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

[Elixuh]

It’s outcomes like this that make me believe in vicbias and vfl conspiracy theories

 

[Vindicater]

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

He has spent the better part of the day calling anybody who disagrees with him and idiot.

Pot and kettle and all that really.

 

[Engimal v3]

Good. No place for snipers in our game. Have fun on the sidelines!

 

[Phone]

I would bet my house he would get off lol

as someone who lives in sydney i would be very glad to take this bet and move into the property game

to use this same line of thinking, when Mason Redman got suspended as a result of the off-season rule change that Heeney has now been suspended for, you probably could have found Essendon supporters saying if it was the AFL's golden boy Issac Heeney, he would not have been suspended.

Hell I just did a quick search and:

Neither did I, but was Redman’s any worse..? If Heeney had a red sash on his jumper I dare say he’d be missing a week

 

[Randomizor]

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.

Throughout this thread you’ve seemed to suggest that the argument for it being unusual is so clear and obvious. You’ve fought many posters on this point.

Yet despite being this overwhelmingly clear in your eyes, the Swans didn’t think to make it?

Either the Swans are completely and utterly incompetent and you should be embarrassed by them, or maybe it’s not so obvious and clear cut, or maybe it just plain wasn’t unusual circumstances? Take your pick.

 

[Banyo Bloods]

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.

When will Essendon supporters actually move on from the Peter Wright suspension. You can’t keep bringing it up and declare you moved on and accepted it.

 

[skipper kelly]

Never heard so much BS. Hilarious.

 

[.Shotties.]

Either the Swans are completely and utterly incompetent and you should be embarrassed by them, or maybe it’s not so obvious and clear cut, or maybe it just plain wasn’t unusual circumstances? Take your pick.

I think a defender stumbling in the act of an illegal hold resulting in their head being at solar-plexus height is unusual. Do you think that happens in contests more often than not?

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Good. No place for snipers in our game. Have fun on the sidelines!

Poor Heeney walking definition of a good bloke!

 

[HirdsTheWord]

When will Essendon supporters actually move on from the Peter Wright suspension. You can’t keep bringing it up and declare you moved on and accepted it.

We didn't appeal Wright because we accepted he did the wrong thing, even if 4 weeks was BS.

You should never appealed Heeney's in the first place, and the fact you did and your legal team dished up the drivel, is embarrassing.

 

[.Shotties.]

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

Holy shit, this sent me.

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

Because Hewett didn't get done for getting neale high because his arm bounced up off of neales bicep

Yeah and Chris Judd didn’t get done for elbowing Pav in the face and won the Brownlow that year too. Different rules for different players unfortunately.

You still can’t go around whacking blokes in the face - regardless of if you get suspended for it or not

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

We didn't appeal Wright because we accepted he did the wrong thing, even if 4 weeks was BS.

You should never appealed Heeney's in the first place, and the fact you did and your legal team dished up the drivel, is embarrassing.

I dont think its that big of a deal mate him being in Brownlow contention played a large part in the club exploring every avenue to get him off.

But honestly do you want to see a player miss out on the most prestigious medal for a act like that?

 

[Banyo Bloods]

We didn't appeal Wright because we accepted he did the wrong thing, even if 4 weeks was BS.

You should never appealed Heeney's in the first place, and the fact you did and your legal team dished up the drivel, is embarrassing.

When will supporters was the question. You guys.

 

[skipper kelly]

as someone who lives in sydney i would be very glad to take this bet and move into the property game

to use this same line of thinking, when Mason Redman got suspended as a result of the off-season rule change that Heeney has now been suspended for, you probably could have found Essendon supporters saying if it was the AFL's golden boy Issac Heeney, he would not have been suspended.

Hell I just did a quick search and:

Thats just showing the obsession with Sydney players. Did Sydney hurt you people or something?

 

[HirdsTheWord]

I dont think its that big of a deal mate him being in Brownlow contention played a large part in the club exploring every avenue to get him off.

But honestly do you want to see a player miss out on the most prestigious medal for a act like that?

No, it sucks for him, but he broke a rule, almost word for word.

it doesn't matter if a bloke playing for a brownlow or a rookie playing his first game.

they all need to be treated the same.

i am happy for the AFL to amend the rule and remove any grey area.

 

[MF]

last I checked 193 is less than 207. Am I missing something?

 

[Phone]

When will Essendon supporters actually move on from the Peter Wright suspension. You can’t keep bringing it up and declare you moved on and accepted it.

It's not even the right suspension from this week to compare it to anyway. Wright getting the same amount of games as Rankine who: A) was guilty of an intentional act while Wright was guilty of a careless act and B) was offered the option to take the MRO's grading when Wright wasn't offered that and was sent to the Tribunal and C) fought the MRO's grading of intentional at the Tribunal when Wright accepted guilty at the Tribunal but tried to agree it down to 3 weeks is much more annoying. Rankine should have probably got one more week than Wright

The comparison Essendon fans should be making is to Redman's suspension from R1 which is much the same as Heeney's. They're both acts that are caught up in the rule changes from the off-season and which, unlike Butters and Hogan, did not have any kind of escape route. Are they acts that should be suspendable? I dunno, I dunno. But thems the rules at the moment

 

[Randomizor]

I think a defender stumbling in the act of an illegal hold resulting in their head being at solar-plexus height is unusual. Do you think that happens in contests more often than not?

What the defender was doing is irrelevant.
Players initially intending to strike low but accidentally hit high? Happens all the time, results in suspensions often.

 

[SC_Power]

Andrew Dillon has just come out and said that the AFL Tribunal system “has never been better”

Just to review how our AFL tribunal works.

Pick the on field act worthy of suspension.
A, B, C?

 

[MF]

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.

Our club raised their concerns about the rule change with the AFL at the start of the year and pointed out pretty clearly how it could result in a situation like this.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

It's not even the right suspension from this week to compare it to anyway. Wright getting the same amount of games as Rankine who: A) was guilty of an intentional act while Wright was guilty of a careless act and B) was offered the option to take the MRO's grading when Wright wasn't offered that and was sent to the Tribunal and C) fought the MRO's grading of intentional at the Tribunal when Wright accepted guilty at the Tribunal but tried to agree it down to 3 weeks is much more annoying. Rankine should have probably got one more week than Wright

The comparison Essendon fans should be making is to Redman's suspension from R1 which is much the same as Heeney's. They're both acts that are caught up in the rule changes from the off-season and which, unlike Butters and Hogan, did not have any kind of escape route. Are they acts that should be suspendable? I dunno, I dunno. But thems the rules at the moment

and we didn't appeal redmans decision.

because we just accepted it ant moved on.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Our club raised their concerns about the rule change with the AFL at the start of the year and pointed out pretty clearly how it could result in a situation like this.

what situation?

a player being hit in the head off the ball?

kind of exactly how the rule is written?

 

[Bones7677]

Oh do we now?

Yes they do

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

No, it sucks for him, but he broke a rule, almost word for word.

it doesn't matter if a bloke playing for a brownlow or a rookie playing his first game.

they all need to be treated the same.

i am happy for the AFL to amend the rule and remove any grey area.

Yer but no malice or intention to harm Webster at all he turned around and apologized to him right away.

I mean its fine i respect your opinion i just think its absolutely wild you can lose a brownlow for a action like that.