Remove this Banner Ad

McPhee one week only

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Must have spun the orange on the tribunal wheel of fortune.
Orange = downgrade

That or taken his top off, nice work Adam :thumbsu:
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Can someone explain to me how the suspension system works? There's a match review panel right? And they dish out the penalty? And then a player can contest it at the tribunal?

Do the match review panel and the tribunal work for the same organisation (AFL)? How can penalties be varied when a player contests them - isn't that an admission that the original penalty was incorrect? If so, what is being done to bring the views of the two bodies in line with each other? Isn't it a bad thing that the two bodies can have different interpretations on what penalty is appropriate (2 weeks vs. 1)?
 
Can someone explain to me how the suspension system works? There's a match review panel right? And they dish out the penalty? And then a player can contest it at the tribunal?

Do the match review panel and the tribunal work for the same organisation (AFL)? How can penalties be varied when a player contests them - isn't that an admission that the original penalty was incorrect? If so, what is being done to bring the views of the two bodies in line with each other? Isn't it a bad thing that the two bodies can have different interpretations on what penalty is appropriate (2 weeks vs. 1)?

its the same with todays judicial system.

An organisation AFL or otherwise would be stupid to try to say that they never make mistakes. In the end organisations are just people and people make mistakes especially a panel with only a few members.
 
Can someone explain to me how the suspension system works? There's a match review panel right? And they dish out the penalty? And then a player can contest it at the tribunal?

Do the match review panel and the tribunal work for the same organisation (AFL)? How can penalties be varied when a player contests them - isn't that an admission that the original penalty was incorrect? If so, what is being done to bring the views of the two bodies in line with each other? Isn't it a bad thing that the two bodies can have different interpretations on what penalty is appropriate (2 weeks vs. 1)?
They use the wheel

[YOUTUBE]x0WaxMn3N8I[/YOUTUBE]
 
While I am disappointed that he will miss this week, I do feel that one week is a fair verdict for a body punch behind play.

That is where the points system can get carried away. How that could have potentially cost him 3 weeks is staggering.

Good to see the tribunal is getting a lot of calls right this year.
 
Am i the only one who is really pissed off with Mcphee? Im sure he is dissapointed in himself, but this is just stupid dumb football. We just dont need that shit at this time
 
Dons may fight McPhee suspension

ESSENDON will decide today whether to appeal against Adam McPhee's one-match suspension for striking Fremantle's Scott Thornton after he was found guilty by the AFL Tribunal last night.

While admitting he had no recollection of the incident, McPhee said it was clear in the video footage he had seen Thornton late and bumped him arm-on-arm.

He said Thornton got in his path towards goal and "instinctively I raised my arm for the contact I thought I was going to get".

Thornton told the tribunal he had been winded by the contact and had to be assisted from the ground, but came back on the ground to play out the match.

The tribunal jury of David Pittman, Stewart Loewe and Wayne Henwood were satisfied that McPhee's actions were reckless and handed down 187.5 demerit points — a one-match suspension.

Sydney co-captain Brett Kirk was fined $1950 and received 93.75 demerit points after he pleaded guilty to colliding with an umpire during the Swans' match against Hawthorn.

The initial sanction of 125 points means he is not eligible to win the Brownlow Medal.

Kirk collided with umpire Mathew James after the ball was bounced during the second quarter of the game at ANZ Stadium on Saturday night, contact that was deemed by the match review panel as "reckless".

He was charged under the new rule which provides a "no-go zone" behind umpires at stoppages, a rule that was trialled during the pre-season cup and subsequently adopted for the home-and-away season.

All clubs received a memorandum about the new rule two days before the season began as part of the AFL's endeavour to protect the welfare of umpires outlining that such cases must go directly to the tribunal.

Terry Forrest QC, for Kirk, argued last night that the contact was unintentional and Kirk's eyes were clearly on the ball as James ran backwards into his path.

He told the tribunal that Kirk took up "the position where an accountable footballer occupies — right next to his opponent Sam Mitchell" when the umpire bounced the ball, a "smart footy" tactic.

The jury agreed that the penalty offered was appropriate.

Brisbane Lion Luke Power was found not guilty of making negligent contact with umpire Ray Chamberlain during the first quarter of the Lions' clash with Carlton at Docklands on Saturday.

Power had been offered a $2600 fine by the match review panel, which was reduced by 25 per cent to a $1950 sanction with an early plea, but chose to take the matter to the tribunal.

Port Adelaide will be pleased the club rejected the one-match suspension offered to Daniel Motlop after he was found not guilty of striking West Coast's Adam Hunter at Subiaco. Kangaroo Michael Firrito was found not guilty of striking Bulldog Brad Johnson so escaping a reprimand.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/articles/2009/04/07/1238869972146.html
 
'While admitting he had no recollection of the incident, McPhee said it was clear in the video footage he had seen Thornton late and bumped him arm-on-arm.'

That sounds a little bit silly.
I was happy that he downgraded it, I think the 1 match ban is fair.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom