MRP / Trib. The Chook Lotto thread

[you pick one]

"The AFL's campaign against front-on contact claimed its first victim tonight, with Geelong onballer Mathew Stokes receiving a four-week suspension."


It always seems to be us.That was a practice match 2007 and If I remember correctly Cassisi took out Stokes legs,so what Stokes was penalized for was totally reversed a few years latter and Cassisi would have been the one penalized.

 

[FredLeDeux]

"The AFL's campaign against front-on contact claimed its first victim tonight, with Geelong onballer Mathew Stokes receiving a four-week suspension."


It always seems to be us.That was a practice match 2007 and If I remember correctly Cassisi took out Stokes legs,so what Stokes was penalized for was totally reversed a few years latter and Cassisi would have been the one penalized.

Yes, that was an absolute shocker.

 

[you pick one]

Yes, that was an absolute shocker.

It was a shocker because as you will know we had the good record bad record and point system back then, so every time Stoke's fronted after that he suffered from that first decision,it cost him dearly over the years.

 

[rowdy_1]

Milburn also the first player to get suspended for a sling tackle on Edwards from Richmond... back in the days that trying to avoid being hurt in a tackle used to be the responsibility of the person being tackled.

 

[Nickoo]

I know I've gone on about it but the behind the play hits on Selwood which get no review from the MRP but a jumper push which in both instances caught the neck and did no harm. Nakia in the third qtr nearly got sucked in by lever until the ump pulled him up and advised him not to. And what about how two Adelaide players had hawk prostrate on the ground. Its really crabby. I really wanted them to challenge it. But smart decision to take it.


Go cats!

 

[Larry Donohue]

"The AFL's campaign against front-on contact claimed its first victim tonight, with Geelong onballer Mathew Stokes receiving a four-week suspension."


It always seems to be us.That was a practice match 2007 and If I remember correctly Cassisi took out Stokes legs,so what Stokes was penalized for was totally reversed a few years latter and Cassisi would have been the one penalized.

My recall of that one was stokes slid about 5 metres in the teeming rain and could not stop his momentum. One of the worst suspensions ever along with chris grant losing the brownlow for falling on someone.

 

[FredLeDeux]

My recall of that one was stokes slid about 5 metres in the teeming rain and could not stop his momentum. One of the worst suspensions ever along with chris grant losing the brownlow for falling on someone.

LM, I know only too well that memory can play tricks on one 20 years later, but I think "falling on someone" is a very generous description of something that looked to me, both then and now, very much like a good old-fashioned 2-week smack in the gob.

See at 7:05ff

 

[Larry Donohue]

You're right fred. I often confuse the grant and mckernan incidents. It was corey mckernan who fell on a tumbling barnesy that I was referring to.

 

[Larry Donohue]

Thanks for the clip. Brought back some fine recall

 

[BotsMaster]

Schofield got a one match ban for Oliver's diving act

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Schofield got a one match ban for Oliver's diving act

You're ******* kidding.

This game's dead.

 

[cats_09]

The AFL had to either suspend Schofield or report Oliver for driving and the last thing the AFL wants to admit it's that we have players who dive.

Schofield was screwed because the AFL wants to keep their head in the sand

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

Did Walters get anything for dropping the knees in?

 

[cats_09]

Did Walters get anything for dropping the knees in?

$1,000 fine and a free kick on the day - so rewarded and penalised for the same action

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

$1,000 fine and a free kick on the day - so rewarded and penalised for the same action

That is a disgrace. Should have at least got a week. Danger was pretty sore.

 

[bigfarter]

That is a disgrace. Should have at least got a week. Danger was pretty sore.

Steve Johnson got a week for the same act a few years ago. I'm wary of buying into Geelong players getting treated more harshly than others by the MRP but there are quite a few instances over the last 5 years or so where I do feel like our boys have copped bans where similar instances from other players have gotten through with a fine or no sanction at all. A bit frustrating. That said, Walters gets to relive costing his team the game all week long so he'll be suffering anyway.

 

[cats_09]

WEST Coast defender Will Schofield will join Richmond's Bachar Houli at the AFL Tribunal on Tuesday night to challenge his two-match ban for striking Melbourne onballer Clayton Oliver.

Houli could escape with a two-week penalty from the Tribunal for the swinging left arm that left Carlton's Jed Lamb concussed and unable to return to the game.

The Match Review Panel graded the incident intentional and high impact but if Houli pleads guilty immediately, his suspension could be reduced by a week.

If the Tribunal considers that Houli's action was intentional, the Tiger will likely be suspended for three or four weeks...

...The MRP found Schofield intentionally struck Oliver with low impact to the head.

Eagles coach Adam Simpson quipped on radio 6PR on Monday night he hoped Oliver "made the flight back" to Victoria after the Demon faced accusations of staging.

I hope that Schofield wins tonight

 

[you pick one]

I hope that Schofield wins tonight

Be even better if Oliver got 2 or 3 weeks,that was appalling.

 

[BotsMaster]

I hope that Schofield wins tonight

Don't see how Houli's was intentional.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Don't see how Houli's was intentional.

He definitely intended to stop the Carlton blot from scragging him behind the play, but I doubt he intended such serious consequences.

 

[cats_09]

Don't see how Houli's was intentional.

I blame the umpire - if he blows the whistle and awards a free kick to Houli for being held then that incident doesn't occur.

The AFL needs to direct umpires to start paying free kicks to the players being held behind play, being pushed or punched off the ball or during stoppages because surely if the ball isn't in play then you shouldn't be able to hold/block/punch an opponent.

Start calling the free kicks for illegal play and a lot of this bullshit like Houli's report will stop

 

[BotsMaster]

He definitely intended to stop the Carlton blot from scragging him behind the play, but I doubt he intended such serious consequences.

Well I agree with that but I don't think he meant to hit him in the head.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Well I agree with that but I don't think he meant to hit him in the head.

Agreed, just bad luck that I think.

 

[FredLeDeux]

I blame the umpire - if he blows the whistle and awards a free kick to Houli for being held then that incident doesn't occur.

The AFL needs to direct umpires to start paying free kicks to the players being held behind play, being pushed or punched off the ball or during stoppages because surely if the ball isn't in play then you shouldn't be able to hold/block/punch an opponent.

Start calling the free kicks for illegal play and a lot of this bullshit like Houli's report will stop

Could not agree more strongly.
Johnson-Baker, Hall-Straker, Vickery-Cox all down to umpires taking their money under false pretences.

 

[Tony Barber]

Don't see how Houli's was intentional.

I thought that a hit that far off the ball was immediately intentional.