Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Taylor Walker

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

FR0GGY said:
Does he get three if we challenge and lose? Or two either way?
Click to expand...

If they challenge it (pleading not guilty) and lose, yes it's 3 games..

They can plead guilty but challenge one of the classifications (negligent, medium, high contact) to try get it down to 1 match..

If they lose that classification challenge he will still get 2 games because he has still pleaded guilty..

This is the way i think the club will go..
 
If we challenge and lose, his season is screwed. Three matches followed by the bye means not playing for 5 weeks. It will then take him another month to get back to his top.

A two week break will have him ready to eat Freo alive (but two weeks still sucks based on any impartial assessment).
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

mulz said:
wasnt the smartest tackle from tex. i dont like to see players get rubbed out for these tackles but thats the way the game is going. not surprised he has got games.
dissapointing but not surprising.

a lot of adelaide posters are just embarassing themselves the way they are carrying on about it.
Click to expand...

Adelaide supporters on here have every good reason to be very frustrated with the verdict. The AFL is NOT a fair and even competition, however much you may think so. Also, something tells me you're not really a true crows supporter..
 
The majority of us are furious at the inconsistency, not the result. How can something be so inconsistent within one weekend?! Had NLM and Nahas both got 2 weeks, we'd be miffed but understanding. But when one pulls out Raven's Even Flow DDT and the other treats his opponent like a lawn dart and they both get off, while Tex gets two weeks, that's where the fury comes in.
 
A FEW GOOD MEN said:
If we challenge and lose, his season is screwed. Three matches followed by the bye means not playing for 5 weeks. It will then take him another month to get back to his top.

A two week break will have him ready to eat Freo alive (but two weeks still sucks based on any impartial assessment).
Click to expand...

Missed more weeks than that last year (at AFL level, admittedly was playing in the SANFL).

Love to see him play his bunnies though.

I'm really glad things are clicking for him. Called it a little in the preseason when he was flying for those one handed spoils.. he was getting more and more comfortable with his ability to contest in big pack situations. (I still believe he grew up having to avoid close in contests like that for fear of being meat axed by broken hill hill billies looking to make a mess of the cheeky whipper snapper who made them look stupid). The last 3 weeks especially he's been very physical. My biggest desire is to see him continue that. Not sure 2 to 4 weeks will make that big a difference. Either he's clicked and it'll keep coming or it hasn't.
 
I'm just sick of seeing guys getting rubbed out for accidental contact. Suspensions should be reserved for dirty sniping, deliberate elbows etc. There should have to be intent to injure the the opposition to get a suspension.

The umpires have the capability of paying a free kick for accidental infringments. That should be penalty enough.

When you watch most of the stuff guys are being suspended for nowadays in normal motion, theres nothing on it. Once you slow them down it always looks much much worse.

Hell i'd rather see someone get a yellow/red card and have to sit for a mandatory 30 minutes or something if it meant less suspensions. Theres players getting rubbed out every week now and lets be honest, theres not a truly dirty player left in the league now.
 
I think they should definately appeal given how important Walker is to our structure, and the fact we have 3 tough games coming up against Carlton, Collingwood and Fremantle.

I thought it was an excellent tackle. Hope Walker keeps dishing those out. I was initially surprised he got reported and thought he would have gotten 1 week at the max. The AFL tribunal can be pretty dammed inconsistent. :thumbsdown:
 
BigLefty said:
Theres players getting rubbed out every week now and lets be honest, theres not a truly dirty player left in the league now.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Gone are the days of the Leigh 'fling a guy into the goalpost' Mathews. When I saw that footage I thought he'd get a season for something like that these days.

Also no more 'eye gouging' Tony Liberatore. :eek:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Thommo51 said:
Katrina Gill said we risk three by challenging. By the way isn't that a bull**** concept? To threaten off teams from appealing stupid decisions by placing an additional punishment upon it?
Click to expand...

I think people don't seem to be clear how the system works.

Walker's tackle was awarded 225 activation points (2 game penalty) when you add his 93 (or whatever it was carryover points are) takes it to over 300 which is a 3 game penalty. He is currently on a 3 game suspension not 2, it can only be reduced by 25% down to two games IF he pleads guilty.

To encourage a player to plea guilty and to save the expense of facing the tribunal players are offered a 25% reduction of points. If a player elects to face the tribunal they obviously are not then entitled to the 25% early plea reduction.
 
relapse said:
I think people don't seem to be clear how the system works.

Walker's tackle was awarded 225 activation points (2 game penalty) when you add his 93 (or whatever it was carryover points are) takes it to over 300 which is a 3 game penalty. He is currently on a 3 game suspension not 2, it can only be reduced by 25% down to two games IF he pleads guilty.

To encourage a player to plea guilty and to save the expense of facing the tribunal players are offered a 25% reduction of points. If a player elects to face the tribunal they obviously are not then entitled to the 25% early plea reduction.
Click to expand...

Okay, fair enough I guess I didn't really think that through. Is the early plea thing common in sports tribunals and civil law, given its convenience? I'm a little bit ignorant on the the whole MRP issue.

Also, I was a bit confused by the below article I assume that the bolded is a typo.

afl.com.au said:
Alright that makes a bit more sense now.
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Geelong Football Club, the incident was assessed as negligent conduct (one point), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of five activation points, resulting in a classification of a level two offence, drawing 225 demerit points and a two-match sanction. He has a bad record of 93.75 demerit points, increasing the penalty to 318.75 points and a two-match sanction. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to 239.06 points and a two-match sanction.
Click to expand...
 
Come out and challenge it and give it everything we have... The AFL does not like negative press and those who intelligently make a public stink about it get their way (any one notice Kurt Tippett had 5 free kicks on Sunday - the same number he has received in the first 6 games combined :eek:).

Consistency is what it is all about...

As a club we need to come out - get on the front foot and have Sando (in his press conference) discuss how worrying concussions in the AFL are.. highlight the fact that he hopes Priddis makes a full recovery after being dumped into the turf... Then talk about how he is really please about Taylor not being concussed and being able to come back on and play the rest of the game...

Wouldnt hurt to throw in a few cheeky references to how important of a game dreamtime at the G is and how he is glad NLM didn't have to front up to all the media planned for him this week to discuss a suspension....
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The number of equal or worse incidents and then we hear "no case to answer". This annoys the hell out of me, just when we're getting something together after a couple of lean years. The AFL shaft us with the father/son inequity, home final having to be played in Melbourne etc. and now this sh*t.
 
Walker's been travelling pretty close to the edge for a while so it was only a matter of time before it caught up with him. Think it is more a case of him wanting to physically impose himself on the opposition more than being a dill or thug.

Sad that the game has degenerated to an extent that a genuine show of strength rubs a guy out for two weeks.

I can live with the 2 weeks but the reasoning for the other two suspect tackles getting off given by the MRP panel is what erks me...."did not use excessive force"?

I mean really? So players are going in half cocked in tackles? I'm pretty sure that's not the case and in both the NLM and Nahas tackles they used all of their available force to bring their opponent to ground. Essentially Walker gets a holiday for being stonger than his opponent.
 
What I'm really looking for now, is how the club deals with it. In previous years many here including myself have been scathing of our softly softly approach when it comes to AFL edicts. Every other facet of the club seems to have had some concrete for breakfast; given the MRP inability to make a charge stick recently, other contentious tackles this weekend, and our coach's excellent manipulation of AFL opinion vis a vis Tippett last weekend, I'd like us to come out and challenge the assessment. Time for Trigg to join the rest of us?
 
Lawrst said:
Nahas was really dangerous, I am at a loss for words how Walker gets done but Nahas doesnt.
Click to expand...

For mine - the Nahas tackle was a spear that part-way-through, he knew was going to happen.......and Lovett-Murray used his body weight to ensure Priddis nose-bagged the turf.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Taylor Walker

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top