AFL Player #23: Harrison Jones - Cops a week for tackle on Zac Fisher - 20/5

[Lore]

Contract Status: Out of contract 2024
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 22, Duckworth

 

[Westlo]

as much as I'll love to see Caddy came in for Dreamtime...

if we don't challenge that we're a joke
if our lawyers don't get that overturned their a joke, because carlton's would 100%.

 

[yodellinhank]

has been since they gave him the role.

still boggles the mind that they think that's a good idea. one person, decided everything for the league? why even have someone do it if the decisions are going to be arbitrary

totally will be unbiased.

totally.

what a ******* joke.

We'll it's worked, hasn't it?

Everyone is always saying "what a ****ing idiot that Michael Christian is" and not "this whole league is corrupt to shit and we're all being conned."

 

[Godzke]

Does it matter? It's probably the action and the look and the vibe.

 

[ghostdog]

I thought at the time it looked rough and he was lucky not to get penalised, considering the change in rules, but every replay I've seen his head doesnt touch the turf. It's a strong tackle. End.

 

[astrowizzle]

The all is ****ed. Christian is a total dickhead
How does butters get nothing for that and redman gets a week for something much much softer of the ball
There was no malice and no sling in the tackle
Different rules different jumpers
Funny how Collingwood seen to go ok in there

 

[BomberManU]

That just cannot be a suspension. No fair minded observer would think it's worthy of one.

 

[The Donners]

It’s a potentially career threatening 1 week ban (at least in the short term). If Caddy plays, has 10 touches, 3-4 marks (contested) and kicks 1-2 goals I doubt Jones will be back in the side over the next month.

I’d imagine Jones would be keen to challenge the ban or at least I think it’s in his best interest.

 

[EnolaGay]

Just on Christian, how did Parker’s hit get rated careless when he deliberately lined up the player off the ball? If it wasn’t referred to the tribunal, Parker would’ve got 4 weeks, the same as Wright who was eyes on the ball attempting to mark a kick directed to him.

Parker’s hit caused facial fractures on top of a concussion ffs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[The Donners]

It’s hard to be impartial but looking at the tackle 10 or so times, a 1 week ban seems OTT. If similar incidents have received a ban then sure, give him a week but soon you won’t be able to spoil the ball in a marking contest using a fist.

 

[The Donners]

I thought at the time it looked rough and he was lucky not to get penalised, considering the change in rules, but every replay I've seen his head doesnt touch the turf. It's a strong tackle. End.

Spot on.

 

[eth-dog]

Just on Christian, how did Parker’s hit get rated careless when he deliberately lined up the player off the ball? If it wasn’t referred to the tribunal, Parker would’ve got 4 weeks, the same as Wright who was eyes on the ball attempting to mark a kick directed to him.

Parker’s hit caused facial fractures on top of a concussion ffs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Christian doesn't do the VFL.

 

[Kong]

I just assume the directive with this stuff is to generate controversy/interest in the game.

Umpires and the MRP have been making wrong and contradictory decisions for at least 20 years. Far too often for it to be down to individuals just forgetting about the rules and precedents they've set with other decisions previously. That just defies common sense.

And as much as it feels like Essendon get the rough end with both departments, I don't think the AFL would run an actual conspiracy against clubs, given it equates to match fixing.

It just has to be an off the record directive to make sure people are tuning in and talking. And they succeed in this with stupid decisions like this one that make absolutely no sense. We're all talking about it and will still watch.

 

[Foxx]

Deserved a fine.

 

[Squeaky]

I thought at the time it looked rough and he was lucky not to get penalised, considering the change in rules, but every replay I've seen his head doesnt touch the turf. It's a strong tackle. End.

At the time it was holding the ball - but the fkwit umpire didn't pay it!
Now for him to be rubbed out for it is absolutely farcical.
This is bullshit!

 

[Snake Charmer]

Deserved a fine.

No it doesn’t

 

[FullRoastChook]

Typical weak as club, not challenging the MRO, starting to think Mr. Scott doesn't want to upset his mates at HQ

 

[the PILL]

I just assume the directive with this stuff is to generate controversy/interest in the game.

Umpires and the MRP have been making wrong and contradictory decisions for at least 20 years. Far too often for it to be down to individuals just forgetting about the rules and precedents they've set with other decisions previously. That just defies common sense.

And as much as it feels like Essendon get the rough end with both departments, I don't think the AFL would run an actual conspiracy against clubs, given it equates to match fixing.

It just has to be an off the record directive to make sure people are tuning in and talking. And they succeed in this with stupid decisions like this one that make absolutely no sense. We're all talking about it and will still watch.

Interesting point, never really thought of it like that but I wouldn't put it past the the AFL to be honest. Look at their shameless ingraining of sport gambling on just about any snippet of media they produce.

Personally I think it's a Michael Christian thing with us though.

It's a real shame Harry will miss a huge marquee match and I can't help feeling a certain bit of damage gets done to a players confidence when stuff like this happens.

 

[Foxx]

Typical weak as club, not challenging the MRO, starting to think Mr. Scott doesn't want to upset his mates at HQ

The club spoke to biomechanics and lawyers, and there was no way they felt they could get him off.

 

[eth-dog]

So Jones gets a week for a good tackle where there was no head hitting the ground, no concussion test or anything. Terri legitimately punches someone in the guts and doesn't get cited?

Please tell me how Michael Christian doesn't let the fact he hates Essendon get in the way of his job?

 

[Alberto_Magnifico]

So they can just arbitrarily adopt a higher category based on a qualitative assessment, rather than direct medical evidence.
That's really cool

 

[yodellinhank]

And as much as it feels like Essendon get the rough end with both departments, I don't think the AFL would run an actual conspiracy against clubs, given it equates to match fixing.

The AFL aren't averse to match fixing though. Judd's Brownlow was match fixing. Melbourne not tanking tanking and Tony Liberatore's comments being ignored was match fixing. Star players with mysterious "injuries" and troublemakers with drug penalties is match fixing...

 

[FullRoastChook]

The club spoke to biomechanics and lawyers, and there was no way they felt they could get him off.

they need to be fired and get carltons lawyers ASAP. seems they can get away with murder.

 

[andleanback]

Another spineless decision to not challenge, probably the same lawyer we used in the wright case giving advice

 

[The Prosecutor]

Another spineless decision to not challenge, probably the same lawyer we used in the wright case giving advice

And Redman.

 

[The Prosecutor]

Whats the ****ing downside of challenging?