- Banned
- #301
Precedents have been used many times. You can't forbid it as a practice.
Buddy Elbow -how many week?
- Thread starter go_the_dockers
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Precedents have been used many times. You can't forbid it as a practice.
UM
No it wasn't.
That 1 week off though was 2014 when he ran through Shane Edwards, so it's not like he's been suspended for "striking" before
LOL, I assumed it would be weeks.
Well if you're going to insist on that being true even after I've pulled out a quote from the article which states that precedent was banned as evidence up to at least 2010... good day to you.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,481
- 40,649
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
That 1 week was for running through Edwards (Richmond) and knocking him out. Should have been Severe and 3 or 4 weeks...
But for the Sydney discount.
SSSSSS
Brownlow Medallist
- Apr 18, 2011
- 19,400
- 41,770
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Six decades of domination
Hurts..................DON'T IT?
Not really. Got two flags and nearly 600 goals out of him, and two more after he pissed off. Still a Hawthorn legend.
Got the best out of Bud so happy for him to enjoy his retirement package and enjoy the Bondi lifestyle.
He wasn't knocked out he got up and took his kick.
He only got one week though because we were two weeks out from playing the Hawks at the MCG though remember?
Then I'm pretty sure the next week Hodge and Lewis spent the whole game throwing arms North players and spent some time in the stands as a result.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,481
- 40,649
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Ah I was sure he was concussed. Here we go:
MRP was wrong, not just careless on Buddy, Tippett bans
Swans pair Buddy Franklin and Kurt Tippett got off lightly when intent was carelessly mistaken. One week for each was wrong.
Tippett also only got 1 week when the AFL were handjng out 2 and 3 week suspensions.
No Sydney discount though of course.
Amazing what the colour of the jumper does.
- Banned
- #309
I said I couldn't read the article, but perhaps I should explain better.
Precedent, when it comes to the law, is a binding decision. Because a superior court has ruled one way previously, or even a same level court, then judges are bound to follow those precedents. They apply to questions of law.
You cannot have a precedent to a question of fact.
What you are able to do, and have always been able to do, is point to previous similar enough decisions and say "Cotchin got a fine, why should Hodge get suspended." It's using "precedent" in the common sense, but not in the legal sense.
Seems the word "precedent" is a hang-up, so leaving it out...
Players fronting the VFL/AFL tribunal have historically not been permitted to cite footage of past incidents in their defence.
- Banned
- #311
And that bit is wrong. In terms of penalty, it has always been relevant.
EDIT: Fritsch used a precedent earlier this year.
Franklin's team used it to challenge the grading, not the penalty.
If you're right then you should easily be able to cite a couple of, er, precedents...
- Banned
- #314
Just did.
SSSSSS
Brownlow Medallist
- Apr 18, 2011
- 19,400
- 41,770
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Six decades of domination
Cyril Rioli - 'Attempted Striking' ... Two weeks.
Actually elbowing someone in the head?
- Banned
- #316
Here's another.......you can Google yourself for more....
Hartlett banned for two
The AFL tribunal has upheld the match review panel's findings and suspended Hamish Hartlett for two weeks.
Here's another.......you can Google yourself for more....
Hartlett banned for two
The AFL tribunal has upheld the match review panel's findings and suspended Hamish Hartlett for two weeks.www.portadelaidefc.com.au
Fair enough re Fritsch. I gather the rule has changed this year.
Yes I can remember cases where the AFL DVD was used. As per the article, "the DVD is the only means of creating a precedent to judge cases". I'll concede you are technically correct in a limited sense, but at the time of the Hartlett case it would not have been possible for Franklin to use vision of his three incidents given the DVD was produced pre-season.
- Banned
- #319
I'm not being a smart arse here. The media are the problem because they throw around legal expressions when they shouldn't. And it creates confusion.
The rule has never changed. There has never been a rule. It's just the way the media has interchanged "precedent" between the "narrow legal" meaning (there are no precedents) and the broad "example" meaning (these 3 cases were low so why should Buddy get medium).
Mate, wishing injuries on players is shithouse and there's no excuse for it.
Maybe they used to do it back in your day, but like you said, it's probably not good karma..
"Precedent" always referenced the general definition prior to the legalese invasion of the AFL in the 2000's.
Given the multitude of weak rulings to choose from, this seems certain to open the floodgates to a procession of inadequate penalties, with those defences turned down by the tribunal screaming blue murder.
Brilliant news.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,481
- 40,649
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Cyril Rioli - 'Attempted Striking' ... Two weeks.
Actually elbowing someone in the head?
Cyril once got reported for striking a team mate when he didnt make contact with anyone.
Didnt even try to strike.
But yes, attempting to hurt someone could lead to a higher penalty because actually hitting them may have been with low impact or even negligible impact.
Which is why there is the potential to cause serious injury.
Apparently swinging an elbow doesnt have any potential...
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,481
- 40,649
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
10 for 6 weeks at Hawks. 7 for 1 week at Swans.
For someone who hasnt changed his style of play. And where over time in theory the AFL has become more strict about penalising bad behaviour.
