- Dec 9, 2015
- 5,735
- 10,159
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Bedford suspension
- Thread starter russ
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Well, last year Carlton had to go to appeal for Cripps, and that wasn't even a bump.
But it points to my Christian comment.
Jeremias
Moderator
- Sep 26, 2004
- 46,219
- 62,619
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #28
Good to hear
Could your club perhaps lend its lawyers to the righteous cause?!
No, but it's not a bad idea for the club to add "How to beat the MRO" to the list of subjects offered by the Carlton College of Sport.
Could rake in some nice $ from other clubs who want to know how to master the system.
ragzztoriches
Debutant
- Apr 4, 2015
- 135
- 404
- AFL Club
- GWS
The problem being that the key price of evidence used in the hearing was a still photo, that no one has seen, that allegedly showed fishers head making a whiplash movement into Bedford. I donāt think that can be classed as high contact of you get someone shoulder to shoulder or shoulder to chest and the other players head whiplashes forward.
The afl also used the fact that fisher went for a scat test as evidence it was dangerous but the threshold for scat tests is currently quite low, because of the port Adelaide scandal.
I think that the giants will argue that the tribunal made an error in considering the scat test and an error in their adjudication of the force and primary impact.
As an aside Iād really love the afl to release the still photo they used. How can the public have any confidence in the aflās institutions if the whole process is Byzantine and opaque.
Gigantic
Brownlow Medallist
Snarls Barkley
Brownlow Medallist
- Jun 7, 2012
- 10,002
- 12,354
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- San Antonio, West Ham, Renegades
Very harsh.
A bigger name would have gotten off.
Hopefully the appeal is successful but have no faith.
A bigger name would have gotten off.
Hopefully the appeal is successful but have no faith.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,531
- 40,723
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
She had been in the role for the entire year, just not officially.
She signs off on all MRO decisions so has final say on everything. Which means she has been signing off on all the ridiculous tackle penalties all year.
She was ok with Weitering and ok with Bedford.
She is also the driving force behind robots instead of just buying more and better quality cameras for the posts.
Other than calling her "she" I made no mention of her sex and its role in her decisions.. Far more likely is her being yet another exec in the AFL pound who is happy to stay on course rather than make meaningful fixes.
Multiballz
Team Captain
- Feb 21, 2023
- 558
- 711
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
He just needs to claim he was going for the ball.
These idiots need to bring some integrity and accountability onto themselves and start to allow precident.
These idiots need to bring some integrity and accountability onto themselves and start to allow precident.
Good to hear
Could your club perhaps lend its lawyers to the righteous cause?!
They need to borrow Carltonās lawyer ASAP
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
a) chose to bump
b) got him high
Dunno why GWS thought bringing a biomechanist in to argue that "yes there was probably high contact but the bulk of the force was to shoulder" was the right play. AFL have been pretty consistent on banning any head high bumps (with a few exceptions of genuine accidents while attacking the ball "reasonably").
Dunno what angle they'll bring to the appeal. Very first line of the reasoning is;
Tribunal reasons:
It is not disputed Toby Bedford bumped Zac Fisher.
b) got him high
Dunno why GWS thought bringing a biomechanist in to argue that "yes there was probably high contact but the bulk of the force was to shoulder" was the right play. AFL have been pretty consistent on banning any head high bumps (with a few exceptions of genuine accidents while attacking the ball "reasonably").
Dunno what angle they'll bring to the appeal. Very first line of the reasoning is;
Tribunal reasons:
It is not disputed Toby Bedford bumped Zac Fisher.
- May 29, 2013
- 3,859
- 9,315
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Ha .... hilarious all the non St Kilda desperados screaming for Bedford to get off ..... no doubt if the Bedford decision was impacting your team you would be screaming the other way that he should stay suspended
It was a bump ..... he got him high ..... high and severe enough that Fisher had to go undergo a concussion test
The only disgrace here is that GWS are allowed to appeal the decision twice and if he does get off on some crapshite technicality then surely it proves the system is truly broken
It was a bump ..... he got him high ..... high and severe enough that Fisher had to go undergo a concussion test
The only disgrace here is that GWS are allowed to appeal the decision twice and if he does get off on some crapshite technicality then surely it proves the system is truly broken
- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,284
- 42,122
- AFL Club
- GWS
Or they see that it wasnāt an actionable offence
Nope & nope.
Lol you at the 1st person of any club or media that has said he should be charged.
- May 29, 2013
- 3,859
- 9,315
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
He's been found guilty twice
Show me where he didn't bump him and hit him in the head
Tell me that Fisher didn't have to undergo a concussion test
If he gets off its a joke ... considering he has been found guilty twice
Gws/Bedford didn't argue at the tribunal that it wasn't a bump. First line of the tribunals explanation is "no dispute that Bedford bumped Fisher".
It was a bump.
ragzztoriches
Debutant
- Apr 4, 2015
- 135
- 404
- AFL Club
- GWS
What is in dispute is the force/location of contact. Are you deliberately trying to misunderstand whatās being argued?
Colonial was arguing that it wasn't a bump
Unless "not an actionable offence" means something other than "not a bump" (and "nope" now means "yup") I think you may be the one who misunderstood.
ragzztoriches
Debutant
- Apr 4, 2015
- 135
- 404
- AFL Club
- GWS
Not actionable meaning that it was a ābumpā but it didnāt get him highā¦ or it wasnāt foreseeable that the other player wouldnāt protect themselves, or it doesnāt meet the thresholdā¦
All of those are pretty reasonable readings especially when no one directly refuted that it was a bump.
And Iād say that colonial was perhaps suggesting that he didnāt get him high and it wasnāt contact that was serious enough to warrant sanction, considering the low bar for scat tests post the Port Adelaide game.
- May 29, 2013
- 3,859
- 9,315
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
But the bump did get him high ...... high enough that Fisher went for a concussion test and high enough that he has been found guilty twice
If he gets off its a disgrace and shows the AFL is corrupt ..... though I think we know that already with extremely questionable tribunal decisions in favor of big name players and favored teams
If he gets off its a disgrace and shows the AFL is corrupt ..... though I think we know that already with extremely questionable tribunal decisions in favor of big name players and favored teams
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,531
- 40,723
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Who are GWS playing this weekend?
It was a terrible suspension. In a long list of terrible suspensions this year. The AFL has no idea what it is doing.
ragzztoriches
Debutant
- Apr 4, 2015
- 135
- 404
- AFL Club
- GWS
Or there was the suspicion that there might have been head contact and laudably, with an abundance of caution, the Carlton medical team assessed Fisher for concussion due to the current environment surrounding HIA and scat tests.
You clearly have an axe to grind here, and it makes sense given Saturday, but the player who was hit said there was no head contact, there was no concussion, the medical report found no injury and two umpires within 10m of the incident didnāt see anything wrong with the incident. The vision doesnāt suggest conclusively that there was head contact and neither you nor I have seen the photo that purportedly shows high contact.
To suggest with the level of certainty that you have that the contact was high is a little bit silly.
- Sep 25, 2013
- 15,023
- 29,208
- AFL Club
- Carlton
He put on a legitimate block to protect his teammate. At no point does it look like he got Fisher high. Yep, it shook him up and it was prudent for the Blues to ensure there was no concussion (concussion can occur without a hit to the head) but that isn't an admission that he was hit high.
Similar threads
- Poll
