Yidaki
AFL Behavioural Awareness Officer
- Jul 24, 2010
- 27,886
- 29,119
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Another joke decision by the MRP. Richmond hard done by here.
Pity Ivan's last name wasn't Ablett.
Pity Ivan's last name wasn't Ablett.
Ivan Soldo v Mason Cox
- Thread starter _RT_
- Start date
- Tagged users None
smasha
It's Time!
MRP needs a 10k fine and please explain.
The problem was Richmond put up a lousy defence that was easily countered by the AFL’s legal representative. They should have argued the impact was not sufficient enough for a suspension, instead they argued that the contact was not deliberate, which is pretty hard to believe when you watch the footage.
He shouldn’t have even been suspended in the first place, but Richmond dropped the ball here. Ablett shouldn’t have been suspended a couple weeks ago either, but Geelong were smarter in the way they challenged it and he deserved to get off.
- Banned
- #105
If you watch the footage, you will see Soldo running in a straight line towards the centre. Worpel moves into his path and drops his knees as Soldo raises his arm as protection so as to force high contact probably trying to milk another free for another set shot at goal. As soon as Soldo realises what happens he is surprised and acts like anyone would if they accidentally hit someone. How can that be intentional? Ridiculous decision and we don’t need smarties saying we should have played the force card.
I also think he should have got off but sucked in to all you tiger fans who desperately wanted Ablett to be suspended.
Karma is a b***h
One week you think an elbow to the head is worth a suspension despite the force or even intent, the next you think Soldo deserves to get off.
You Ablett bashers can’t also point to wanting consistency because Ablett got off the 1st time but you want a suspension the 2nd time even though it was the same act.
There isn’t a rule that says do it a 2nd time and it becomes a suspension.
Most of you around here suffer from tall poppy syndrome.
At least I’m consistent in my views unlike most of you.
Ablett shouldn’t be suspended the 1st time, nor the 2nd or should Saldo.
Pity about your QC....so ha sucked in!
Karma is a b***h
One week you think an elbow to the head is worth a suspension despite the force or even intent, the next you think Soldo deserves to get off.
You Ablett bashers can’t also point to wanting consistency because Ablett got off the 1st time but you want a suspension the 2nd time even though it was the same act.
There isn’t a rule that says do it a 2nd time and it becomes a suspension.
Most of you around here suffer from tall poppy syndrome.
At least I’m consistent in my views unlike most of you.
Ablett shouldn’t be suspended the 1st time, nor the 2nd or should Saldo.
Pity about your QC....so ha sucked in!
You're a disgrace. I like the vast majority never made any comments about Ablett. You are one vindictive little piece of poo.
just another typical handbagger…...blind Ablett worshippers.....they still cant see that he put money before his love of the handbaggers…...laughable
- Banned
- #110
Behind the play FFS for the billionth time.
Tigers clearly should have fought the impact. Mind boggling really.
_RT_
Hall of Famer
- Sep 17, 2006
- 44,834
- 83,681
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Furies Premiers 2010
- Thread starter
- #111
Richmond used the same defence Pies used for Mason Cox who deliberately changed direction to bump Grimes 35m off the ball. That case was overturned as the tribunal somehow found it wasn't intentional. A perfectly valid argument based on that finding.
Ablett was reported for an intentional high shot and found guilty of a careless high shot after managing to convince the tribunal it wasn't intentional.
In both Ablett cases he changed direction initiated contact and left the ground while running at speed. In those circumstances a suspension is warranted under the guidelines but in the second case Christian graded it insufficient force because Wright got straight up, same with Lynch after Fyfe elbowed him. Worpel got straight up after being bumped by Soldo, so if Christian was consistent then it should never have been a report.
For me the consistent lack of consistency from Christian in how he grades cases is the issue. If the guidelines were changed so that any elbow to the head is a suspension it removes the inconsistencies.
The tribunal is there if players want to challenge the suspension. Bonus is it probably cleans up the game as well.
_RT_
Hall of Famer
- Sep 17, 2006
- 44,834
- 83,681
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Furies Premiers 2010
- Thread starter
- #112
So was Cox, who initiated contact with Grimes by changing direction and taking him out 35m off the ball.
His defence was he braced for contact and it wasn't intentional. Somehow the tribunal agreed yet finds a guy who didn't initiate contact and react instinctively to someone moving into their space acted intentionally.
Jedi Tiger
🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆
- Sep 18, 2015
- 324
- 1,271
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Wow - lots of commentary from “totally not obsessed” cats’ fans on a completely-not-Geelong-related, coincidentally Richmond/Hawthorn concerning issue. #rentfree
To be fair the issue with a lot of fan is the lack of consistency. Personally I’ve got no problems with Ablett getting off either time (or Fyfe) my issue is that they got off but Soldo didn’t dispite them all being intentional elbows to the head with all essentially the same impact.
An elbow is an elbow, Ablett wasn’t making any attempt at all to get the ball so I don’t see how that’s any way to argue whether it’s careless or intentional.
Hello so you clearly weren’t around for all the obsessed Richmond and Hawk fans regarding Ablett or basically anything Geelong related?
It’s quite pathetic the carry on from your mob, hawks I understand the rivalry but you lot have a real chip on your shoulder. This will be recognised in round 12 by what will be obscene amounts of booing/sooking when we play you.
I look forward to that but for now enjoy the Soldo suspension as most of your fans thought elbows of any type are reportable until now. Hypocrites!
Rodney Dangerfield
Doesn’t matter
Love how a couple of supporters represent most of a supporter base. Seems like there is only one person really worked up here.
Jedi Tiger
🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆
- Sep 18, 2015
- 324
- 1,271
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Quite confident it was supporters of 17 clubs calling bs on the Ablett non-suspensions. Nice melt btw
Ablett’s intention is to block, not hurt him with a clumsy effort, he won’t be hurting anyone with those type of elbows.
Fyfe however does ‘throw’ the elbow out with intent on hitting, not blocking.
Now Worpel is just a germ thinking he can get in the way of a massive ruckmen and be all mouthy without fear of consequence.
I don’t think Soldo should be suspended as he just wants to get past and we can clearly see by the reaction it’s not his intention but players like Worpel need to smarten up. If you want to stand in their way than be aware. You’re gonna get cleaned up by someone much bigger than you.
Your confidence is misguided. You think Freo fans were outraged? lions fans? GWS? Saints pretty silent. Do you generally like making things up?
Your own Jack Riewoldt just laughed off the thought Ablett should be suspended the 1st time. Unfortunately the question wasn’t put to him the 2nd time.
However it’s the nuffies led by Mark Robinson with ridiculous views. 1st time he was more than happy he got off, 2nd time he was outraged lol. The next elbow his view changes again??? Haha unbelievable stuff.
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
I think that is obvious. Soldo is running straight back to the centre and Worpel moves into his path. Worpel drops his knees in an attempt to milk a second free. His hit is very mild. Cox actually moves off his line to collect Grimes and his hit is much more substantial. Yet Cox gets off but Grimes' suspension is upheld. Go figure.
- Banned
- #123
tbh i dont care about comparing it to the cox one. neither the cox or this hit had any potential for damage or particular malice.
its the ablett x 2, fyfe, and tom mitchell last year let-offs that get me. ablett and mitchell both barreled into players at speed leading with the elbow which has a significantly higher potential for harm, and mitchell hit a passive opponent looking the other way ala the brisbane guy who got suspended this week and conca a few years ago.
theres a clear precedent to unjustly give the 'better' players greater leeway to break the rules for the sake of brownlow pr, and its not an anti-richmond thing.
its the ablett x 2, fyfe, and tom mitchell last year let-offs that get me. ablett and mitchell both barreled into players at speed leading with the elbow which has a significantly higher potential for harm, and mitchell hit a passive opponent looking the other way ala the brisbane guy who got suspended this week and conca a few years ago.
theres a clear precedent to unjustly give the 'better' players greater leeway to break the rules for the sake of brownlow pr, and its not an anti-richmond thing.
ARES
Cancelled
Bullshit
Soldo was slowly jogging in a straight line
Worpel stepped 45deg into his path, expecting for an impact, Soldo raised arms to brace for impact, impact negligible and unintentional...
Everyone but the few soft nutters could see the play
Give it a rest
ARES
Cancelled
This sums it up
In the end, Christian is out of his depth here, too many questionable calls
