MRP

[Freo_4eva]

And the other question - how was the very similar front on bump Glass put on Schulz ignored? The ball was gone, Glass once again in full flight off the ground sending Schulz onto his back. Intentional/medium impact........ ah, just sweep that one under the mat!

Yeah saw that and couldn't believe he did the same thing again almost to a tea.. forget MRP and suspensions etc.. what kind of meathead (let alone captain) literally targets and runs at a bloke, in his defensive goal square, launches at him with no regard for the ball even remotely, so at absolute best you give away a certain free kick which can cost you a tight game. Bright spark is old Glassy

 

[Frank J Moose]

Tom Hawkins who hit Langford so hard he came off the ground and threw up gets off. You have to be kidding.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Yeah saw that and couldn't believe he did the same thing again almost to a tea.. forget MRP and suspensions etc.. what kind of meathead (let alone captain) literally targets and runs at a bloke, in his defensive goal square, launches at him with no regard for the ball even remotely, so at absolute best you give away a certain free kick which can cost you a tight game. Bright spark is old Glassy

Yet Ballas gets hit twice for lesser offenses. This shits me to tears, no consistency.

 

[strobe00]

Yeah saw that and couldn't believe he did the same thing again almost to a tea.. forget MRP and suspensions etc.. what kind of meathead (let alone captain) literally targets and runs at a bloke, in his defensive goal square, launches at him with no regard for the ball even remotely, so at absolute best you give away a certain free kick which can cost you a tight game. Bright spark is old Glassy

Trying to find vision of the Langford and Schulz ones... but haven't had any luck.

Anyone able to recommend a link?

 

[UFO Tatsu]

Yet Ballas gets hit twice for lesser offenses. This shits me to tears, no consistency.

it is exactly that we get a bad go from the MRP and our players aren't the money rakers that maybe our players shouldn't put themselves in that situation ... fyfe was unfortunate but ballas gotta reign in some of those actions

inconsistencies sh*t me "a bit" ... our players getting in that position sh*ts me more

 

[Randomizor]

And Douglas gets two weeks for his hit on Ward. Righteo then.

 

[fine wines]

And Douglas gets two weeks for his hit on Ward. Righteo then.

Thought that one would get you guys going almost as much as Glass only getting one week on Wingard.

 

[gaskin]

I'm fine with Douglas getting 2 weeks. He barely made any contact (if any) to the head and it was within a legitimate distance to the ball carrier that he could say he was laying a sheppard. For me most of the damage to Ward happened on impact with the ground.

 

[UFO Tatsu]

And Douglas gets two weeks for his hit on Ward. Righteo then.

i think they realised that fyfe was a f**k up and has set the precedence for an influx of these charges ... they have to tone it down or else no one will be eligible for the brownlow or the finals will be played between the seconds

 

[strobe00]

I thought it should have been negligent if it was head on head. Shoulder on head is fair enough to be reckless, but it didnt look like that happened to me.

 

[caterina]

Mundy - reprimand

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-05/mrp-full-statement-round-seven

 

[UFO Tatsu]

Mundy - reprimand

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-05/mrp-full-statement-round-seven

glad and stupefied at the same time

 

[caterina]

If he accepts it, Stokes missing a week means he misses against us, since Cats have the bye

 

[clogged]

What does this mean:

Charges laid:
Jack Viney, Melbourne, has been charged with Engaging in Rough Conduct against Tom Lynch, Adelaide Crows, during the first quarter of the Round Seven match between Melboure and the Adelaide Crows played at the Adelaide Oval on Saturday May 3, 2014.

In summary, the matter has been directly referred to the Tribunal for its determination and he cannot accept an early plea on this matter.

 

[Latro]

glad and stupefied at the same time

Why? Hits behind play like that always get penalised. Mundy was stupid for doing it.

 

[Lach72]

What does this mean:

Didn't lynch leave the field with a sore jaw and a bleeding mouth and had to subbed? Head clash from a bump I think?

 

[gaskin]

What does this mean:

Broke Lynch's jaw apparently.

 

[Bender571]

What does this mean:

It means the MRP didn't agree with the penalty set out by their formula and decided to send it to the tribunal for a lesser penalty

 

[Fred Ziffel]

Why? Hits behind play like that always get penalised. Mundy was stupid for doing it.

It is also unusual for David. For the most part he is unflappable.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

It means the MRP didn't agree with the penalty set out by their formula and decided to send it to the tribunal for a lesser penalty

Or more likely , they copped the fallout over the Fyfe travesty and are doing a pontius pilate ; over to you.

 

[gaskin]

What does this mean:

The video says that under the MRP table of offences he would have been given 3 or 4 weeks but because he didn't hit Lynch in the head it would have been harsh. The tribunal can grade it differently and give him a lower penalty.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

The video says that under the MRP table of offences he would have been given 3 or 4 weeks but because he didn't hit Lynch in the head it would have been harsh. The tribunal can grade it differently and give him a lower penalty.

Is that the same inference with the Nick Suban charge in the Grand Final ?

 

[gaskin]

No idea. I don't even know what he was suspended for.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

No idea. I don't even know what he was suspended for.

It was essentially minor but there is no grey area or room for discretion with the formula the MRP would have been forced to use.
Common sense prevailed. Some observers mistakenly thought he was attempting an eye gouge.

 

[gaskin]

Then I'd say it's exactly the same as that.