It was a cheap shot but that doesn't mean the MRO can fudge the classification in order to suspend him. It was clearly low and not medium impact.
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 9
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 8 Winner: bearweger
Nick Larkley Average play
- Thread starter Upgrayedd
- Start date
- Tagged users None
BringFevBack2021
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 9, 2021
- 5,742
- 13,140
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Cmon, take the bias away - it’s a s**t act and I’m certain you’d be fuming if Larkey got tunnelled, fell back and broke his wrist, wouldn’t you? Worse yet, imagine he breaks his neck.
Was wiped out of the game years ago and a strong precedent needs to be set now to ensure players don’t chance it, not even at their angriest.
Devington
Brownlow Medallist
- Jun 4, 2013
- 17,547
- 45,346
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
When considered as a bump. It shouldn't be classified as one though, tunnelling and bumping are two distinctly different actions.
BringFevBack2021
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 9, 2021
- 5,742
- 13,140
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Yeah correct, I believe it should be classed as misconduct per the MRO’s guidelines.
If the MRO thought it worthy of a suspension he should have referred it to the tribunal. He can't fudge the classification to suit his preferred outcome.
Wouldn't he just get a fine then?
Only 'Serious Misconduct' gets referred to the tribunal under what you've quoted.
BringFevBack2021
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 9, 2021
- 5,742
- 13,140
- AFL Club
- Carlton
C) MISCONDUCT
Serious misconduct lives under this header?
Why so pedantic though? Weird hill to die on. Tunnelling is a pathetic act to defenceless players with a high chance of injury attached.
If your arguing that the MRO doesn’t have appropriate criteria however, I’d agree. Misconduct seems the catch-all to dish out punishments for edge cases in whatever way they see fit.
He doesn't need to classify it as misconduct. I believe he can refer any incident to the tribunal if he doesnt believe the penalty under his guidelines matches the act. But he cant classify a low impact act as medium impact in order to get his desired outcome. North should appeal as they would likely win.
Just seen it and don't care what the outcome was, the same as how Draper should've gotten suspended for an intentional gut punch, this should've got at least 3 weeks. That's such a cowardice, dangerous act with no place in the sport.
- Dec 27, 2017
- 24,443
- 53,985
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Is the low, medium, high impact criteria based on the outcome?
Did he run into him? Looked like he swung an arm and gut punched him from behind.
Either way he got a very stern talking to from Silvagni. Wagged his finger at him and everything lol
But yeah, between that and the diving for frees, my opinion on JHF has changed a bit.
Yes.
- Dec 27, 2017
- 24,443
- 53,985
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Then it has to be appealed. It’s pretty absurd that he could get off, but if that’s the criteria, he has to appeal.
CakeEater
Brownlow Medallist
Shoulda got a bit more than 1 week.
Deserved 4 or so.
Deserved 4 or so.
The definition of low, medium, high etc are clearly different when the targeted player is in the air and unable to control their fall.
Seems that’s obvious to everyone but North supporters.
It was a deliberate act and out of play, seeing as the whistle had already blown to stop play before Larkey decided to tunnel him. Should have been deemed Serious and sent him straight to the tribunal.
Seems that’s obvious to everyone but North supporters.
It was a deliberate act and out of play, seeing as the whistle had already blown to stop play before Larkey decided to tunnel him. Should have been deemed Serious and sent him straight to the tribunal.
Some Idiot
Brownlow Medallist
- Mar 17, 2009
- 10,293
- 8,166
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
What we now call tunnelling seems very similar to what used to be called a body spoil and it was used and executed by defenders throughout most of footy's history. Always interesting how something that was play on for most of history now has people calling for 4 week suspensions.
Many of the champion defenders and players lauded as all time greats were proud exponents of tunnelling.
Anyway he's lucky to get away with just 1 week because of how deliberate and late it was.
Many of the champion defenders and players lauded as all time greats were proud exponents of tunnelling.
Anyway he's lucky to get away with just 1 week because of how deliberate and late it was.
Last edited:
Yep, only a 'low impact' bump is needed to change the landing of a mid-air player to potentially result in very nasty consequences.
This should have gone to the tribunal to make an example of him.
Except this was during a dead ball and he swung an elbow shot at him... Wasn't playing footy.
Chism
Franks & Beans
- Sep 7, 2008
- 38,416
- 38,188
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Cowboys/Pacers HotSpurs/Dodgers
Lucky to only get 1 I reckon.
Some Idiot
Brownlow Medallist
- Mar 17, 2009
- 10,293
- 8,166
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Completely agree
Big Souv was just showing a bit of toughness. Nothing to see here, should’ve been just a free kick and move on.
Tackled a bloke who doesn't have the ball? Yeah righto.
hotchilli
Premium Platinum
- Jun 5, 2021
- 8,741
- 17,669
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Houston Rockets, Houston Astros
There wasn't anything tough about it.
Similar threads
- Locked
