MRP

[Freo88]

It's like the Clarke non-free kick. If the roles were reversed, and we lost the game, there would be blood all over this board about it for days on end. But we, (some), try and justify it as a non event, even though it is paid 99% of the time.

The Crowley interchange infringement is still being harped on about with only a very few acknowledging that SJ was bloody clever to try it and get away with it. If Crowley did we would be giving him the keys to the city.

It's perspective and balance which some need here.

You've absolutely nailed it here. I said in the game day thread that if the Clarke incident happened in our defensive 50 and lead to a Cats goal we would all be filthy.

 

[estibador]

You've absolutely nailed it here. I said in the game day thread that if the Clarke incident happened in our defensive 50 and lead to a Cats goal we would all be filthy.

As far as I can tell most of the Cat supporters' whinging about the umps stems from that one incident.

When you consider we should have had a shot for goal from the top of the square if Interchangegate had been adjudicated properly we should probably call it even.

 

[slicedndiced]

Clarke did not touch enright until he had spoiled the ball, he did it perfectly by stopping in front of Enright.

It is paid as a free every day of the week and it was a free kick, no doubt.

 

[Freo88]

As far as I can tell most of the Cat supporters' whinging about the umps stems from that one incident.

When you consider we should have had a shot for goal from the top of the square if Interchangegate had been adjudicated properly we should probably call it even.

What makes you think we'd get a shot at the top of square for that? It happened on center wing basically.

 

[slicedndiced]

As far as I can tell most of the Cat supporters' whinging about the umps stems from that one incident.

When you consider we should have had a shot for goal from the top of the square if Interchangegate had been adjudicated properly we should probably call it even.

I can understand the Cats fans frustration as it was at a pivotal point in the game. They were gaining momentum and a goal from a free kick could have cast a completely different complexion on the game.

 

[estibador]

What makes you think we'd get a shot at the top of square for that? It happened on center wing basically.

Because they either pay frees where an incident happened or where the ball is, depending on which is more advantageous to the team that has been infringed.

 

[Docker82]

Looks like it's safe to consign the Fyfe suspension to the bin marked 'never to be seen again'.

Quite a few Freo case files have ended up in that bin now.

I think we can thank Viney for this tbh.

The incident got so much negative press from the media in terms of the MRPs decision that they simply won't suspend anyone for it again. The other major difference between Fyfe and Hannebery was the fact Hannebery's incident got looked at over and over by the media and basically everyone said he shouldn't get weeks. With Fyfes suspension that fact the incident even existed was pretty much forgotten until the moment the MRP gave their verdict.

If you want my opinion, forgetting all that happened in the past Hannebery got exactly what he deserved, absolutely nothing. Whether you want the penalty to be right (0 weeks) or fair (Judging on Fyfes incident, 1-2 weeks) will determine whether you actually think this decision was the right one or not.

 

[strobe00]

Clarke did not touch enright until he had spoiled the ball, he did it perfectly by stopping in front of Enright.

Was rivers. Did end up contacting rivers after the spoil. Was pretty light contact. I don't know the rule well enough to know whether the free should have been given or not, but I've seen a lot worse completely let go.

 

[caterina]

2014 figures for nine rounds to date
Charges do not include crap like contact with an umpire or melee fines
Cumulative points are for the base charges, not inflated or deflated by record

Team - number of players charged - cumulative demerit points given - cumulative weeks banned

Ade - 1 - Trib* - 2
Bri - 4 - 755 - 3
Car - 1 - 225 - 1
Coll - 2 - 250 - 1
Ess - 2 - 250 - 2
Fre - 7 - 1055 - 4
Gee - 3 - 575 - 3
GCS - 2 - 350 - 1^
GWS - 2 - 350 - 2
Haw - 2 - 250 - 1
Mel - 3 - 350* - 1
NM - 1 - 80 - 1
Por - 0 - 0 - 0
Rich - 3 - 430 - 0^
StK - 1 - 125 - 1
Syd - 2 - 205 - 0
WB - 3 - 675 - 3
WC - 4 - 655 - 3

* Adel and Melb points are less than expected as cases referred straight to tribunal
^ Rich and GCS reduced weeks by appealling

So overall Fremantle are number one for players charged, points given and weeks lost, but of course we are not being victimised

 

[estibador]

So overall Fremantle are number one for players charged, points given and weeks lost, but of course we are not being victimised

Interesting figures, cheers

It was understandable back in the Connolly/Josh Carr era when we often misdirected our aggression in lieu of attacking the ball hard, but I wouldn't consider our current team dirty by any stretch.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

Clarke did not touch enright until he had spoiled the ball, he did it perfectly by stopping in front of Enright.

Rivers, but yes, I agree with you that he did not make contact when spoiling and even if he did it was incidental.

I'm with Bushie here. Clarke was lucky not give a free, and we would be celebrating if Crowley or Ballas did that to SJ.
Perspective doesn't come with purple coloured glasses.

Nah, Bushie is blind. The umpire finally got one right.

 

[Grape Bear]

Interesting figures, cheers

It was understandable back in the Connolly/Josh Carr era when we often misdirected our aggression in lieu of attacking the ball hard, but I wouldn't consider our current team dirty by any stretch.

Makes it all the more interesting why we are the most pinged team to date, when our tactics, attack on the ball, and intensity are not significantly more than what other teams do week in and week out.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

It is paid as a free every day of the week and it was a free kick, no doubt.

Pfft, you didn't even know it wasn't Enright. Something else you may not have noticed is that it's not an automatic kick anymore as it seems to be another of those rulings they've gone soft on.

 

[Freo88]

2014 figures for nine rounds to date
Charges do not exclude crap like contact with an umpire or melee fines
Cumulative points are for the base charges, not inflated or deflated by record

Team - number of players charged - cumulative demerit points given - cumulative weeks banned

Ade - 1 - Trib* - 2
Bri - 4 - 755 - 3
Car - 1 - 225 - 1
Coll - 2 - 250 - 1
Ess - 2 - 250 - 2
Fre - 7 - 1055 - 4
Gee - 3 - 575 - 3
GCS - 2 - 350 - 1^
GWS - 2 - 350 - 2
Haw - 2 - 250 - 1
Mel - 3 - 350* - 1
NM - 1 - 80 - 1
Por - 0 - 0 - 0
Rich - 3 - 430 - 0^
StK - 1 - 125 - 1
Syd - 2 - 205 - 0
WB - 3 - 675 - 3
WC - 4 - 655 - 3

* Adel and Melb points are less than expected as cases referred straight to tribunal
^ Rich and GCS reduced weeks by appealling

So overall Fremantle are number one for players charged, points given and weeks lost, but of course we are not being victimised

Or we keep doing stupid acts on the field where we shouldnt be in a position to even be cited.

Just because the stats say one thing doesnt mean there isnt a good reason for them being that way.

We're undisciplined this year and committing alot of unneccessary acts on the field. The stats you provided back this up.

 

[caterina]

Or we keep doing stupid acts on the field where we shouldnt be in a position to even be cited.

Just because the stats say one thing doesnt mean there isnt a good reason for them being that way.

We're undisciplined this year and committing alot of unneccessary acts on the field. The stats you provided back this up.

Nah, it's the capriciousness and the opaque decision making that is the problem. Teams and players get judged on different standards. Both within games by umpires, and by the MRP. Blight on the sport.

 

[strobe00]

Have to agree with this; this eternal Vict(oria)imhood will do nothing to aid us in getting a flag.

Pretty sure I don't hear the club complaining. And they're the ones that'll be winning the flag at some point, not us supporters.

I don't see what a few whining BF supporters will do to affect our club's chances on winning a flag.

so what's your point?

 

[Freo88]

Nah, it's the capriciousness and the opaque decision making that is the problem. Teams and players get judged on different standards.

But you cant honestly say we havent been undisciplined this year? Ballas against Sydney. Clarke with an errant elbow which didnt really need to be thrown. Duffield bumping Wingard after the ball had left the vicinity. The list goes on.

Obviously the Fyfe one is only poor call.

 

[caterina]

But you cant honestly say we havent been undisciplined this year? Ballas against Sydney. Clarke with an errant elbow which didnt really need to be thrown. Duffield bumping Wingard after the ball had left the vicinity. The list goes on.

Obviously the Fyfe one is only poor call.

Yes I agree but our indiscipline gets cited more than others. You see guys doing what Ballas and Clarke did every game with no report. Hodge and SJ clearly strike players, no report. They are either all reportable or none of them are. It is not that the charges are made up, it is that some are reported and identical ones aren't. There is no transparency or consistency

 

[Freo88]

Pretty sure I don't hear the club complaining. And they're the ones that'll be winning the flag at some point, not us supporters.

I don't see what a few whining BF supporters will do to affect our club's chances on winning a flag.

so what's your point?

My view is that the journey would be alot more enjoyable if we didnt whinge the whole way about how hard done by we are and the AFL is out to get us.

 

[Freo88]

Yes I agree but our indiscipline gets cited more than others. You see guys doing what Ballas and Clarke did every game with no report. Hodge and SJ clearly strike players, no report. They are either all reportable or none of them are. It is not that the charges are made up, it is that some are reported and identical ones aren't. There is no transparency or consistency

If you can find me some examples that you think are similar, fair enough. To my mind i cant think of any that compare directly to what freo players have been cited for.*

I would say that clarke throwing an elbow and landing it in the throat whilst not looking is a pretty reckless act. Hence the grading.

Really its all beside the point - we can only control our actions, worrying about how other teams are treated isnt achieving anything.

* Exclude the Fyfe bump - yeah we got reemed but as i keep saying stuff happens. At least it appears the game has changed for the better in similar incidents.

 

[wild side]

Rivers, but yes, I agree with you that he did not make contact when spoiling and even if he did it was incidental.
Nah, Bushie is blind. The umpire finally got one right.

So, me, bushie, matthew Lloyd, the geelong team, the geelong supporters at the match are blind. Also, Rivers had a game he would rather forget. Fyfe jumped on his head for a MOY contender, Ballas rang rings around him for a potential GOY, and he wasn't paid a free kick that should have. He had a dirty night. Should've stayed at the Demons.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

So, me, bushie, matthew Lloyd, the geelong team, the geelong supporters at the match are blind.

Pretty much.

 

[Freo88]

So, me, bushie, matthew Lloyd, the geelong team, the geelong supporters at the match are blind. Also, Rivers had a game he would rather forget. Fyfe jumped on his head for a MOY contender, Ballas rang rings around him for a potential GOY, and he wasn't paid a free kick that should have. He had a dirty night. Should've stayed at the Demons.

Could probably add in most of the football fraternity there.

Obviously its all a moot point now as the game is done, but whats worth taking from it all is it goes both ways and its not worth getting hung up on umpires and injustices.

 

[strobe00]

My view is that the journey would be alot more enjoyable if we didnt whinge the whole way about how hard done by we are and the AFL is out to get us.

You might be right.

I don't believe the afl is out to get us.

But I do believe that different teams and players are judged according to different standards. And that interpretations change very quickly, and reactively, based on how loudly the vic media clamour for change on a certain issue.

These things personally p!ss me off on occasion.

It doesn't need to be due to mrp love either... it could quite easily be due to how good the legal team is that teams like the hawks and sydney can muster.

 

[strobe00]

If you can find me some examples that you think are similar, fair enough. To my mind i cant think of any that compare directly to what freo players have been cited for.*

I would say that clarke throwing an elbow and landing it in the throat whilst not looking is a pretty reckless act. Hence the grading.

Really its all beside the point - we can only control our actions, worrying about how other teams are treated isnt achieving anything.

* Exclude the Fyfe bump - yeah we got reemed but as i keep saying stuff happens. At least it appears the game has changed for the better in similar incidents.

go watch the josh gibson one on conca. And tell me why you think that was just negligent.

As far as I'm concerned both clarke and gibson were reckless, or they were both negligent.

it's the inconsistency of interpretation that sh!ts me.