- Jun 14, 2015
- 17,733
- 38,703
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Port Adelaide Power
Looks like Brisbane are this week's winner of MRP CHOOK LOTTO, WHOOO!!!!!
-
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
MRP / Trib. Eric Hipwood to tribunal - Result $2500 fine
- Thread starter HTPunter
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Ok so not guilty fair enough.
But this makes no sense ... "The AFL pushed for a two-game ban, arguing he'd intentionally pushed Gardner into the path of the umpire."
If you believe he intentionally pushed a player with such force into an umpire, then why only 2 weeks? Greene got 6 weeks for a light bump.
But this makes no sense ... "The AFL pushed for a two-game ban, arguing he'd intentionally pushed Gardner into the path of the umpire."
If you believe he intentionally pushed a player with such force into an umpire, then why only 2 weeks? Greene got 6 weeks for a light bump.
Greene's was completely different IMO. Greene showed a complete lack of respect walking through an umpire.
But I do tend to agree with you there. Had the AFL felt he done it on purpose which is clearly not the case then why only 2 weeks. If a player deliberately pushes a player into an umpire. That's worth more then 2 weeks.
Some Idiot
Brownlow Medallist
- Mar 17, 2009
- 10,258
- 8,126
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Crazy that he got away with this. Footage shows him look directly at the umpire, he admits to watching Zac Bailey run past. Nonsensical defence on multiple fronts.
Kangaroo court… laughable.
- Jul 16, 2013
- 13,412
- 17,115
- AFL Club
- Essendon
What I expected.
Deserved weeks as a dog act but there was no rule against it.
Will be changed next season.
Deserved weeks as a dog act but there was no rule against it.
Will be changed next season.
seriously need to split this fine three ways, the dogs player can play a third the umpire can play a third and hipwood pay a third, absolute accident and just general football defender v forward push and shove. umpire was half asleep.
Section 5
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 26, 2018
- 5,976
- 9,131
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Lions star found guilty but free to play after blaming rival for ump contact at Tribunal
Lions star found guilty but free to play after blaming rival for ump contact at Tribunal
www.foxsports.com.au
The Tribunal deliberated for over 40 minutes before ultiamtely finding Hipwood did not show a high degree of carelessness, which they said was worthy of a $2500 fine but not a suspension.
“Viewed from certain angles this incident looks quite troubling, as it appears that Hipwood intended to push Gardner into the umpire,” Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson explained.
“However, on viewing the footage from behind the goals and hearing the evidence from Hipwood, the circumstances were very different to what they first seemed.
“It is now clear to us that Hipwood was simply running towards goal when his opponent, who was running beside him, deviated and all but stopped in Hipwood‘s path, blocking his run. Hipwood reacted by pushing his opponent, who collided with the umpire.
“However, we find that Hipwood ought to have been aware that an umpire was in close vicinity, as he and his opponent were running at speed, he ought to have been aware that the umpire was vulnerable to a high speed collision. In those circumstances, he breached his duty of care by forcefully pushing his opponent into the umpire.
“He did have an alternative, he need not have pushed his opponent. He did more than brace for contact. As a result, we find Hipwood was careless.
“It was however a reaction and not his action alone that caused the incident and we do not regard the level of carelessness as high. We do not propose to impose a suspension, we have in mind imposing a fine of $2,500.”
Given the Tribunal found a level of carelessness that was less than high, the AFL opted not to push for at least a one-match ban.
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 96,471
- 106,624
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
Your analysis does not match the report from the tribunal. Soz bro.
Brad Scott trials umpire uniforms for 2023
Not really. The rules state that it is a fine.
- Jan 23, 2007
- 4,552
- 3,138
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Is Hipwood supposed to vanish into thin air when Gardner runs into him? Guilty my ass, no more guilty then Gardner actually starting the whole thing, and the flog umpire for having no awareness.
Lions star found guilty but free to play after blaming rival for ump contact at Tribunal
Lions star found guilty but free to play after blaming rival for ump contact at Tribunal
The Tribunal deliberated for over 40 minutes before ultiamtely finding Hipwood did not show a high degree of carelessness, which they said was worthy of a $2500 fine but not a suspension.
“Viewed from certain angles this incident looks quite troubling, as it appears that Hipwood intended to push Gardner into the umpire,” Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson explained.
“However, on viewing the footage from behind the goals and hearing the evidence from Hipwood, the circumstances were very different to what they first seemed.
“It is now clear to us that Hipwood was simply running towards goal when his opponent, who was running beside him, deviated and all but stopped in Hipwood‘s path, blocking his run. Hipwood reacted by pushing his opponent, who collided with the umpire.
“However, we find that Hipwood ought to have been aware that an umpire was in close vicinity, as he and his opponent were running at speed, he ought to have been aware that the umpire was vulnerable to a high speed collision. In those circumstances, he breached his duty of care by forcefully pushing his opponent into the umpire.
“He did have an alternative, he need not have pushed his opponent. He did more than brace for contact. As a result, we find Hipwood was careless.
“It was however a reaction and not his action alone that caused the incident and we do not regard the level of carelessness as high. We do not propose to impose a suspension, we have in mind imposing a fine of $2,500.”
Given the Tribunal found a level of carelessness that was less than high, the AFL opted not to push for at least a one-match ban.
iBeng
Intentionally left blank
- Apr 3, 2012
- 58,140
- 66,407
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Would be a different story if the dogs player was standing next to a standing ump and Hipwood ran at him to intentionally push him into the unsuspecting ump. The ump chose to run alongside two players, Dogs player went to knock Hipwood off balance in the chase for the position and Hipwood responded in kind.
On the bolded, the wording of that quote would lead you to believe that tonight was the 1st time anyone in authority had a look at the behind the goals vision.... you would think that buffoon Christian would have looked at the behind the goals vision before referring it straight to the tribunal.
StevenwellerHFC
Brownlow Medallist
- Banned
- #117
Good result, moving on to the next current thing.
- Dec 11, 2010
- 10,029
- 11,312
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
It does match with us playing the bombers next round.
KissKiss
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 26, 2012
- 7,743
- 8,760
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Just another example of Christian coming across as incompetent
I'm OK with the decision. He's entitled to defend his space, it just so happened that the umpires path was converging with theirs. But in the same breath he knew the umpire was there and a collision might occur.
I seem to recall about 15 years ago Jude Bolton pushed Tom Harley into an umpire, and Harley was the one fined for it. Insane decision. Lucky they didn't use that precedent to go after Ryan Gardner this time.
Similar threads
- Locked
