Elliot Yeos suspension

[Shadow89]

It’s clearly the rule of the week for the MRO. In most weeks neither would be a suspension. The AFL has been telegraphing through media people for a couple weeks that ‘the AFL doesn’t like these off-ball hits’. Instead of making a statement saying there will be strict-liability for any strike from here on, this is their asinine response.

And I see a few comments in here worried that this is an unmanageable precedent to set and to that I say, never fear! Because everything will change in a week’s time.

...and we'll just sit and wait 'til Hawkins has the honour of once again being selected for the dubious honour of being their poster boy for examples of what not to do (for just that week)

 

[Shadow89]

I want to know who he insulted/assaulted at AFL HQ to keep being made the scapegoat every season on crackdowns (jumper punches a few years ago etc)

Don't forget 'umpire contact'...that one was a pearler

 

[Gavin Excell]

I will not rest until Bunnings Karen weighs in on this hot topic

When it comes to masked avengers , I prefer Lizzy Rose

 

[Shadow89]

When it comes to masked avengers , I prefer Lizzy Rose

But the problem is Bunnings Karen doesn't wear a mask, haha!

 

[garlic munchers]

Oh yeah, Cats are 'so protected by the MRO'...

At the very least, should shut all the conspiracy theorists up

Christian dug himself a hole that went all the way to China and no option but to suspend Hawkins (wrongly).

AFL is a huge business and in no way should Christian with an undeniable perceived conflict of interest (whether there is an actual conflict is irrelevant), be making these one man decisions.

Further, if the scragging that goes on in AFL occurred at suburban/country level then someone would get their arse handed to them.

Given this option is not available in the sanitised AFL, the AFL must get off it’s well paid jobs for the boys arse and umpire the scraggers who focus on the player only (hutchings, de boer etc) the f*** out of the game.

 

[Gavin Excell]

...and we'll just sit and wait 'til Hawkins has the honour of once again being selected for the dubious honour of being their poster boy for examples of what not to do (for just that week)

Hawkins is his own worst enemy

Dumb bastard

 

[Gunf]

Christian dug himself a hole that went all the way to China and no option but to suspend Hawkins (wrongly).

AFL is a huge business and in no way should Christian with an undeniable perceived conflict of interest (whether there is an actual conflict is irrelevant), be making these one man decisions.

Further, if the scragging that goes on in AFL occurred at suburban/country level then someone would get their arse handed to them.

Given this option is not available in the sanitised AFL, the AFL must get off it’s well paid jobs for the boys arse and umpire the scraggers who focus on the player only (hutchings, de boer etc) the f*** out of the game.

I agree scraggers need to be out of the game but on your other point AFL don't need a reason to suspend Hawkins if he even sneezes wrong they get him as evidenced by the last few years..

Jumper punch crackdown (only he got suspended)
Umpire contact etc

 

[Fully]

So the AFL wants Yeo suspended for brushing an opponents face

 

[Fully]

Wait the AFL are saying their not even sure he hit him??

 

[Shadow89]

So the AFL wants Yeo suspended for brushing an opponents face

They want Hawkins suspended for brushing someone's neck...the whole thing is a farce. Meanwhile, Burgoyne's free to keep smashing heads and taking names at will.

 

[Alesana]

Yeo free to play. Don't know how he copped a week to begin with smh

 

[Underarm]

Ban overturned.

Damn WAbias at it again.

 

[WestCoast05]

I want to know who he insulted/assaulted at AFL HQ to keep being made the scapegoat every season on crackdowns (jumper punches a few years ago etc)

Largely agree regarding Hawkins (definitely turned a boozed up Gil down in a bar in the early hours a few years back, only way to explain it) - EXCEPT in the infamous jumper punch suspension, the AFL had literally just stated we are suspending the next jumper punch and the God bless him he went and jumper punched someone.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Rightly so.

If you don't think a player should miss a GF for something, it shouldn't be worth a ban in H&A either.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

Largely agree regarding Hawkins (definitely turned a boozed up Gil down in a bar in the early hours a few years back, only way to explain it) - EXCEPT in the infamous jumper punch suspension, the AFL had literally just stated we are suspending the next jumper punch and the God bless him he went and jumper punched someone.

Not just the jumper punch, the year before they did the same thing on light punches to the face. 1 or 2 weeks later he punched either Matt Crouch or Dane Rampe (memory not 100% on which strike). Barely made impact, but did it straight after the AFL cracked down on it.

Hawk has never been lucky with the tribunal, but this is the first time I'd consider him incredibly unlucky (his stupidity notwithstanding).

 

[Whiskers]

Without doubt that is the softest "One week" in the history of VFL. A guy on FB nailed it. We play Geelong next and we know Hocking has got his fingers in this.

yeahhhhhhh rightttttttttio, good call. What other conspiracies do you believe in?
Christian is incompetent, pretty simple.

 

[WestCoast05]

Not just the jumper punch, the year before they did the same thing on light punches to the face. 1 or 2 weeks later he punched either Matt Crouch or Dane Rampe (memory not 100% on which strike). Barely made impact, but did it straight after the AFL cracked down on it.

Hawk has never been lucky with the tribunal, but this is the first time I'd consider him incredibly unlucky (his stupidity notwithstanding).

As much as I dont mind Hawkins out since we are facing you, that backwards elbow is soft as, give a fine if they have to.

But more than anything I hate the random-ass nature of how they pluck out who to suspend or not.

Legit tackles get pinged, and actual sling tackles get let off.
Meanwhile someone else headbutts a stomach and the stomach gets suspended.
What a sh!tshow the MRO/MRP is, and has been for a long time.

We bag out the Umps but they have to make split second decisions. MRO/MRP are a complete F up and have no excuse to be.

 

[Atomboy]

Watch someone here still call out Vic bias, if the Yeo decision is upheld. Guarantee it

Still #VICBIAS - clearly an attempt to put Yeo off his game before they play the Cats

 

[D-N-R]

Right decision. Embarrassing for Christian. The only good thing about this tribunal is being able to appeal without getting extra weeks.

 

[Whiskers]

Christian dug himself a hole that went all the way to China and no option but to suspend Hawkins (wrongly).

AFL is a huge business and in no way should Christian with an undeniable perceived conflict of interest (whether there is an actual conflict is irrelevant), be making these one man decisions.

Further, if the scragging that goes on in AFL occurred at suburban/country level then someone would get their arse handed to them.

Given this option is not available in the sanitised AFL, the AFL must get off it’s well paid jobs for the boys arse and umpire the scraggers who focus on the player only (hutchings, de boer etc) the f*** out of the game.

Great post, absolutely dug himself the hole and yes the scraggers must be held accountable.

 

[Dazzler9]

When is Hawkins' hearing? Just imagine if two MRO decisions are overturned in the same week. Good luck Hawk!

 

[HairyO]

They want Hawkins suspended for brushing someone's neck...the whole thing is a farce. Meanwhile, Burgoyne's free to keep smashing heads and taking names at will.

You actually want tackles that dont cause injury to see players rubbed out for a week?

Really?

 

[Shadow89]

You actually want tackles that dont cause injury to see players rubbed out for a week?

Really?

Lol, I want the MRO to stick with what it says, rather than just making sh*t up every week and in every situation.

'The head is sacrosanct, and sling tackles must be penalized, for the danger of long-term trauma'

*Burgoyne sling tackles young player into the ground headfirst*

MRO - *crickets*

************

Just come out and say that you penalize the outcome and not the action (unless it's Hawkins, in which case he's exempt from any form of consistency). Clearly the AFL doesn't give a sh*t about injury, just about 'appearing' to act as it does whenever an injury/concussion is sustained. If Dangerfield and Rowbottom had gone off the ground and had the concussion test/not played out the game, guarantee Burgoyne would have been suspended in each instance.

I'm just sick of the whole dog's breakfast that is adjudication of reportable offences. It's why Bartel left the tribunal, because the system of classification was too arbitrary, and he couldn't enforce it in good conscience.

 

[HairyO]

Lol, I want the MRO to stick with what it says, rather than just making sh*t up every week and in every situation.

'The head is sacrosanct, and sling tackles must be penalized, for the danger of long-term trauma'

*Burgoyne sling tackles young player into the ground headfirst*

MRO - *crickets*

************

Just come out and say that you penalize the outcome and not the action (unless it's Hawkins, in which case he's exempt from any form of consistency). Clearly the AFL doesn't give a sh*t about injury, just about 'appearing' to act as it does whenever an injury/concussion is sustained. If Dangerfield and Rowbottom had gone off the ground and had the concussion test/not played out the game, guarantee Burgoyne would have been suspended in each instance.

I'm just sick of the whole dog's breakfast that is adjudication of reportable offences. It's why Bartel left the tribunal, because the system of classification was too arbitrary, and he couldn't enforce it in good conscience.

Burgoyne was penalised.

And of course you penalise the outcome. You try to kill someone you get less than if you actually kill someone.

You steal $5, you steal $50,000.

That is literally how legal systems work.

 

[Shadow89]

Burgoyne was penalised.

And of course you penalise the outcome. You try to kill someone you get less than if you actually kill someone.

You steal $5, you steal $50,000.

That is literally how legal systems work.

So we're literally adjudicating on the basis of how hard someone's skull is? Lol, whatever, you're clearly only here to defend Burgoyne, rather than talk about the situation as a whole.

Given that Ryan literally suffered nothing, don't you think Hawkins should only get a fine too?