bring attention to this but I guess it’s only news when the cats get ripped off.
Gee those cats deserve to have four points added because of that appalling error.
Gee those cats deserve to have four points added because of that appalling error.
1 week.Did boofhead get rubbed out?
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Lucky to just get a careless grading tbh. If I remember correctly there's a bit of a blurring of the lines because he had the ball, but I think they typically grade elbows as intentional.Match Review: Six-goal Demon banned for high hit, Blue charged twice
The Match Review has released its findings for the final three matches of round sevenwww.afl.com.au
Match Review: Six-goal Demon banned for high hit, Blue charged twice
The Match Review has released its findings for the final three matches of round sevenwww.afl.com.au
Sounds fair. Seeing that cunners basically stopped and Laird ran into him. The Melbourne #31 cocked his elbow and was the instigator of the contact. I can see how the MRO judged these to be equal.Same grading as Cunningtons was against Laird
How can that precedent possibly work? His names not Dangerfield.
more of a joke about one set of rules for star players, another set for the restI thought they can’t use precedent in AFL tribunal
they really aren't similar when you look at the video of two incidents.
Not similar at all. Fair outcome for Fritsch I think, not intentional but warrants a suspension for careless elbow
Will laugh if they upgrade to intentional or high impact at the tribunal