MRP / Trib. Isaac Heeney - High contact on Jimmy Webster

[Randomizor]

Was wondering how long the Sydney fans would take to mention Daicos or Maynard. You didn’t disappoint.

Maynard is actually a great reference. He did something we’d all consider wrong, but there wasn’t an exact rule against it. So the AFL brought in a rule. If anyone breaks the “Maynard rule” this year, I’m sure Swans fans would want them rubbed out.

In this case enough players were getting away with off the ball strikes to create separation. So the AFL brought in a specific rule against it. Heeney broke this rule. Swans fans suddenly don’t like newly introduced rules applying to their players.

 

[The Mares Leg]

Was wondering how long the Sydney fans would take to mention Daicos or Maynard. You didn’t disappoint.

What an appallingly weak troll.

 

[smeggaz]

Guys don't worry, written reference from Sydney Sweeney is inbound.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[jannissary]

Vicbias - believe it and the AFL's betting "partners" are thanking them for the bonus of pocketing all those Heeney Brownlow votes.

You can look at someone and punch them in the face for no penalty or a fine, but trying to stop someone scagging you (where was the umpires whistle, there's effing four of you!) you get a game suspension. Laura Kane you are effing hopeless.

VFL alive and well, needs missile from Vlad on HQ

exactly! i can't believe he hit someone in the face and his "good bloke defense" didn't work, even when he admitted that it was something that he does 50-100 times a game! i can't believe that zak butters got away with a similar thing, he must play for a vic side right?

he hit someone, it happens, he appealed and lost, and appealed again and lost. so be it.

 

[The Mares Leg]

Maynard is actually a great reference. He did something we’d all consider wrong, but there wasn’t an exact rule against it. So the AFL brought in a rule. If anyone breaks the “Maynard rule” this year, I’m sure Swans fans would want them rubbed out.

In this case enough players were getting away with off the ball strikes to create separation. So the AFL brought in a specific rule against it. Heeney broke this rule. Swans fans suddenly don’t like newly introduced rules applying to their players.

Heeney only broke the rule because the tribunal considered his actions ‘usual’.

This point may be far too subtle for someone who desperately wants to see him suspended. Are you one of those?

Lets see how many ‘usual’ fend offs result in suspensions from here on.

 

[Randomizor]

Heeney only broke the rule because the tribunal considered his actions ‘usual’.

This point may be far too subtle for someone who desperately wants to see him suspended. Are you one of those?

Lets see how many ‘usual’ fend offs result in suspensions from here on.

I think you’re confusing people want to see someone suspended, with people who can actually read the rules as written.

Swans failed to successfully argue that the circumstances were unusual. Therefore they are officially usual. Given that, the rules are very black and white about what grading should apply.

 

[Underarm]

Heeney only broke the rule because the tribunal considered his actions ‘usual’.

This point may be far too subtle for someone who desperately wants to see him suspended. Are you one of those?

Lets see how many ‘usual’ fend offs result in suspensions from here on.

There was nothing unusual about Heeney's Intent to strike. Heeney even admited he did it 50-100 times a game.

 

[Phone]

Heeney only broke the rule because the tribunal considered his actions ‘usual’.

This point may be far too subtle for someone who desperately wants to see him suspended. Are you one of those?

Lets see how many ‘usual’ fend offs result in suspensions from here on.

Many of them will not, because they will fail to cause enough impact for it to be a Reportable Offence. This one, unfortunately for Heeney, did meet the threshold

 

[Ambrosia]

I’m in the should not be suspended camp

 

[HirdsTheWord]

The appeal said it best.

The swans were just upset at the rule rather than providing any type of substantive evidence to the contrary.

I thought they would at least try and argue an error in the rule of law

embarrassing they appealed this with the argument they did. Take the punishment and move on, like every other club does. Waste of complete time effort and money.

We all thought Peter wrights suspension was a bit of a ****in rort, but we just moved on and accepted it.

Shame on the swans. Flags were lowered today.

 

[Madblue]

Just like the bump, if you hit in the head you suffer the consequences. Simple and correct decision

 

[the big lebowski]

Injunction!!!!!!

 

[Phone]

The appeal said it best.

The swans were just upset at the rule rather than providing any type of substantive evidence to the contrary.

I thought they would at least try and argue an error in the rule of law

embarrassing they appealed this with the argument they did. Take the punishment and move on, like every other clubs does. Waste of complete time effort and money.

to be fair, the Crows argument on Tuesday wasn't much different. "oh this shouldn't be intentional because we don't want it to be" was basically the crux of it. The AFL changed the processes a few years ago to make challenging MRP/MRO much more tangible (see if you spot when that happened!) and I can't help but wonder if the efforts we saw this week might lead the AFL down the path of trying to make some adjustments on that front, which would be a shame

 

[The Mares Leg]

I think you’re confusing people want to see someone suspended, with people who can actually read the rules as written.

Swans failed to successfully argue that the circumstances were unusual. Therefore they are officially usual. Given that, the rules are very black and white about what grading should apply.

You’re correct We failed to argue the case.

That DOESN’T mean there was no legitimate argument to be had.

Only stupid people confuse verdicts with argument.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

The winner should it be not Heeney himself should graciously donate his medal to him

We also have shit lawyers

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

The AFL literally changed the rule in the off-season off the back of their failed attempt to suspend him and going forward this will be a suspendable offence

I would bet my house he would get off lol

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Neither is your chest, which is the area Heeney swatted at with a downward motion.

There was no swatting motion. It was a swinging arm.
There was no downward motion. He swung it out sideways and backwards, parallel to his shoulder/chest height.

It was a strike. It was well off the ball. It resulted in head contact. That contact wasn't negligible.
There are no extenuating circumstances to grade it careless.

He was given a get out of jail free card with the grading of low impact. It should have been graded medium.
The action was almost identical to Bachar Houli's in 2017 that got 2 weeks and the AFL appealed it and got 4 weeks.

 

[The Mares Leg]

There was nothing unusual about Heeney's Intent to strike. Heeney even admited he did it 50-100 times a game.

The issue is defining a ‘fend’ as a ‘strike’.

Or would you support Dusty being suspended 15 times in the last 3 years?

In that sense…Heeney’s situation WAS unusual…as much as you don’t want it to be.

 

[Maddo11]

embarrassing they appealed this with the argument they did. Take the punishment and move on, like every other club does. Waste of complete time effort and money.

We all thought Peter wrights suspension was a bit of a ****in rort, but we just moved on and accepted it.

Shame on the swans. Flags were lowered today.

 

[Maddo11]

There was no swatting motion. It was a swinging arm.
There was no downward motion. He swung it out sideways and backwards, parallel to his shoulder/chest height.

It was a strike. It was well off the ball. It resulted in head contact. That contact wasn't negligible.
There are no extenuating circumstances to grade it careless.

He was given a get out of jail free card with the grading of low impact. It should have been graded medium.
The action was almost identical to Bachar Houli's in 2017 that got 2 weeks and the AFL appealed it and got 4 weeks.

Ah yes, the famous "get out of jail free card" where you still spend a week in jail. Great wording, did you happen to write this nonsensical rule for the AFL?

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

The appeal said it best.

The swans were just upset at the rule rather than providing any type of substantive evidence to the contrary.

I thought they would at least try and argue an error in the rule of law

embarrassing they appealed this with the argument they did. Take the punishment and move on, like every other club does. Waste of complete time effort and money.

We all thought Peter wrights suspension was a bit of a ****in rort, but we just moved on and accepted it.

Shame on the swans. Flags were lowered today.

Thats going a bit to far but yes our argument was hopeless to begin with

 

[hoss]

Very sad yet predictable result. That should never be worth a week.

On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[hoss]

As long as the afl is consistent..........

Lol, when's that ever happened?

On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Lol, when's that ever happened?

On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Remember tho umpiring is as good as ever

This has probably been the worst season i can remember in terms of fixture/umpiring/MRP

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Here’s that ‘swinging backfist’ for you Essendon boys..

Looks like an attempt to chop an arm to me.

Oh and look, Webster is hanging on and the ball is 30 metres away.

Oh and look, Webster is almost in a full squat.

And oh look, Heeney is looking down aiming for his chest.

and oh look, hardly the USUAL push and shove in the square this was brought in to stop.


View attachment 2045208

How can you look at one picture and be so far off the mark on all points?