Review Round 18, 2024 - West Coast vs. Brisbane Lions

[Squizz89]

Thoughts and prayers with Jonny Ralph at this time…

 

[Nuggo]

What a circus. It is embrassing a professional code can act like this.

 

[werdna78]

Can someone explain to me how and why he got off? Like what did we argue?

I think we argued that the tribunal worked backwards from the concussion, rather than the fundamentals of making a tackle, that wasn't bad that unluckily led to a concussion.

 

[Kwickhatch]

I think we argued that the tribunal worked backwards from the concussion, rather than the fundamentals of making a tackle, that wasn't bad that unluckily led to a concussion.

Thankyou good sir!

 

[WheildonTheAxe]

Wow. I did not see that coming.

But what about all of our plans to play Bailey back into form as a specialist forward pocket?!

 

[Gadzorks]

View attachment 2051320

Thank you for posting these - I'm not on that platform

 

[Ceebee]

Thoughts and prayers with Jonny Ralph at this time…

Yep it’s actually karma for being an opinionated knob .

 

[Gadzorks]

Do we get a refund on our tribunal fees?

I wonder if it falls under the soft cap? If it does it shouldn't be counted if we win even if they don't refund it.

 

[Fatcat08]

So essentially by not mentioning or assessing whether the tackle broke the laws of the game relating to whether it could be expected to cause Injury, the appeals board assessed that the tribunals therefore by its admission that the tackle didn't break the laws. Therefore no case to answer because the tribunal themselves said it was a legal action.

Nice work tribunal

Hilarious

 

[braddsey]

So essentially by not mentioning or assessing whether the tackle broke the laws of the game relating to whether it could be expected to cause Injury, the appeals board assessed that the tribunals therefore by its admission that the tackle didn't break the laws. Therefore no case to answer because the tribunal themselves said it was a legal action.

Nice work tribunal

Hilarious

or the shorter version (which everyone outside the AFL and tribunal understands) - someone got concussed so someone else must be penalised, and nothing else matters.

 

[martinson]

Helps not having Anderson.

 

[Sproj]

John Rofl won't be happy, he makes his own opinions don't you know

 

[bato]

How does the Tribunal make an error that big?

Seems like it's one of the first things you would want to cover when making your argument.

 

[braddsey]

Thank you for posting these - I'm not on that platform

Not to undermine @Hollow Knight’s great work, but you can monitor on fox footy (should you be a big footy nerd and need the info the second it’s posted. Which you clearly do, it’s why we’re all here!).
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/

They have David Zita’s coverage live feed.

 

[braddsey]

For those reading the Giant’s arguments, they are a little different to ours. I really hope he gets off, a few big slaps for the AFL on different points tonight!

 

[Gadzorks]

Not to undermine @Hollow Knight’s great work, but you can monitor on fox footy (should you be a big footy nerd and need the info the second it’s posted. Which you clearly do, it’s why we’re all here!).
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/

They have David Zita’s coverage live feed.

By definition being a bf member equals nerd.

Or do we need the lawyers to appeal that statement?

 

[Dizzle]

I say play Country Roads after every goal for the whole game.

 

[Warwick]

What a circus. It is embrassing a professional code can act like this.

Exactly. This screams amateur hour. Yet again.

What a laughable head office.

 

[mpal6]

GWS need our lawyer.

 

[Pride of lions]

Helps not having Anderson.

Winneke is one of the top barristers in the country. It is amazing that we could get him to act on our behalf on such short notice. Anderson is nowhere near his level.

 

[braddsey]

Winneke is one of the top barristers in the country. It is amazing that we could get him to act on our behalf on such short notice. Anderson is nowhere near his level.

It shows how far removed from the sport the tribunal is these days... though that's not necessarily on the AFL, it's also on the clubs.
In the end the result for Charlie was not about if the tackle was legal or not, it was that the tribunal didn't address the clause in the AFL laws to determine if Charlie's tackle was indeed rough conduct. So to that point, the players are really in no better position than they were before regarding what is a fair tackle. If a player was to come out next week and lay the exact same tackle, the AFL only need address that point in their tribunal argument, and then the whole thing needs to be tested again.

...hopefully for the players there's something more conclusive that comes out of the Bedford appeal (for which the appeal board are now deliberating).

 

[mpal6]

Good to see they're adapting

 

[rye]

i dont know why we give this shitshow the veneer of being a legal process

 

[braddsey]

Good to see they're adapting

View attachment 2051477

Bedford off too on the same error of law. Great that he got off. We still know nothing more on the legality of the tackle!

Hi-five Giants
(and you're welcome on the tactic. we'll send you a bill for 50% of Winneke's fee!).

 

[Nathan Barley]

So because the tribunal was focused on what he should’ve done instead of what he did that’s the reason he got off?

Or is it more that what he did wasn’t necessarily dangerous but just the fluke circumstance?