MRP / Trib. Match Review Panel general discussion

[catempire]

[Mods, if there is a better place for this, by all means - I couldn't find a general discussion thread]

Chapter 1 - insufficient force

It's basically a weekly occurrence nowadays but the MRP keeps dishing up reasons to criticise. This week's inconsistency du jour is the re-emergence of the old favourite:

...the force used by [player] was below that required to constitute a reportable offence.

A fair enough statement in isolation. Perhaps even to be encouraged in a contact sport where collisions and resultant injuries are inevitable.

But this week we saw that phraseology not once, but four times! Excellent, So they're being consistent you might say!

Well, what about last week? Matt Thomas of Richmond received a reprimand for conduct graded as negligent, low impact and high (125 points down to 93.75 with a guilty plea).

What about Fyfe? What about Taylor Adams? What about Taylor Hunt? What about James Kelly on Goddard last year?

What exactly is the difference between "low impact" and "force...below that required to constitute a reportable offence"? The MRP will tell us they take into account the contemporaneous medical report. That's got to be good, right?

But oops, players who suffer no lasting injury, who do not bleed, who play out the game with no obvious ill-effects are sometimes deemed somehow to have suffered a force that is at least that which constitutes a reportable offence, while at other times, they have not. There is no transparency, no consistency, no rhyme or reason to it.

One is left with no choice but to believe that the MRP licks their collective finger, sticks it in the air and goes with their gut instinct or vibe of the thing, then reverse-engineers the reasoning that is issued publicly accordingly. I could almost live with that if there wasn't some pretence that the system is built to ensure consistency and is an improvement on the old system. But it's not. It's time we reformed this farcical system or reverted to something less phoney.

By the way, I'm not suggesting any of the four players "assessed" this week by the MRP should have been suspended, I'm not. I just want to see a system that is consistent and predictable.

 

[JUBJUB]

Well, what about last week? Matt Thomas of Port received a reprimand for conduct graded as negligent, low impact and high (125 points down to 93.75 with a guilty plea).

UPDATE : He now plays for Richmond

BTW,how is what Prick Maxwell did any different to what Taylor Hunt did to Daniel Rich ?

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-04-14/charged-round-four

 

[Moggy]

I think you will always get a mixture of gut reaction (eg "it didn't look hard enough to me") mixed with popular sentiment, all dressed up in pseudo-legalese to make people think there is something scientific to it.

In other words, apply your capable mind elsewhere

 

[Catatonic Shock]

Spot on OP though.
Echoes all footy followers feelings.
Bloody disgrace the entire system.

 

[barmy44]

they should challenge every single report this year based on the 'atomic level defence'. no two people have ever actually touched... the electron clouds of atoms actually repel each other in much the same way as two positively charged magnets. we have the sensory illusion of touch, but it is just that. the only time two atoms will 'touch' is during nuclear fusion in the centre of stars.

so next time one of our players is up for 'high contact', the challenge is set. no possible contact = no more suspensions

 

[you pick one]

they should challenge every single report this year based on the 'atomic level defence'. no two people have ever actually touched... the electron clouds of atoms actually repel each other in much the same way as two positively charged magnets. we have the sensory illusion of touch, but it is just that. the only time two atoms will 'touch' is during nuclear fusion in the centre of stars.

I knew she was faking it.

 

[Teriyakicat]

they should challenge every single report this year based on the 'atomic level defence'. no two people have ever actually touched... the electron clouds of atoms actually repel each other in much the same way as two positively charged magnets. we have the sensory illusion of touch, but it is just that. the only time two atoms will 'touch' is during nuclear fusion in the centre of stars.

so next time one of our players is up for 'high contact', the challenge is set. no possible contact = no more suspensions

Do you reckon it will float, barmy?? you're dealing with ex-footballers, mostly (Just thought you should know that.)

 

[AM]

The disappointing aspect of it all is that Mark Evans undertook to simplify the system. An integral part of that as I understood it was to more precisely define what constituted intentional, reckless or negligent conduct. If he has fulfilled that commitment I for one haven't seen it anywhere.

 

[vinum coupe]

let's start the dart board.

Reprimand for Hawkins on Langford.

Zip 2 years ago.

1 to Roughy on Selwood.

2-3, two years ago.
I reckon there will be a heap more. Hits off the ball everywhere.

 

[BUSTER29]

let's start the dart board.

Reprimand for Hawkins on Langford.

Zip 2 years ago.

1 to Roughy on Selwood.

2-3, two years ago.
I reckon there will be a heap more. Hits off the ball everywhere.

When will they review todays game VC?

 

[darren forssman]

Reprimand for Hawkins on Langford.

and langford ripping hawks jumper is surely a 3-4 week'r...intentional and reckless.

 

[vinum coupe]

When will they review todays game VC?

Well it's the only game left, so you'd think it will be done by 3 today.

 

[dazbroncos]

All clear from our game. SJ and Hodge and Hawk v Langford all looked at and passed over…

Im a bit numb really…. we didn't get nitpicked…

GO Catters

 

[Catatonic Shock]

I didn't want to say anything because every time I've said "nothing in it" they've gotten weeks, BUT there was nothing in Hawkins.

 

[bigfarter]

All clear from our game. SJ and Hodge and Hawk v Langford all looked at and passed over…

Im a bit numb really…. we didn't get nitpicked…

GO Catters

Any other week Hawkins would've gone. They probably knew if they cited Hawkins they'd also have to cite Hodge, Roughead and Langford, which clearly would never happen. I don't mind and think no-one deserved a suspension coming out of that game but Scott Thompson must look at the Hawkins and Hodge incidents and wonder what exactly he did to warrant a reprimand.

 

[allrighty]

Any other week Hawkins would've gone. They probably knew if they cited Hawkins they'd also have to cite Hodge, Roughead and Langford, which clearly would never happen. I don't mind and think no-one deserved a suspension coming out of that game but Scott Thompson must look at the Hawkins and Hodge incidents and wonder what exactly he did to warrant a reprimand.

Unfortunately one of those three is a protected species.

Did you also note that Lethal said he would pick Selwood over Hodge if he had to make a choice for his team. Suck that Dawks!

 

[darren forssman]

Scott Thompson must look at the Hawkins and Hodge incidents and wonder what exactly he did to warrant a reprimand.

he should not have got a reprimand but he is always doing dirty s**t like that, ie throwing subtle hits at players after they mark.

 

[iameviljez]

and langford ripping hawks jumper is surely a 3-4 week'r...intentional and reckless.

It had a high level impact on the two hetero women I was sitting next to

 

[iameviljez]

I just want to see a system that is consistent and predictable.

I don't envy them their job in terms of consistency, being such a random sport, there's such a variability in incidents.

 

[JUBJUB]

Any other week Hawkins would've gone. They probably knew if they cited Hawkins they'd also have to cite Hodge, Roughead and Langford, which clearly would never happen. I don't mind and think no-one deserved a suspension coming out of that game but Scott Thompson must look at the Hawkins and Hodge incidents and wonder what exactly he did to warrant a reprimand.

Not sure why the Hawkins and Thompson incidents are compared.Thompson used a fist,Hawkins was open handed.

 

[darren forssman]

It had a high level impact on the two hetero women I was sitting next to

they werent hetero before that though!!!

 

[AM]

Any other week Hawkins would've gone. They probably knew if they cited Hawkins they'd also have to cite Hodge, Roughead and Langford, which clearly would never happen. I don't mind and think no-one deserved a suspension coming out of that game but Scott Thompson must look at the Hawkins and Hodge incidents and wonder what exactly he did to warrant a reprimand.

So when the MRP get it right you're still not satisfied. Give us a break.

 

[iameviljez]

they werent hetero before that though!!!

I have that effect on women

 

[bigfarter]

So when the MRP get it right you're still not satisfied. Give us a break.

That comment was half-joking and in regards to the Pro-Hawks MRP bias, saying that they couldn't rub out Tommy because then they'd have to do the same to Hodge and co. I don't think either deserved to go but you can hardly say the MRP "got it right" when Thompson went for a very similar incident in the same week! Lighten up, AM!

 

[_Me_]

In this forum there is venom toward sj every time he does a silly act. Bt this week highlights the bullshit that is the AFL MRP, and we have not had the balls to make the noise required to give us a fair deal.

This week the Ablett and Blair hits were not of requisite force. Ablett apparently hit picken in the knee. Let alone the dawks, but they never get done. The hits on Wingard were not great, and hodge and duryea should have been reprimanded given a level playing field which there is clearly not.

We point the finger and slag off at sj, but his actions were not worse than the four examples above but he got done. Let alone his dan H bump, when has another player been done for that.

The GFC need to make noise and challenge a few of these crap decisions, highlight similar decisions with different outcomes in the media.

Harlett's action was not disimilar to a number of behind plays hits to the midrifs but he copped a week.

This is the bullshit of the AFL where there is no even draw, even rules, or fairness. The reason why people are getting fed up with the AFL.

MRP should be sacked