- Apr 8, 2006
- 40,164
- 41,521
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Dallas Cowboys and Texas Longhorns
Geez this didn't turn out well for the Geelong fans.
-
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
MRP Trouble For Cyril?
- Thread starter Boxhead_31
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Simon_Says
Push My Buttons
- Apr 14, 2016
- 3,129
- 2,206
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- LA Lakers,Chelsea F.C.
Striker I would argue that since Cyril wasn't looking at the ball, (Which Oliver wasn't in possession of at the time of impact), he should get a week. Didn't even have eyes on the ball
Good footy BUT
a) it's not low impact
b) it's not really high
Either No fine or a suspension.
a) it's not low impact
b) it's not really high
Either No fine or a suspension.
Topkent
Confirmed ITK Drafting King
Slept on it woken up and I still dont get it, either its a ripping bump and play on or its a suspension, id prefer the former but if thats low I doubt Cyril has 2 more levels higher if significant impact he could have hit him with
Its bullshit that the player you hit has more outcome on the result, If that was McCartin or Brayshaw or someone with a history of head knocks he would have gotten a month for the exact same bump
Its bullshit that the player you hit has more outcome on the result, If that was McCartin or Brayshaw or someone with a history of head knocks he would have gotten a month for the exact same bump
For sure
- Jul 16, 2013
- 13,412
- 17,115
- AFL Club
- Essendon
This is the truth and why the MRP is a joke.
For the last ten years, if you choose to bump then that is the relevant intention regardless of whether there was an intention to hit the head. Remember Paul Chapman missing a final because a bump slipped high. That theory seems to have mysteriously disappeared.
Dacksaredown
Club Legend
- Jun 20, 2012
- 1,777
- 1,626
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Other Teams
- Houston Rockets
Sweet. Players can run past the ball and flatten players now. Rules change every few weeks.
Last edited:
00Stinger
100 - 7
Funny that Derek Humphrey-smith is on the record as saying Rioli should have been suspended and the tribunal got it wrong. Then just confirmed that Rioli shouldn't have got the following free kick for diving into the tackle seconds later
Get your facts right.
They weren't talking about the Hunt high tackle, it was the high tackle a few minutes later down inside our 50 that lead to the goal 40 out. Cyril did duck into that & it was a disgraceful decision.
Usually Derek is pretty good but the majority of the bump was upper chest imo, maybe some indirect contact to head (ie low impact call) but really hard to say.
- Jun 23, 2013
- 10,737
- 12,861
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Los Angeles Clippers
Cant wait for a few years when Cyril starts getting the Adam Goodes treatment (boo's), If he keeps ducking, lifting players in tackles, chicken wing tackles and flattening blokes knowing that his mates at the MRP will let him off it might come sooner than later.
I thought it was a ripping shirtfront, something that has been a part of the game for a century, but something that the rule makers are trying to rub out. With that in mind and based on like for like MRP outcomes this year Cyril should have received a suspension of 1-2 weeks.
Should any front on hip and shoulder result in a suspension? NO. But if you choose to bump and make contact with the head you received a suspension (which was the outcome of the bump analysis).
Should any front on hip and shoulder result in a suspension? NO. But if you choose to bump and make contact with the head you received a suspension (which was the outcome of the bump analysis).
Boxhead_31
The Greatest Team Of All
- Oct 12, 2007
- 36,823
- 51,299
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- South BHFL
- Thread starter
- #215
Not really, went pretty much how it was expected.
MRP looking after the chosen ones once again
Jade
Smug lives here.
- Jul 8, 2008
- 34,604
- 53,542
- AFL Club
- Essendon
My god Hawthorn are a protected species.
Would be rivaling North Melbourne for a tenuous grip on the eight if not for some serious assistance from all levels of officiating.
Would be rivaling North Melbourne for a tenuous grip on the eight if not for some serious assistance from all levels of officiating.
I agree with this 100 per cent... but all I see is contact up the middle not in his head.
I don't get wtf the MRP are on about saying he hit him in the head... I must be blind.
DemonTim
Cancelled
10k Posts
The Trident - Awarded to posters who do a hell of a lot on the Dees board
- Jul 18, 2013
- 11,363
- 8,296
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
You acknowledge that the MRP say he hit him in the head, yet come up with this s**t. If you acknowledge that the MRP say he hit him high (you do), then wouldn't him getting off with a fine be weird based on that (since you know, that's what the penalty is based on)
Can't see that in any of the current tribunal guidelines and I don't think it has ever been the case.
All I can see is where it talks about the intention to commit a reportable offence. So if they think you were trying to lay a legit bump then it isn't rated intentional. If they think you tried to lay a high bump then it is intentional. I found the 2013 tribunal guidelines and it says the same thing. I think they said at some point if you choose to bump and get them high then you are reported, but I don't recall them saying you get rated intentional.
I think sometimes people mix this up with the head clash thing from a few years back. They ruled that if you intend to bump and heads clash, then it's not just considered an accident, you can be reported for it.
Chapman was rated reckless, not intentional. Back then there were 3 categories, negligent, reckless and intentional. If he was rated negligent then he would have got off with an early plea.
Corrupt. The AFL HQ is as corrupt as the mafia.
Chapman gets rubbed out for this. He was our best player against Port in the semi. Guess who they were to play in the prelim? You guessed it, Hawthorn.
Sydney are the big threat to the Hawks this year. And maybe Adelaide. Watch the MRP go after them over the next few of weeks.
I don't think he should have given him a week. A fine, maybe. At another angle it looks as he was going for the ball more than the bump and only did that in the last half second. What pisses me off is that when the MRP want to target a team or player, that is a suspension. Then, miraculously, it isn't a week later. And there is no doubt they have their favorites. Everyone was predicting Mitchell would get off, and Cyril. We all know.
- Jul 16, 2013
- 13,412
- 17,115
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Does he now have demerit points as well? So if he does something similar he will be rubbed out?
DemonTim
Cancelled
10k Posts
The Trident - Awarded to posters who do a hell of a lot on the Dees board
- Jul 18, 2013
- 11,363
- 8,296
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
I don't think this should be suspendable, but the MRP have suspended for the exact same thing, and have said if you choose to bump, and get someone high, then you'll be punished. They seem to only use it selectively
I've accepted players will be suspended for things these days, that they weren't in the past, but if thats going to happen they need to do it consistently
Corrupt. The AFL HQ is as corrupt as the mafia.
Chapman gets rubbed out for this. He was our best player against Port in the semi. Guess who they were to play in the prelim? You guessed it, Hawthorn.
Sydney are the big threat to the Hawks this year. And maybe Adelaide. Watch the MRP go after them over the next few of weeks.
chapman deserved weeks for that, jumped up into the bump and his feet left the ground. Completely different scenario to cyrils. Apples and oranges.
Similar threads
