C Section Prem C 2024

Remove this Banner Ad

MRO report , he challenged and got 4 a bigger joke and now challenging back !
How’s it a joke? It’s a sling tackle, albeit stiff. Doesn’t deserve 4 weeks, however surely gets a couple weeks. He drove the player into the ground and pinned the arms…


Goodluck to him if challenging again, don’t like his chances, unless arguing 4 down to 2. Ruling umpire paid a dangerous tackle.
 
Last edited:
How’s it a joke? It’s a sling tackle, albeit stiff. Doesn’t deserve 4 weeks, however surely gets a couple weeks. He drove the player into the ground and pinned the arms…


Goodluck to him if challenging again, don’t like his chances, unless arguing 4 down to 2. Ruling umpire paid a dangerous tackle.
It's a joke you can't challenge without a fear of 2 more
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It's a joke you can't challenge without a fear of 2 more
Lets be honest, District Clubs continue to get treated at the tribunal differently. If it was a precious old boys club it would probably be overlooked. The bloke in question should have his record considered as well, but no, the VAFA gives him 4. Last season they gave a player 2 weeks for a minor late bump after the kick, umpire didn't pay a free kick so it was play on. The precious old boys club complained after the match, the VAFA reviewed the video during the week and the player got 2.
 
Lets be honest, District Clubs continue to get treated at the tribunal differently. If it was a precious old boys club it would probably be overlooked. The bloke in question should have his record considered as well, but no, the VAFA gives him 4. Last season they gave a player 2 weeks for a minor late bump after the kick, umpire didn't pay a free kick so it was play on. The precious old boys club complained after the match, the VAFA reviewed the video during the week and the player got 2.
My club had two players rubbed out on the weekend, Neither (IMO) was justified. One is the club captain, late 20s, been playing since he was 8 years of age with a perfect record. He contested it and lost. The other saw the writing on the wall and decided to take the set penalty rather than risk getting another week. He is in his early 30s, multiple club and comp B&F winner who has played more than 400 games across juniors and seniors in various competitions without a blemish. I can’t remember the last time my club took on a case at the tribunal and had the suspension overturned. If you have the misfortune of fronting the tribunal inevitably you get rubbed out.

Tribunal results and fines are published on the website every week. Take a look at this week’s update and then tell me that they treat school and uni clubs and differently. 10 players from 'precious old boy clubs' were reported (11 if you count ‘Old McKinnon’). From that 11, 9 were suspended. The week before it was 5 from 5. And looking at the melee charges all involve at least one school-based club, in most cases both. Sorry but the available evidence simply does not support your argument. The VAFA tribunal has always been a lottery and whether you are a school, uni, community, religious or suburban based club it makes absolutely no difference.
 
Last edited:
My club had two players rubbed out on the weekend, Neither (IMO) was justified. One is the club captain, late 20s, been playing since he was 8 years of age with a perfect record. He contested it and lost. The other saw the writing on the wall and decided to take the set penalty rather than risk getting another week. He is in his early 30s, multiple club and comp B&F winner who has played more than 400 games across juniors and seniors in various competitions without a blemish. I can’t remember the last time my club took on a case at the tribunal and had the suspension overturned. If you have ther misfortune of fronting the tribunal inevitably you get rubbed out.

Tribunal results and fines are published on the website every week. Take a look at this week’s update and then tell me that they treat school and uni clubs and differently. 10 players from 'precious old boy clubs' were reported (11 if you count ‘Old McKinnon’). From that 11, 9 were suspended. The week before it was 5 from 5. And looking at the melee charges all involve at least one school-based club, in most cases both. Sorry but the available evidence simply does not support your argument. The VAFA tribunal has always been a lottery and whether you are a school, uni, community, religious or suburban based club it makes absolutely no difference.
Old McKinnon lol .They have applied to have anyone that has gone to the school and goes there to be a 1 pointer , so if your a 30yo been at say a St Pauls and come back to be a 1 pointer . They are relentless
 
Old McKinnon lol .They have applied to have anyone that has gone to the school and goes there to be a 1 pointer , so if your a 30yo been at say a St Pauls and come back to be a 1 pointer . They are relentless
Yep thats bs, can't do this after suddenly acquiring a school, should be a 5 year cool off period so to speak until something like that happens.
 
Old McKinnon lol .They have applied to have anyone that has gone to the school and goes there to be a 1 pointer , so if your a 30yo been at say a St Pauls and come back to be a 1 pointer . They are relentless
The ‘Old McKinnon’ reference was tongue in cheek. The rest of the post was entirely factual.
 
MRO report , he challenged and got 4 a bigger joke and now challenging back !
The VAFA have an MRO??
The club that I support was told by HQ that they do not have time to troll through all vision and its up to the clubs to request an investigation of an incident. I would assume the club put in such request.
After hearing how the investigation process works, I'd be shocked if anyone didn't get suspended from any incident.
The much discussed incident in D3 semi final last year, the investigation report stated that the player "may or may not" have struck the opposing player. He was given 4 weeks by the VAFA.
 
Tribunal results and fines are published on the website every week. Take a look at this week’s update and then tell me that they treat school and uni clubs and differently. 10 players from 'precious old boy clubs' were reported (11 if you count ‘Old McKinnon’). From that 11, 9 were suspended. The week before it was 5 from 5. And looking at the melee charges all involve at least one school-based club, in most cases both. Sorry but the available evidence simply does not support your argument. The VAFA tribunal has always been a lottery and whether you are a school, uni, community, religious or suburban based club it makes absolutely no difference.
My club has had 7 reports in the last 2 season.

2 took the prescribed.
1 was “invited” to EP. Perfect record. A VFL Captain, legend of NFNL and a father of 1.😂. He was sited because he failed a duty of care and given 3 weeks. I believe a freak accident.
4 players successfully challenged. 3 were stupid reports and 1 was very very lucky. Witness have sympathetic evidence and umpire thought we had Judge, Jury and Executioner.

We played a game on the weekend where the opposition pushed the boundaries, and nothing came of it. They clearly aren’t a School Boy team.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The VAFA have an MRO??
The club that I support was told by HQ that they do not have time to troll through all vision and its up to the clubs to request an investigation of an incident. I would assume the club put in such request.
After hearing how the investigation process works, I'd be shocked if anyone didn't get suspended from any incident.
The much discussed incident in D3 semi final last year, the investigation report stated that the player "may or may not" have struck the opposing player. He was given 4 weeks by the VAFA.
If umpires are unsure on an incident they note the time then go back and watch it and decide if they think it is reportable
 

Remove this Banner Ad

C Section Prem C 2024

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top