MRP / Trib. Dangerfield sent to the tribunal

[calder_daddy]

Highly believe we’ll fight it and try and bring it down to high contact and get away with only 2 weeks
To the letter or the law he deserves 3 weeks plus
Is the rule stupid with accidental head clashes.
Absobloddylutely

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Tribunal system is a bloody lottery. The very same bump causing no damage is in the realm of fine and 1 week.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Tribunal system is a bloody lottery. The very same bump causing no damage is in the realm of fine and 1 week.

Same bump without the head clash probably wouldn't even be a downfield free kick let alone further penalty I reckon.

 

[winty]

Wonder what the outcome would've been if we didn't have all the media outlets speculating on it over the weekend and basically demanding it go straight to the tribunal and what the sentence would be.

That's one bad thing about having the MRP - it used to be when there was a report the media couldn't replay or critique the incident until the tribunal handed down its decision on Monday night. Now it's just trial by media until Michael Christian gets to view the incident.

 

[calder_daddy]

Wonder what the outcome would've been if we didn't have all the media outlets speculating on it over the weekend and basically demanding it go straight to the tribunal and what the sentence would be.

That's one bad thing about having the MRP - it used to be when there was a report the media couldn't replay or critique the incident until the tribunal handed down its decision on Monday night. Now it's just trial by media until Michael Christian gets to view the incident.

Yeah but this is the case for different clubs also.
High profile players have gotten off over the years because of the crickets from those supporter bases.
We aren’t liked and haven’t been for a decade and these are the type of results we get.

 

[_Game_]

I honestly was preparing for 4+, so this is quite welcome. I don't agree with it, but it is the rules.

 

[Gee Class Loco]

3 weeks handed out.
Just about right.
Let's see what we are made of now boys.

 

[ShaunWDT]

Quoting Siri is laughable, wouldn't get that clown to represent again.

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

3 weeks for Danger

 

[calder_daddy]

Confirmed a 3 week ban

I’ll be honest, if he was to miss 3 matches at any time of the year I’m glad it’s against
Lions at home
Hawks
Melbourne

 

[ShaunWDT]

Highly believe we’ll fight it and try and bring it down to high contact and get away with only 2 weeks
To the letter or the law he deserves 3 weeks plus
Is the rule stupid with accidental head clashes.
Absobloddylutely

Seems unlikely when they accepted it straight away and didnt look to argue the point further.

 

[hoopla]

I wonder how many weeks Cotchin or Martin would have received if they were in the same situation? I doubt it would have been 3 or more.

 

[calder_daddy]

Seems unlikely when they accepted it straight away and didnt look to argue the point further.

If there’s nothing to lose other than 10k
They’ll have a crack at it

 

[calder_daddy]

I wonder how many weeks Cotchin or Martin would have received if they were in the same situation? I doubt it would have been 3 or more.

They would’ve got the same, let’s not be those guys

 

[hoopla]

They would’ve got the same, let’s not be those guys

Do you really believe that? Cotchin is untouchable. Martin less so.

And why can’t we be as petty as other teams’ supporters?

 

[Burro]

I wonder how many weeks Cotchin or Martin would have received if they were in the same situation? I doubt it would have been 3 or more.

Kelly would be charged for high contact....

 

[Catman]

If it's not a star like Dangerfield, it doesn't get three, because there's no constant analysis by the media and because it's not a high profile player.

This will be another short-lived campaign by the AFL/media.

 

[AM]

Highly believe we’ll fight it and try and bring it down to high contact and get away with only 2 weeks
To the letter or the law he deserves 3 weeks plus
Is the rule stupid with accidental head clashes.
Absobloddylutely

Nah! We'll take it. Reckon the club breathed a sigh of relief when the AFL didn't ask for more than the 3 weeks the MRO assessed.

 

[hoopla]

Either a discipline issue at the cats or they’ve been targeted unfairly

The suspension ladder: Whose bad boys keep getting banned?

Guess how many games your club has missed through suspension over the past 10 years

www.afl.com.au

 

[Sky]

I wonder how many weeks Cotchin or Martin would have received if they were in the same situation? I doubt it would have been 3 or more.

Right.. just like Richmond fans would be saying those two would get more and the only reason Danger didn’t was because of who he is.

 

[AM]

Dangerfield Found Guilty By Tribunal

Patrick Dangerfield will miss the Cats' next three matches.

www.geelongcats.com.au

 

[cats_09]

Dangerfield just interviewed on 7, the club won't be appealing and accept the 3 week suspension

 

[calder_daddy]

Do you really believe that? Cotchin is untouchable. Martin less so.

And why can’t we be as petty as other teams’ supporters?

Because if you know any other them especially on here they’re a bunch of *******s

 

[Badtemperedbadger]

Kelly would be charged for high contact....

I watched a game on the weekend where a defender with no intention of marking the ball, came in late to the contest jumped into the head of the forward with his knee (accidental most probably).
Punched ball away.
Forward concussed went straight off.
where’s the duty of care?
Im not necessarily saying Danger gets off but I see no difference in the two incidents, both were defensive actions, both deliberate actions though accidental contact.
Both resulted in concussions.
Where will this “Duty of Care” in a ballistic style game end up?
The fact that you get multiple weeks for an accident opens up all sorts of interpretations, just how far will the AFL take this?

 

[cats_09]

Second tweet has the interview between Browne & Dangerfield (glad 7Newxs tweeted this as Browne blocked me on Twitter)