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

^^^^^^^^
Yep.

When many of us pointed out that the AFL wasn't applying its own rules in the Williams case, there were plenty on here who told us that "the playing field has changed, the head is now sacrosanct", "it's not result, it's the action and the potential to do damage", etc etc ...

And yet none of these things applied in the Astbury case.

The MRO process is, always has been, and probably always will be, a f**king circus.
 
Every fine should come out of teams softcap. Not players pocket. Every fine, then disadvantages team. Makes players more accountable.

Nek minnit Carlton fans hope for a string of melees so the club's soft cap can't afford Barker any more...

:p
 
How does this not get cited?



High, intentional, medium impact (broke his hand).


What happened to the Essendon player? It looked like he hardly even flinched. Impact can't really be gauged off an injury to the transgressor. He could have injured it prior or threw a poor punch.
 
caleb daniel has a case to answer you'd think - the deliberate "second action" dumping that bloke headfirst into the ground........gawn!
 
Jul 25, 2019
53,234
78,465
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Leeds United
Caleb Daniel was pretty lucky to get only one week imo.
 
But it wasn’t egregious.

:rolleyes:

It was two specific motions that drove the head into the ground, maybe this is the new precedence this round?
 
Aug 22, 2014
13,591
49,322
AFL Club
Carlton
What happened to the Essendon player? It looked like he hardly even flinched. Impact can't really be gauged off an injury to the transgressor. He could have injured it prior or threw a poor punch.

In the words of the great Jeff Gleeson QC (on behalf of AFL): You've all seen enough of that type of bump resulting in a concussion to conclude comfortably that it's the type of bump where it's a roll of a dice (and therefore has the potential to cause injury).

AFL House can't seriously argue that a player (Williams) should have an incident graded medium impact because it could have caused an injury, and then disregard a blatant punch to the head, off the ball, because it didn't cause an injury.
 

Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods

Sir Cripps of Carlton House
Mar 26, 2015
11,697
21,690
Bendigo
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Melbourne Tigers, Bendigo Braves, OKC
What happened to the Essendon player? It looked like he hardly even flinched. Impact can't really be gauged off an injury to the transgressor. He could have injured it prior or threw a poor punch.
Who cares about the injury? He punched him in the head. Minimum 4 weeks IMO.
It's a punch. It's deliberate. It's high. This is the type of s##t they need launch the book out of a catapult for.
 

Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods

Sir Cripps of Carlton House
Mar 26, 2015
11,697
21,690
Bendigo
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Melbourne Tigers, Bendigo Braves, OKC
Daniels 1 week? Seriously....
Harbrow? Cited?
Nothing in the Harbrow one IMO.
Both going for the ball. Harbrow stayed on the ground, kept the shoulder low and elbow tucked in. Was just a bit more aware of the contact that was coming. Looked vicious and glad Gibbo seems ok, but literally just two players going hard for the ball.
 
Nothing in the Harbrow one IMO.
Both going for the ball. Harbrow stayed on the ground, kept the shoulder low and elbow tucked in. Was just a bit more aware of the contact that was coming. Looked vicious and glad Gibbo seems ok, but literally just two players going hard for the ball.

Made contact with head and I'm not fooled by experienced payers knowing how to make dangerous contact 'look' okish. Daniel's tackle would have copped automatic 4week suspension ( or more) in rugby codes.
 
Aug 18, 2006
38,708
48,563
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Nothing in the Harbrow one IMO.
Both going for the ball. Harbrow stayed on the ground, kept the shoulder low and elbow tucked in. Was just a bit more aware of the contact that was coming. Looked vicious and glad Gibbo seems ok, but literally just two players going hard for the ball.

Yep, nothing in the Harbrow one, both went the ball, both missed the ball and both collided. You wouldnt want gibbons out if the results were reversed
 
Nov 27, 2016
17,279
33,426
AFL Club
Carlton
In the words of the great Jeff Gleeson QC (on behalf of AFL): You've all seen enough of that type of bump resulting in a concussion to conclude comfortably that it's the type of bump where it's a roll of a dice (and therefore has the potential to cause injury).

AFL House can't seriously argue that a player (Williams) should have an incident graded medium impact because it could have caused an injury, and then disregard a blatant punch to the head, off the ball, because it didn't cause an injury.
Watch em do just that.
 

Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods

Sir Cripps of Carlton House
Mar 26, 2015
11,697
21,690
Bendigo
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Melbourne Tigers, Bendigo Braves, OKC
Missed the ball? Harbrow went past the ball.
It took an awkward bounce. You can clearly see him with eyes on the ball and reaching for it.
I've just had another look and he doesn't really run past it. They both collide pretty much at the spot where the ball lands.
 
Who cares about the injury? He punched him in the head. Minimum 4 weeks IMO.
It's a punch. It's deliberate. It's high. This is the type of s##t they need launch the book out of a catapult for.

Impact makes up one of the components for deciding the penalty. All I am saying is that I don't think you can evaluate impact based on the injury to the hand of the transgressor.
 

Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods

Sir Cripps of Carlton House
Mar 26, 2015
11,697
21,690
Bendigo
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Melbourne Tigers, Bendigo Braves, OKC
Impact makes up one of the components for deciding the penalty. All I am saying is that I don't think you can evaluate impact based on the injury to the hand of the transgressor.
Well of course, but a punch to the head is a punch to the head. I don't think injury to the receiver or transgressor needs to be factored in this instance. You wanna punch someone, take up boxing.
 
Back