Weitering on Toby Greene, is he in trouble?

[CarterS]

Zorko has prior reputation for being an utter p***k on field, Weiters has always been regarded as a clean and fair player

Incident should be dealt with on its own merits not the name of the person committing it.

 

[JyeDye]

Look I'm incredibly bias but there's genuinely nothing in this and the only reason anyone here gives a shit is because they hate Carlton.

 

[Pacman82]

Can you show the footage where Weitering actually gouged his eye?

Swap roles and it still would've been a fine, there was nothing in it.

It did more damage than what Zorko did, & he had to sit out a week:

Why Hodge would be disappointed if Brisbane did not contest Zorko ban

The Lions veteran has copped a one-match suspension.

www.sen.com.au

Greene copped a week for a similar 'making contact to the eye region' offence in a 2019 final as well that caused no injury:

Superstar Giant banned for unreasonable contact to eye region

Toby Greene has been hit with a one-match ban

www.afl.com.au

No consistency at all.

 

[Thrawn]

It did more damage than what Zorko did, & he had to sit out a week:

Why Hodge would be disappointed if Brisbane did not contest Zorko ban

The Lions veteran has copped a one-match suspension.

www.sen.com.au

Greene copped a week for a similar 'making contact to the eye region' offence in a 2019 final as well that caused no injury:

Superstar Giant banned for unreasonable contact to eye region

Toby Greene has been hit with a one-match ban

www.afl.com.au

No consistency at all.

What damage did he actually do?

You do realise that bleed is from something else and on the other side of his face, right?

I wish people actually looked at the facts instead of regurgitating dishonest garbage.

 

[Chief]

Greene copped a week for a similar 'making contact to the eye region' offence in a 2019 final as well that caused no injury:

He got a fine for this:

 

[JyeDye]

It did more damage than what Zorko did, & he had to sit out a week:

Why Hodge would be disappointed if Brisbane did not contest Zorko ban

The Lions veteran has copped a one-match suspension.

www.sen.com.au

Greene copped a week for a similar 'making contact to the eye region' offence in a 2019 final as well that caused no injury:

Superstar Giant banned for unreasonable contact to eye region

Toby Greene has been hit with a one-match ban

www.afl.com.au

No consistency at all.

You've just posted two clips of guys trying to dig to China through peoples eyes to cop suspensions. This literally proves Weitering is nowhere near a suspension.

 

[Pacman82]

What damage did he actually do?

You do realise that bleed is from something else and on the other side of his face, right?

He bled mm's from his eye from a Carlton player making contact there. If that doesn't warrant a week then neither should the others in recent times is all I'm saying.

 

[Thrawn]

He bled mm's from his eye from a Carlton player making contact there. If that doesn't warrant a week then neither should the others in recent times is all I'm saying.

You said Weitering caused more damage than your other example?

Where is this damage??

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

So Weitering tries to scoop Greene’s eyes out and gets a fine and Bedford’s tackle causes no injury and he misses a final. These guys are having a laugh.

GWS is the over-punished child of the AFL.

Yeah, 'scooping' with straight fingers above and below the eye.
Meanwhile, Bedford's 'tackle' wasn't even a tackle. It was late bump. Did you even watch the game?

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

If there is no case to answer why did he get fined.? That doesn't make sense.

Poor choice of words.

 

[CarterS]

You're struggling to see the difference? Seriously?
Zorko had him pinned to the ground, was on top of him and made an unnatural reach to his face from under his armpit and a pinching motion with his fingers around the eyes. If you're struggling with that, you probably shouldn't operate a vehicle on the road (assuming you do - maybe you don't).

No need for statements like that rubbish. Talk about the issue not personal attacks.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Taking it way too seriously dude. “Weiters” got off for eye gouging, you should be happy.

I'm not taking any of this seriously. I'm having fun with the melts, WHILE being happy with the result.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Incident should be dealt with on its own merits not the name of the person committing it.

How can you say this with a straight face after saying you see no difference between the two?
This one WAS dealt with on its merits, EXACTLY how you claim you want it, but you aren't happy?!?

 

[CrazyJoeFevola]

He bled mm's from his eye from a Carlton player making contact there. If that doesn't warrant a week then neither should the others in recent times is all I'm saying.

He must have a magic hand if he can cause bleeding on the other side of his face to where the contact was made

 

[Pacman82]

He must have a magic hand if he can cause bleeding on the other side of his face to where the contact was made

I guess he must have had a razor blade hidden in his sock. Future WWE champion Toby Greene.

 

[CarterS]

How can you say this with a straight face after saying you see no difference between the two?
This one WAS dealt with on its merits, EXACTLY how you claim you want it, but you aren't happy?!?

Mate seriously, I asked what the difference between the incidents was and the other user replied "Zorko has prior reputation for being an utter p***k on field, Weiters has always been regarded as a clean and fair player"
and i was responding to that comment.
You'd hope if roles were reversed Greene would get the same outcome but who could say that confidently.

 

[VicBased]

Poor choice of words.

He was fined for a poor choice of words?

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

No need for statements like that rubbish. Talk about the issue not personal attacks.

You made some stupid statements. I questioned your ability to perform simple tasks.
If you don't want to open yourself up to ridicule, use better judgement.
The two incidents that you struggled to see the difference with, were VASTLY different.
Just because they have the words 'eye' and 'hand' doesn't make them the same.

 

[CarterS]

You made some stupid statements. I questioned your ability to perform simple tasks.
If you don't want to open yourself up to ridicule, use better judgement.
The two incidents that you struggled to see the difference with, were VASTLY different.
Just because they have the words 'eye' and 'hand' doesn't make them the same.

one was careless/low impact/high contact and the other was careless/medium impact/high contact, you call that vastly different?

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Mate seriously, I asked what the difference between the incidents was and the other user replied "Zorko has prior reputation for being an utter p***k on field, Weiters has always been regarded as a clean and fair player"
and i was responding to that comment.
You'd hope if roles were reversed Greene would get the same outcome but who could say that confidently.

Well, Toby gave away a free for a dangerous tackle that WASN'T cited.
He had a player in a headlock and WASN'T cited.
He punched a player in the junk and WASN'T cited.
All in the same game, but sure, Toby is treated differently.

 

[A Neita bath]

Looked intentional to me. Should have been a week. Isn’t though. Not surprised. At least the MRO are consistently inconsistent.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

one was careless/low impact/high contact and the other was careless/medium impact/high contact, you call that vastly different?

The actions and circumstances were. That's why they were graded differently. Don't use the MRO gradings as a reason for them being similar. There's very little wriggle room in the gradings.
There's 2 gradings for conduct; careless and intentional, but they'll find ways to call deliberate acts careless.
There's 2 areas of contact; high/groin and body.

So there's already a high probability that most actions will share 2 of the above gradings, with most citable offenses probably falling under careless and high.
That just leaves the severity of impact. Severe and high aren't used a lot, so that leaves most actions sharing the low and medium gradings.

There's a strong chance that a LOT of citations share very similar gradings, despite being different actions.

 

[Fitzey]

At the end of the day he put his fingers deliberately in Greenes eyes and got away with it. No point writing paragraphs defending his actions, it’s a low act and he’s extremely lucky.

 

[Chief]

he put his fingers deliberately in Greenes eyes

Can't agree.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Looked intentional to me. Should have been a week. Isn’t though. Not surprised. At least the MRO are consistently inconsistent.

How many incidents are graded intentional? Not that I think this was intentional.
They rarely use it. When they do, it's usually for a body blow, where an intentional grading can still result in a fine. They pick and choose what gradings they use to get the desired outcome.