Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. The Suspension Roulette - Tribunal Discussion

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Posts
12,718
Reaction score
12,015
Location
South of the Swan
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur
It surprises me we don’t have a dedicated thread for the roulette that is the AFL MRO’s wheel of fortune.

To break the new thread in:

Round 24, 2025.

Liam Baker has been offered a week for his slight catch on Chad Warner.

The action was deemed medium impact which I’m not having at all.
He’s a lucky boy he pulled out though, he’d be missing a month of the new season

Thoughts lads and ladies?


https://www.afl.com.au/news/1401221
 
Last edited:
Couldn't tackle because Warner didn't have possession. Warner then pulls up very suddenly, which results in Baker making contact with the head rather than the body.

I honestly don't know how differently Baker could have approached the contest, short of allowing Warner to freely pick up the ball.

At this stage the AFL should just make the bump completely illegal. Free kick for laying a fair bump, suspension if it's head high. Because the current system of allowing players to bump but penalising with a suspension if it is misstimed just doesn't make sense. The margin for error is so small we're seeing players suspended for head high bumps on a weekly basis.
 
It surprises me we don’t have a dedicated thread for the roulette that is the AFL MRO’s wheel of fortune.

Liam Baker has been offered a week for his slight catch on Chad Warner.

The action was deemed medium impact which I’m not having at all.
He’s a lucky boy he pulled out though, he’d be missing a month of the new season

Thoughts lads and ladies?


https://www.afl.com.au/news/1401221
Head high bumps start at medium, this is best case scenario imo
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Its funny how any similar incidents that happen to our players never get cited. Christian is biased and corrupt. I mean look at that hawks scum not getting sent to the tribunal for a groin kick?
 
Yeah thought it was a week, have a challenge for the sake of it but I was very surprised it wasn’t a free. Only argument they could make is negligible contact I suppose, below that of a suspension? Gets people off punches to the head so why not.
 
Yeah thought it was a week, have a challenge for the sake of it but I was very surprised it wasn’t a free. Only argument they could make is negligible contact I suppose, below that of a suspension? Gets people off punches to the head so why not.
That was definitely my thought process, insufficient contact and thus can’t be medium impact. Medical report would back it up, presumably.

He is very lucky though.
 
Our administration is a bunch of wet wipes so we'll probably send them a letter thanking them for the suspension.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

You would think the argument would have to be force was below the required level to constitute a reportable offence.

No doubt we'll argue some nonsense where we say Baker smashed him in the head as our opening argument. Our tribunal performances have been diabolical in recent years, in line with the rest of the clubs performance.
 
Maybe Jack Graham can give Bakes his mcsuspension discount voucher for this one.
 
Looked to me like Baker was expecting Warner to do what he normally does in that situation and pick the ball up with one grab and take off. Instead he fumbled it and stayed lower longer. Baker realized at the last second and tried to limit the contact.
Had Warner managed to one grab it and stand up it would have been a well executed bump.
Typical split second mistimed bit of play that results in no injury or free kick but someone is missing a game.

In one case it is outcome over action and in the next it is action over outcome.
MRO roulette at it's best.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom