MRP / Trib. Tom Lynch -How many?

[conrad_437]

There's a behind the goals vision that shows a clenched fist, but majority of contact is from Lynch's wrist to Butts' upper back, with barely/negligible contact to the back of the head.

That's pretty lucky for Butts. Really shouldn't matter what part of Lynch's hand ended up striking Butts, and that it was an inch lower than he wanted it to end up.

 

[Foxx]

It's a terrible excuse. There is no excuse.

He's tried to king hit him. And many in this thread are saying it's understandable.

I got plenty frustrated when I played the game. Never gave out anything other than the token jumper hold.

In my opinion, Lynch should cop the same as any of the big suspensions of the last decade (Gaff, Bugg, etc). It's time the AFL started suspending on intent rather than incidental contact. It's obvious that Lynch's primary aim was to harm Butts.

Hell be suspended, but It's time umpires start handing out free kicks for off the ball holds etc.

 

[TheOptimum18]

That's pretty lucky for Butts. Really shouldn't matter what part of Lynch's hand ended up striking Butts, and that it was an inch lower than he wanted it to end up.

I'm not really arguing a point here, I'm just making the observation of what happened.

Illiterate people will assume I'm defending Lynch's actions when I made no such statement, and merely pointed out what occurred.

 

[RCAB]

This notion about being in play or out of play makes no sense. All it means is players can use it as an excuse to literally almost kill someone and get away with it.

Now use this logic and apply it to Lynch

 

[Strange Cat]

The tigers supporters in here are really painting themselves very well with the minimisation and excuses for shit behaviour

 

[Soggy2112]

He clearly did the wrong thing there's no denying that. Players at the time probably thought its not worth the fine. Also Lynch is not the type of player neutral supporters will defend in any situation. He's always pushed the limits despite rarely getting suspended.

I thought he'd get 3-4weeks. Not sure why the MRP can't just give out a penalty like that and everyone moves on. Even if its 5 weeks. Let the club challenge it if they don't like it. Personally I think 5-6weeks is a bit much for a incident with 0 injuries.

Intentional strikes to the head are always referred straight to the tribunal.

 

[TheOptimum18]

The majority of tigers supporters in here are really painting themselves very well with the minimisation and excuses for shit behaviour

I'd like to think there's some of us who aren't.

 

[conrad_437]

Hell be suspended, but It's time umpires start handing out free kicks for off the ball holds etc.

They aren't superhuman. I'm no umpire defender but it's pretty impossible to notice the majority of holding when you don't have eyes in the back of your head, or don't have the angle to be 100% sure you can give a free kick.

I didn't know that we were now alluding to the umpires now being at fault for player frustration reacting in whacking other blokes.

 

[conrad_437]

I'm not really arguing a point here, I'm just making the observation of what happened.

Illiterate people will assume I'm defending Lynch's actions when I made no such statement, and merely pointed out what occurred.

Yes, and "pointing something out" comes from mere want to observe, never from the want to sway opinion.

 

[maskmcgee]

So this is taking place tonight? What time? Any word yet on if Richmond are going to plead guilty or challenge it?

 

[Cyclonus]

They aren't superhuman. I'm no umpire defender but it's pretty impossible to notice the majority of holding when you don't have eyes in the back of your head, or don't have the angle to be 100% sure you can give a free kick.

I didn't know that we were now alluding to the umpires now being at fault for player frustration reacting in whacking other blokes.

The other point is that the Crows players have not been shown to have been doing anything out of the ordinary. There is no provocation for Lynch's tantrum other than the bath he was getting. It's not the umpires, it's not the defenders, it's Lynch.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

The other point is that the Crows players have not been shown to have been doing anything out of the ordinary. There is no provocation for Lynch's tantrum other than the bath he was getting. It's not the umpires, it's not the defenders, it's Lynch.

It doesn’t take much to provoke a big blubbery baby.

 

[Foxx]

They aren't superhuman. I'm no umpire defender but it's pretty impossible to notice the majority of holding when you don't have eyes in the back of your head, or don't have the angle to be 100% sure you can give a free kick.

I didn't know that we were now alluding to the umpires now being at fault for player frustration reacting in whacking other blokes.

Well if you want to get to the source of the problem, then fix it by having an umpire looking solely at off the ball actions. So yes by not having that, they are a part of the problem.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

There's a behind the goals vision that shows a clenched fist, but majority of contact is from Lynch's wrist to Butts' upper back, with barely/negligible contact to the back of the head.

So he swung a clenched fist at another player's head with significant force, but it didn't connect properly?
You don't get a discount for dumb luck. This is the perfect application for the potential to cause injury.
Was always going to be 4+ and my initial thought was 6 weeks. If that connects flush, he could end a player's career or, dare I say, their life.

 

[Whiskers]

The tigers supporters in here are really painting themselves very well with the minimisation and excuses for shit behaviour

That’s just standard around here for tigers supporters.

Most aggressive, tin foil hat wearing supporters you will ever see.
Lynch represents Richmond perfectly. The biggest grub in the game.

6-8 weeks.

 

[TheOptimum18]

So this is taking place tonight? What time? Any word yet on if Richmond are going to plead guilty or challenge it?

5pm, I believe.

Went straight to the tribunal, and my guess is we argue for lowest possible punishment.

Just to add on: we are arguing for high impact rather than severe, which would make it a 3 game ban.

 

[Strange Cat]

5pm, I believe.

Went straight to the tribunal, and my guess is we argue for lowest possible punishment.

Hopefully they don’t turn their backs to him after his sentence

 

[TheOptimum18]

So he swung a clenched fist at another player's head with significant force, but it didn't connect properly?
You don't get a discount for dumb luck. This is the perfect application for the potential to cause injury.
Was always going to be 4+ and my initial thought was 6 weeks. If that connects flush, he could end a player's career or, dare I say, their life.

LYNCH WAS A DICKHEAD FOR REACTING IN THE MANNER HE DID.

Now that I have gotten the disclaimer out of the way, this post is not meant to justify or excuse what Lynch did.

But I have seen three separate incidents where Lynch has swung his arm at Butts where the wrist/forearm is what makes contact to Butts on the upper back. Once, sure it may be luck. But three times?

Mind you, I've also seen Lynch swing his fist at Butts and make connection, as well as see Butts punch/attempt to punch Lynch at least twice as well, so let's get all facts on the table.

Lynch will be suspended for what he did, and the chances are, he'll get suspended for less than what he should be in an ideal world.

But let's not superimpose your own feelings onto this matter just because you don't like the player/club/supporter base.

Majority of people in this thread have created this character of Lynch, and gone and posted stuff based on that made up character, ignoring what actually happened and actually discussing the incident on its merit.

I will also add that I can't stand quite a few Richmond supporters in this matter who immediately jump to umpiring or irrelevant incidents such as bringing in Stewart.

 

[maskmcgee]

So basically Tigers arguing for 3

 

[Jeremy McLovin]

Looks like neither Richmond nor Lynch are denying that the contact was high.

 

[Rabish Binney]

So this is taking place tonight? What time? Any word yet on if Richmond are going to plead guilty or challenge it?

They're going to take it to the International Court of Justice.

 

[maskmcgee]

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Intentional strikes to the head are always referred straight to the tribunal.

Not anymore. If the MRO deems the suspension to be the minimum (4 weeks in this case) then that'll be offered.

AFL only refers it directly to the Tribunal if they want to ask for more than the minimum punishment for the grading.

Of course, the reality is most clubs decide to challenge anything in the severe category so you end up with a Tribunal hearing anyway.

 

[maskmcgee]

 

[RCAB]

Swiping? Lol.. the guy has no ****ing remorse. Give him 10 weeks!