Mega Thread Bachar Houli has been reported for this incident with Jed Lamb

[Fat Nyfe]

Always looked 1 week max to me honestly, not sure what the fuss is all about.

 

[Frank Gallagher]

Will get off because he plays for Richmond.

 

[theprospect]

This is literally all they spoke about on the radio today. I was forced to listen to nova all day.

**** that

Think we need to be sensitive to what Waleed Aly wants.

Can't wait to see Waleed rant on The Project about how the AFL is racist and there's some sort of agenda against Houli because he's a muslim when he gets 4 weeks tomorrow.

 

[Infra Ted]

This is literally all they spoke about on the radio today. I was forced to listen to nova all day.

Ewwww.

 

[Dons4days]

Ewwww.

It wasn't a great day.

 

[barmy44]

im fine with 2 - not worth worrying about, really.

 

[PowerForGood]

Remembering that this was sent straight to the tribunal (ie not the MRP view of high, deliberate, intentional type formulae).

Way off the ball, took a look, swinging arm, connect with the forearm with enough force to knock Lamb out cold.

Is it as bad as Tom Jonas on Gaff last year? Nowhere near the severity, but at the least that was somewhere in the play.
Is it worse than all the things we see getting 2-3 games? Very much so.

I'm guessing 4-5.

 

[MightyMighties]

Waleed Aly is a left wing Muslim who co-hosts a reasonably popular prime time commercial TV show. This pisses off conservatives.

And this is just what we need isn't it?

Politics in football.

I'd like to think that footy was one of the last bastions where politics held no relevance. Perhaps a little naive?

 

[telsor]

Weeks?

Surely you mean years of jail time!

Just read the Carlton board, we're talking attempted murder here!

 

[juss]

3 weeks

 

[PetterdHoisted]

Our player got knocked out cold behind the play.

1. We care for our players
2. We care for our team
3. We played a man down practically the whole match. This illegal act benefitted the culprits. It wasn't like we're such a great team that we can deal with that.
4. This kind of act could kill.
5. The whole footy world knows he deserves more than 2 weeks for that act.
6. The use of celebrity character witnesses for an on field matter is plain ridiculous and stinks of someone/team that doesn't want to pay for their actions.
7. They turned this into a circus.
8. As fans of a team that has copped it's fair share of behind the play aggression, once the punishment is dealt, we get on with life.

If you're instigating that Carlton fans are only after blood because of racism, I assure you we aren't. For one, I have been one of the most vocal on here and guess what, I share nationality with the guy and was over the moon when he got drafted and see him play so often.

Plus the Lebanese flag was flying in the Carlton cheersquad before people realised what Lebanon was. Let's say if Lygon St is the spiritual Street of the club, Sydney Rd is not far behind. Carlton would probably have the highest percentage of supporters who share the same ethnicity and religion with Houli.

So no, it's not the person, not to nationality nor the religion... It is this individual action by just another footy player.

Lol no! Not rascism!! Everyone's gone bananas here. Thought maybe because the blues have been down the bottom a while. We all care for the players but there is usually a bit more solidarity against the MRP, not cheering them on.

 

[madmug]

And this is just what we need isn't it?

Politics in football.

I'd like to think that footy was one of the last bastions where politics held no relevance. Perhaps a little naive?

Sorry to bring the real footy world to you.
But, Apart from the fact that 'politics' is about the means of decision making between those involved in most civil activities. The AFL makes political decisions all the time. Some people benefit & some don't. Virtually no decisions are made objectively. They weigh up aspects under consideration, which are nearly always subjective in nature & make decisions on that basis. Its actually how most organisations operate.

 

[Farm Boy]

That incident doesn't look good. I'd say 3-4 weeks. It is a bit hard to judge. I know Conca only copped 2 down to 1 week for his attempted murder on Devon Smith a few years ago, so its all a little hard to work out. The only thing I am certain of is that the MRP and the tribunal are a joke. They really no idea at all. Actually, to say they had no idea at all would be a compliment to them.

 

[bomberclifford]

4 games down to 3 due to good record.

Should probably get 1 extra for arguing intent, which is what happened to Jonas.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

AFL has no choice but to sack the current tribunal, who fell for the character reference ploy, and appoint new members who'll stick to the rules.

 

[Sleutheren]

* this sport.

 

[Aramis]

Basically the token Muslim the media trot out for the "nothing to with Islam" interview every month.

Edit: every week, couple of days as it stands ATM.

This is a really insensitive comment. The guy is a bit obnoxious at times but his a highly educated PhD holder and Lawyer, he does a lot of work trying to help bridging ethnic divides in our community and I think this comment isn't necessary nor has any relevance to Houli's tribunal ruling or appeal.

In the case he made a character reference, I agree with most people that should have absolutely 0 value in the tribunal along with the "extract of a speech" that was spoken by Malcolm Turnbull. the "good bloke" defence is what they are calling it.

Happy they appealed, needs to get 3-4.

 

[davis_756]

In no way did Richmond say he should get weeks off because he is Muslim. That's a lie

That was their entire defense, call in character references of how he is a beacon for the Muslim community and shouldn't be punished as such.

They didn't even bother arguing intent or impact, just pulled out the old racism/religion card.

 

[RobbieGray17]

MRP is a laughing stock.

Scofield gets 2-1 for something a butterfly would have made more impact
Selwood smashes a guy in the back of the head with a forearm, gets off.
Houli kos a guy, and gets two weeks for a personal reflection. (* OFF)
Greene puts on a late contest, makes minimal contact, gets two weeks.
Guy puts on an acidental late bump, gets 1-3 weeks.

This is an embarrassment.

 

[RobbieGray17]

Good record needs to be ****ed off. Judge every action on its merits.

 

[imperial_oz]

I honestly can't even keep up with your random changing point

Yes or no, should outcome be considered at all in suspensions?

Is no too hard for you to understand. I've only said about 4 times.

There has been no change in what I'm saying, just a failure on your part to understand a simple concept.

Intentional elbow to the head draws a severe penalty that can be altered by applicable circumstance but the basic penalty by default is severe before those circumstances are evaluated. Which is what I've been saying all along.

Fine, you disagree. I get that. Now make a valid argument why instead of this pretense

 

[madmug]

The AFL are playing the long game and want to make sure they don't get sued or worse down the track due to their negligence when it comes to head injuries.

If a bloke gets knocked out, and the penalty dished out can at all be possibly seen as light, they are going to appeal, lest they be seen as not taking head injuries seriously.

This is my view. It was a deliberate act. He may not have intended the outcome, but that, unfortunately, is not the point. The AFL must take the high ground on this, or be open to action by the legal vultures who will smell money in this. Also it will show the parents of footy kids that the AFL take seriously the reduction of head injuries in the game.

 

[SilentHunter_]

This whole situation is a mess. Made a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[BotsMaster]

This is literally all they spoke about on the radio today. I was forced to listen to nova all day.

What do you mean by "forced"? Don't you have an off button on your radio?

 

[lewigie]

No thats why there would be a range of penalties based on circumstances.

Like a charge in criminal courts, some are more serious than others, have differing circumstances (some mitigating) but attract a penalty that corresponds more with the nature of the offence than any outcome.

As an example DUI. Serious offence. Penalties are generally severe but based on circumstances may be reduced somewhat or enhanced somewhat but that isnt based on outcome which is the same.

How about king hits that result in death or just result in serious injury?

They're charged completely differently because of the outcome.

Wtf are you on. Should Schofield have gotten 4-5 because his elbow COULD have come close to Oliver's temple? Or Parker on Baguley?