MRP / Trib. 2021 MRO Chook Lotto - Carlton Tribunal News & Reports

Remove this Banner Ad

Stamos

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 30, 2010
14,796
24,198
AFL Club
Carlton

Log in to remove this ad.

OldBlueFan

Club Legend
Sep 23, 2009
2,528
1,821
AFL Club
Carlton
What could Harbrow reasonably have done instead?
He was going at the ball. The ball bounced low, he lowered himself and braced. It was just 2 players going at the ball, and Gibbo got unlucky.
He could have kept going for the ball, just like Gibbons did.

As I said before, the rules don't allow for what "seems" right or fair, it's a grading system. Make contact with the head, the review system is triggered. That the reviewing official is wildly incosistent is another matter.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Stamos

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 30, 2010
14,796
24,198
AFL Club
Carlton
He could have kept going for the ball, just like Gibbons did.

As I said before, the rules don't allow for what "seems" right or fair, it's a grading system. Make contact with the head, the review system is triggered. That the reviewing official is wildly incosistent is another matter.
It only applies to a reportable offence though.
At what point is he not going at the ball? They were both going at the ball, he'a allowed to brace.
 

BlueJet

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 16, 2009
5,433
6,047
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
North Ballarat
Even if you don`t agree with my comments........ what about the so called AFL rule that states if you choose to bump and as a result of that you make contact to the head you are more likely to be suspended..........if Gibbo had been knocked out then the stupid MRO would more than likely have suspended Harbrow, because they ridiculously base their findings on outcomes, which may lead to a player being seriously hurt one day because they pick and choose what they punish!!! I stand by my comments that there was only one player that was going for the ball.............:rolleyes:
I dont see it as having elected to bump, I saw it as two players contesting the ball.
For me, there's a significant difference between the two.
Harbrows alternative was to handbrake and avoid contact whereby he'd be labeled soft - Gibbons doesn't get dibs on contesting the ball.
Want the ball? Go low & ******* hard, it's one thing that has never changed.

I agree that intent should play a greater part in determining the punishment but the likelihood would be that incidents like Williams' would warrant a harsher penalty.
 

OldBlueFan

Club Legend
Sep 23, 2009
2,528
1,821
AFL Club
Carlton
It only applies to a reportable offence though.
At what point is he not going at the ball? They were both going at the ball, he'a allowed to brace.
As soon as he elected to brace for contact his focus switched from the ball to the player, and you can see that in the footage. If he genuinely continued at the ball and there was contact, I'd agree with you, that would definitely be "incidental" contact, but that's not what happened here.

And I'm not sure about "only applies to reportable offences", to hear them talk about it, it seems contact with the head is all that's required.

EDIT. Let me ask you this Stam, if Harbrow had broken Gibbon's jaw, do you think it would have been cited?
 

Robbo's my hero

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2007
14,887
27,579
Sunbury
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Sunderland,Pelicans, LA Kings
Harbrow forgot about the ball in that contest and chose to bump. It was probably a reflex response to the possibility that if he reached for the ball he would have copped the hit. We are told again and again that if you choose to bump and miscalculate, then you face consequences for your action.

Gibbons was taken from the field and checked for concussion and, perhaps, whiplash because he copped a significant hit.

For transparency purposes the MRP should review actions of this type and explain why it didn’t think it was worthy of a penalty.
 

Metalcrusher

Bush Chook
Jan 22, 2015
26,020
58,756
Kalgoorlie
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Blackburn United EPL ... sorta
Harbrow forgot about the ball in that contest and chose to bump. It was probably a reflex response to the possibility that if he reached for the ball he would have copped the hit. We are told again and again that if you choose to bump and miscalculate, then you face consequences for your action.

Gibbons was taken from the field and checked for concussion and, perhaps, whiplash because he copped a significant hit.

For transparency purposes the MRP should review actions of this type and explain why it didn’t think it was worthy of a penalty.
I agree with the highlighted 100% but ...

ROFL as if the AFL would put themselves anymore in public scrutiny ....
 

Arr0w

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 13, 2015
27,367
73,956
In Transit
AFL Club
Carlton
He could have kept going for the ball, just like Gibbons did.

As I said before, the rules don't allow for what "seems" right or fair, it's a grading system. Make contact with the head, the review system is triggered. That the reviewing official is wildly incosistent is another matter.
You are assuming contact was made to the head
 

Remove this Banner Ad