-
LIVE: Port Adelaide v Carlton - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Port at 63% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Is it time for Michael Christian to go
- Thread starter bumsonseats
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Jun 9, 2008
- 11,137
- 9,250
- AFL Club
- Carlton
You would think that by having a single person running the MRP that we would get some consistency, but Christian seems to ignore prior precedents set by himself and the tribunal when making decisions. IMO this is the single biggest flaw in the whole system right now.
The MRP guidelines are so open for interpretation that precent must be a primary consideration in assessing every incident. It needs to be written into the guidelines so the MRP must consider past cases in the assessment of any new incident.
Precent is what clubs/media/fans used to assess the severity of an offence, and the inconsistency of new findings compared to prior precedent is what is most frustrating and confusing.
Until Michael Christian gets this right I'd expect the tribunal to be in session every single week, with clubs rolling up citing numerous prior examples of identical incidents that were all graded differently.
The MRP guidelines are so open for interpretation that precent must be a primary consideration in assessing every incident. It needs to be written into the guidelines so the MRP must consider past cases in the assessment of any new incident.
Precent is what clubs/media/fans used to assess the severity of an offence, and the inconsistency of new findings compared to prior precedent is what is most frustrating and confusing.
Until Michael Christian gets this right I'd expect the tribunal to be in session every single week, with clubs rolling up citing numerous prior examples of identical incidents that were all graded differently.
- Jun 12, 2018
- 4,396
- 8,370
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
He has no credibility left it at ABC
Ever since he jumped on a soap box yelling the cats need to make a stance holding tk ( wife had 4 young kids one not well needed the support of her family)
Next minute hill wanted to break contract to fill his pockets at saints and he was on his box yelling at the dockers “ you can’t keep a player who doesn’t want to be there”
Looks like a weasel sounds like a weasel ……..
Not just that, but the speed that he reports cases. It seemed the match had barely finished on Saturday before we were told Lynch was cited. You'd have to wonder how often he watches these incidents and how closely. Took me about 2-3 views each to decide that McKay and Lynch did nothing wrong. Seemingly he was able to reach the opposite conclusion - followed by the mandatory hysteria from opposition fans - before the tribunal actually (and amazingly) took their time and viewed the incidents impartially.
- Jun 9, 2008
- 11,137
- 9,250
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I am of the view that the the direction given to Christian by the AFL is to assess each incident using MRP guidelines and nothing else, and let the tribunal sort out all the cases where the application of the guidelines leads to an incorrect outcome. If he has to do is pull out the table and circle three boxes I can see why its takes 5 mins per incident to reach an outcome.
There's clearly zero depth of thought in what Christian is being asked to do, leaving the tribunal to sort out cases that don't perfectly march the guidelines. This might also explain why why there's no longer a penalty for losing a case at the tribunal.
- Jul 6, 2017
- 28,885
- 38,868
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Yes..its long past time for him to get sacked
Historically this isn't the case though. In the 2020 Grand Final when Dangerfield knocked out Vlastuin with a raised forearm, Christian stated that "Dangerfield’s actions were not unreasonable in the circumstances and no further action was to be taken".
Now even as someone who can't stand Dangerfield, I didn't think he should be suspended or even fined. But if you take the view that all of these incidents would go to the tribunal, then it should've been graded as Reckless/High Contact/Severe Impact. Then it goes to the tribunal where (similar to Lynch), it is quickly thrown out.
My take of Christian is that the media (both footy and social) drum up outrage/incidents with players and this is what makes it to his desk. In the last couple of years, Lynch has arguably been public enemy #1 and has had at least 2 reports thrown out by the tribunal because they were ridiculous. However there's very similar incidents that are totally ignored. For example in Round 3 there was an aerial collision between O'Meara and Witherden that wasn't even cited. You'd think on consistency this would've gone to the tribunal too, right...
jim boy
Umpires Association Head
- Admin
- #60
Plus I think it is on the Match Review Officer to the 'dimmest' view on an incident, whilst the tribunal takes a more balanced view. Its far better for a club to argue a penalty is too harsh than it is for the AFL too argue a penalty is too lenient. Otherwise the tribunal would have to review every incident regardless of what the MRO says.
Yes. Revenge is a dish best served cold.
(I had no idea it was that old, the thread was at the top of the front page and obviously the MRO process being garbage is as topical today as it was back then).
- May 20, 2011
- 12,125
- 10,777
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Time to get back into play-by-play commentery. Say what you will about him but he was one of the best callers in the business back in the channel 10 days.
Michael Christian is not the final decision maker in MRO cases. The Football Operations Manager is, and I think at this stage Andrew Dillon might be fulfilling that duty.
It is Christian's role however to identify and investigate cases and no doubt make recommendations for the Footy Ops Manager to decide upon. We have no way of knowing for certain Christian's view of the McKay and Lynch incidents. We only know Dillon held the view they should both be suspended.
Sacking Christian will not solve that.
And dear friends, what of sacking Dillon? Nothing could be further from the agenda for the man who is soon to be promoted to AFL CEO.
I shit you not.
It is Christian's role however to identify and investigate cases and no doubt make recommendations for the Footy Ops Manager to decide upon. We have no way of knowing for certain Christian's view of the McKay and Lynch incidents. We only know Dillon held the view they should both be suspended.
Sacking Christian will not solve that.
And dear friends, what of sacking Dillon? Nothing could be further from the agenda for the man who is soon to be promoted to AFL CEO.
I shit you not.
But the person who makes all the decisions attributed to Christian is about to be promoted to AFL CEO.
- Mar 11, 2018
- 8,149
- 12,482
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I wonder how much he gets paid?
boncer34
Formerly "Dos23"
So the bloke who's suspended players committing football acts left and right due to the outcome suddenly decides its the action that counts not the outcome?
Thank god Laura Kane stepped in to prevent Christian from saving his old club.
Thank god Laura Kane stepped in to prevent Christian from saving his old club.
boncer34
Formerly "Dos23"
He makes it easy to pot him when he abandons his outcome based decision making when it's his former club that's gonna suffer.
A player was knocked out. He had a responsibility to send it to the tribunal to be adjudicated, to be found guilty or not. The fact he didn’t, and it’s obvious to the world why he didn’t, should mean he is stood down immediately.
They need to send all cases directly to a tribunal, forget an intermediary like Christian, who's demonstrated inconsistency from day 1. That said, there's no way Maynard should even be cited in my view. Absolute travesty if he's rubbed out for that.
Did Kane overrule him?
Similar threads
