Have we answered the thread title yet?
Zero weeks. The answer is zero weeks.
Zero weeks. The answer is zero weeks.
MRP / Trib. How many Weeks for Rioli?
- Thread starter The Kings Ransom
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Yeah see the thing is most players attempting to spoil the ball with their arm use their arm and fist to do it rather than using Rioli’s revolutionary method of keeping his upper and lower arm at his side.
‘I was trying to bowl someone at cricket today and I succeeded.’
‘Oh that’s great, good reward for bowling at the stumps.’
‘Yeah it was short and wide and he hit it into his own chest and it dribbled onto the stumps.’
That’s the cricketing equivalent of what you’ve just claimed.
Pretty sure the tribunal found he was contesting the mark.
If he wasnt he'd get weeks like Robinson.
That is the sum of it.
To be given weeks you need to be pretty certain he wasnt attempting to mark. And that is why he didn't get weeks.
Probably more solid than your argument.
He was in a contest but not really in a contest because there was no attempt to spoil, even though the ball hit his arm and came loose.
Also he should've tried to minimise injury to the other player, who wasn't injured
If he doesn't turn his body at the last instance, what's to say they both don't clash heads and are still in hospital now?
Because Robinson should have also gotten off. He was the one who got ran into.
Yes, let's put value the opinions of nobodies on footy forums over the experts who arrived at the correct decision, especially the legal implications they need to consider when arriving at such a judgement.
AFL confirm they won't appeal because they know they'd lose.
SuperMal
Club Legend
- Jul 28, 2021
- 1,816
- 1,880
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- LEEDS F’jh#$@G UNITED
Looking seriously like the AFL need to add another parameter to appeal under.....
‘The Tribunal are a pack of geese and got it wrong’ provision.
This provision is used when the only technicality that has been breached is the minimum IQ of the tribunal members.
‘The Tribunal are a pack of geese and got it wrong’ provision.
This provision is used when the only technicality that has been breached is the minimum IQ of the tribunal members.
- Jun 18, 2011
- 1,590
- 1,990
- AFL Club
- West Coast
They already have that one: “the decision of the tribunal is so unreasonable that no tribunal acting reasonably could have come to that decision having regard to the evidence before it.”
The AFL decided the chances of appealing successfully under the 'pack of geese' provision were low.
SuperMal
Club Legend
- Jul 28, 2021
- 1,816
- 1,880
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- LEEDS F’jh#$@G UNITED
I don’t think the Tribunal decision was such that ‘no tribunal acting reasonably’ could have made it - I just think MOST tribunals wouldn’t be that dim......and would have seen he closed up and took his eyes off the ball.
Only a pack of geese would overlook that.
kane249
Wibble
- Oct 27, 2006
- 52,131
- 68,713
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Sth Freo, Liverpool, Chicago Bulls
SuperMal
Club Legend
- Jul 28, 2021
- 1,816
- 1,880
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- LEEDS F’jh#$@G UNITED
What they're saying is ‘there are limited avenues of appeal, which we can’t win on, but we still think you’re a bunch of dills.’
Wouldnt Rowell running back with the flight of the ball be regarded as reckless?
SuperMal
Club Legend
- Jul 28, 2021
- 1,816
- 1,880
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- LEEDS F’jh#$@G UNITED
Only if he can see any danger. If he was running with the flight of the ball and look forwards then yes he’d have a reason to be able to make at least some observation on what is in front of him but as it was he’s looking directly upwards so pinning him for not being able to look in two directions at once and literally making no movement towards anything but the ball at any stage would be harsh I would think
SuperMal
Club Legend
- Jul 28, 2021
- 1,816
- 1,880
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- LEEDS F’jh#$@G UNITED
UNDERSTAND. The tribunal found that Rioli was making a legitimate attempt to mark, in that
I would suggest their concentration span didn’t stretch to the last few frames.
- He had his eyes on the ball
- He had his arms outstretched
I would suggest their concentration span didn’t stretch to the last few frames.
Why not? If you are going to do that and put yourself in harms way then the outcome should be on you. Just ban running back with the flight of the ball. This is how ridiculous this is all becoming.
For me neither the Rioli or Robinson invidents needed to be looked at.
The AFL however look at it differently as they slowly destroy the sport. Based on their Auskick Football League rules both players should be wiped out for years.
In AFL speak, he did nothing outside the rules of the game but we didn't like the look of it and don't want to deal with the media storm, it wasn't our fault.
If they thought it was wrong they'd have appealed.
There's your problem, you're thinking in terms of frames, you need to wrap your head around the fact these sorts of incidents happen in seconds. Willie was already committed to the contest before he noticed Rowell and turned his body. The only other alternative was run in head first and instead of Rowell being bumped in the chest/shoulder region we probably have 2 guys with concussion from a head clash.
Agree, but if you are asking Rioli in a split second to look and change his mind then so you should be asking Rowell to do the same. Doesn’t Rowell also have a duty of care to his opponents? Rioli as he was running at the ball had every right to try and mark it, if he had not of braced I have no doubt a knee could of possibly hit Rowell in the face causing possible massive damage. Rowell on the other hand was running back with the flight of the ball, like you said he is doing so with no awareness of what is coming. That’s not courage that is stupidity and no awareness.
I found this quite a difficult one, my love for the sport as it once was tells me it’s a nothing incident. My acknowledgment of the concussion world accepts we must be hard on acts that are against the laws of the sport and have a possibility to hurt someone.
I genuinely think Rioli had a right to contest for the mark, I also genuinely think by him turning and braving he saved Rowell from being seriously hurt.
That is not my Eagles hat on, I Would say the same about any player from any club in this circumstance.
You know as well as I do that slow motion doesn’t happen for the players, split second stuff is exactly as it sounds.
Similar threads
