MRP

[Latro]

Robbos complaint about SJ getting suspended on 360 was hilarious

 

[Docker82]

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.

Don't think that's a good comparison tbh but the way certain incidents which are roughly the same are very differently viewed is the major problem with the system tbh.

The whole system is simply open for bs interpretations and bias. It's a blight on the league if I was to be honest.

 

[Docker82]

Robbos complaint about SJ getting suspended on 360 was hilarious

Tbh I don't understand how he got suspended for that but not for the other one. Probably should've gone for both though.

Also what do people think about dragging an opposition player into your interchange area? Probably not worthy of a suspension but geez it's completely unnecessary. Worth a fine IMO.

 

[Latro]

Tbh I don't understand how he got suspended for that but not for the other one. Probably should've gone for both though.

Also what do people think about dragging an opposition player into your interchange area? Probably not worthy of a suspension but geez it's completely unnecessary. Worth a fine IMO.

Not enough force on the elbow.

 

[Grape Bear]

It looks like they've thrown out the "accidental" aspect of head contact warrants a suspension. Fyfe has been completely screwed over. Can't bring that back, but **** me, he was hard done to to be disqualified for a Brownlow!

 

[Wigarus]

It looks like they've thrown out the "accidental" aspect of head contact warrants a suspension. Fyfe has been completely screwed over. Can't bring that back, but **** me, he was hard done to to be disqualified for a Brownlow!

He won't get close to a brownlow while GAJ is fit regardless of the MRP.

 

[Grape Bear]

He won't get close to a brownlow while GAJ is fit regardless of the MRP.

Fair call, but doesn't change the fact that he was still hard done to.

 

[Dockernut]

Can't believe the Hannebery one. Staggering.

 

[Latro]

How did Dawes get suspended. That is a total joke.

 

[Outshined]

Robbos complaint about SJ getting suspended on 360 was hilarious

I laughed for a good 10 minutes while Robbo was blowing his top. Reckon they had to get him a pint and a ham and cheese toastie during the ad break to calm him down.

 

[estibador]

He won't get close to a brownlow while GAJ is fit regardless of the MRP.

On FC they just showed his game-by-game stats for the season so far. Wouldn't surprise me at all if he has polled top votes in 7 out of 8 games so far.

That's pretty insane - players have won the medal with that many votes or less for a whole season. If he keeps going like this he should easily beat Dane Swan's record of 34 votes in a season.

 

[Wigarus]

On FC they just showed his game-by-game stats for the season so far. Wouldn't surprise me at all if he has polled top votes in 7 out of 8 games so far.

That's pretty insane - players have won the medal with that many votes or less for a whole season. If he keeps going like this he should easily beat Dane Swan's record of 34 votes in a season.

Yeah, maybe.

But last year we had the largest amount of vote getters in the league. I would be surprised if we aren't up there again this year. The Brownlow isn't really the best in the competition as much as it is the best in your team. Even contributions like we've come to display under Ross really hamper the individual awards imo.

 

[estibador]

Yeah, maybe.

But last year we had the largest amount of vote getters in the league. I would be surprised if we aren't up there again this year. The Brownlow isn't really the best in the competition as much as it is the best in your team. Even contributions like we've come to display under Ross really hamper the individual awards imo.

Sorry I should have clarified I was talking about Ablett in my post. It was a bit ambiguous.

 

[Wigarus]

Sorry I should have clarified I was talking about Ablett in my post.

Ah ok. I thought you were disagreeing with me.

Carry on

 

[gaskin]

Can't believe the Hannebery one. Staggering.

I would have been done with football if Hannebery got weeks. If you can't bend down to pick up the ball then what is the point of even bothering to play the game?

 

[E Shed]

It looks like they've thrown out the "accidental" aspect of head contact warrants a suspension. Fyfe has been completely screwed over. Can't bring that back, but **** me, he was hard done to to be disqualified for a Brownlow!

what is being forgotten here is that the critical aspect of Fyfe's suspension is the bit in the rule where it says if the player has an option but chooses to go the bump then accidental contact to the head is not an excuse. Hanneberry and Viney didn't have any option except to brace for contact in some way. Fyfe could have chosen to tackle which he prefers not to do because of his shoulder so he went the bump.
That is the difference.
For the record I don't believe Clarke infringed, thought it was an excellent call. And as Esti says, even if he did it makes up for what would have been a shot for goal if they had correctly adjudicated the SJ/Crowley interchange bizarreness.

 

[slicedndiced]

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.

It could have been Santa Claus for all I care.

It was a free kick.

 

[pokerspiv]

Fyfe couldn't have legally tackled, since it was already too late. A tackle would have resulted in a free kick for holding the man. He did have the option to smother, but that's dubious given that he was behind the guy kicking it. It's unclear he could have reached a point to smother.

What they are really saying is that Fyfe had the option to not undertake any pressure act. He could have just spectated and watched Rischitelli have his shot. But I don't think any coach would have accepted that option.

 

[gaskin]

Fyfe couldn't have legally tackled, since it was already too late. A tackle would have resulted in a free kick for holding the man. He did have the option to smother, but that's dubious given that he was behind the guy kicking it. It's unclear he could have reached a point to smother.

My exact thoughts at the time and it still boggles my mind when they say Fyfe had other options.

 

[Freo_4eva]

I would have been done with football if Hannebery got weeks. If you can't bend down to pick up the ball then what is the point of even bothering to play the game?

This... completely different situation to Fyfe's (not saying Fyfe should have been done). Hannebery call is totally correct IMO and has at least semi restored my faith in the MRP for another 5 days at least

 

[caterina]

Thought I may as well keep this updated weekly to give a running total and to see if our over-representation at the tribunal in the early part of the year is just a statistical aberration, or if we really are getting reamed

Round 10
Charges do not include trivialities 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 - 3 - 375 - 1
Ess - 2 - 250 - 2
Fre - 7 - 1055 - 4
Gee - 3 - 575 - 3
GCS - 2 - 350 - 1^
GWS - 3 - 475 - 2
Haw - 2 - 250 - 1
Mel - 3 - 350* - 1
NM - 1 - 80 - 1
Por - 1 - 125 - 1
Rich - 3 - 430 - 0^
StK - 1 - 125 - 1
Syd - 2 - 205 - 0
WB - 4 - 900 - 4
WC - 4 - 655 - 3

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

 

[Clive Diablo]

We have to cop pretty well all of that sweet. Dawsons trip, was a trip, Clarkes elbow to the head was an elbow to the head etc. Fyfe while distasteful under all the old footy that we were brought up with was within the new rules, again, something that we just have to accept.

Essentially, we have been naughty and any time spent in the naughty corner, is earned.

We might not be highest on the wins/losses count, but by god we are flogging the rest of the competition in the MRP stakes, that has to count as a win in itself

Ablett and Hodge have elbowed and punched people with as much force as Ballantyne and had no case to answer. Hawkins hit Will Langford so hard he was throwing up. No case to answer. I could handle the suspensions if other teams were getting the same punishment for similar actions. They are not.

 

[strobe00]

We have to cop pretty well all of that sweet. Dawsons trip, was a trip, Clarkes elbow to the head was an elbow to the head etc. FFS... it wasn't to the head. It hit the neck. Doesn't matter in classing it, but at least get the detail right. Fyfe while distasteful under all the old footy that we were brought up with was within the new rules, again, something that we just have to accept.

Essentially, we have been naughty and any time spent in the naughty corner, is earned.

We might not be highest on the wins/losses count, but by god we are flogging the rest of the competition in the MRP stakes, that has to count as a win in itself

Hodge hit Wingard in the head and gets another free pass... insufficient force. McVeigh gets insufficient force for a shoulder to the head of Jaensch. Gibson gets a reckless action (elbow into the back of Conca's head) classed as negligent... and missed 0 games instead of at least 1.

The MRP considers all players equal... some are just more equal than others. If everyone copped the same slap for the same actions I'd dislike it, but accept it. As far as I'm concerned the MRP tweaks its gradings differently depending on the team and player that they're looking at.

F*ck knows why. Fear of media repercussions is my guess... my other suspicion is that it's fear of the legal teams that certain clubs can muster.

 

[strobe00]

It doesn't matter what others get away with.

How very evolved of you. Please forgive me for thinking that's a load of cr@p. I expect the same set of rules and interpretations to be applied regardless of the teams and players. It's a basic tenet of fairness, which is something I consider important.

We can only control our own actions and all of our actions did merit being looked at (though not necessarily have been found guilty given the verdicts in other incidents). We shouldn't have lost our discipline to this extent - that is a club issue and not an MRP issue.

This bit is true. We know the MRP won't do us any favours. Which is why we take our penalties and walk away.

 

[pokerspiv]

Fyfe's did not. Nobody will ever again be suspended for what Fyfe did. It was a joke then and it's still a joke now. The MRP knows it, which is why they haven't done anyone for it since. The rule will be gone at the end of the season. If it was a high profile player from a Victorian team the rule would have just never been applied. It's the Michael Johnson case all over again.