Poor sentencing submission by Gaff’s lawyer imo
Something that serious you don’t submit that it should be “at the lower end which starts at 3 games”
Do that in a case like this and you lose all ability to influence the final result
The tribunal doesn’t care what you ideally want, they care about what is reasonable in all the circumstances
The tribunal knows it’s going to give something substantial, it’s looking for your help to decide how substantial. Not helped at all if you just say “the minimum or something close to it”
You look for the one mitigating factor in your entire threadbare case - in this instance, the idea that he intended to hit him in the chest - and you make a strong argument that it is something worth taking into account
What you’re looking for is a reason why the tribunal should give a penalty not at the lower end of the scale (3 or 4) but at the lower end of the upper end - around 6
Suggest that there’s a possible, plausible reason why it should be 6 and not 8 and you have a chance to influence the tribunal. They could then possibly decide on 6 or 7 and feel comfortable doing that. They would never feel comfortable giving him 3 or 4
Get him 6 or 7 matches instead of 8 and you’ve helped him out in a no win situation. Tell the tribunal you think it should be close to 3 and they’ll completely ignore you and listen to the other lawyer
8 games is reasonable overall but Gaff’s lawyer did him no favours here