Thompson gets 1 week

[Broadbridge_20]

Pathetic.

If Rawlings didnt go down and have a sook it would never have been an issue.

 

[lamby29]

Very poor decision. Thommo has been one of our best players this year, and will be sorely missed.

Looks like Sylvia might keep his spot after all...

 

[melbournemartin]

we should give him a run in the midfield

 

[StingaArmstrong]

Originally posted by melbournemartin
we should give him a run in the midfield

how about ND just gives him a run full stop

it seemed like he got about 5 minutes on the ground

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Originally posted by Broadbridge_20
If Rawlings didnt go down and have a sook it would never have been an issue.

Never copped an unexpected whack in the guts then?

You imply Rawlings is a cheat.

 

[BT]

Re: Re: Thompson gets 1 week

Originally posted by Petrie Dish
Never copped an unexpected whack in the guts then?

You imply Rawlings is a cheat.

Cheat no, soft yes.

His evidence was hardly helpful either.

You can shove off now Dollar dwindling Roo.

 

[melbournemartin]

Re: Re: Thompson gets 1 week

Originally posted by Petrie Dish
Never copped an unexpected whack in the guts then?

You imply Rawlings is a cheat.

i emply he is soft like the other dude said

dont AFL players work on strengthening their abs?

 

[DemonDoob]

the thing about thomo's contact is the tribunal deemed it to be striking. what a load of crap??? how can that be striking, and then when darcy hits jolly and puts jolly out for 4 weeks (breaking his cheekbone) its deemed nothing. inconsistency crap

 

[WILKO_6]

Originally posted by DemonDoob
the thing about thomo's contact is the tribunal deemed it to be striking. what a load of crap??? how can that be striking, and then when darcy hits jolly and puts jolly out for 4 weeks (breaking his cheekbone) its deemed nothing. inconsistency crap

Agree 100% on that, but Rawlings is not soft. You know what its like to be badly winded dont you. You cant breathe for a few seconds.

The tribunal is turning into a joke, especially getting one week for tapping someone with your foot (Darryl White, Steven Baker) and I think a trip should only be a free kick against and shouldnt even be considered for the tribunal.

 

[BT]

Rawlings evidence "The contact was lower than I expected". Thanx for that Brady!

Thommo's first suspension of his career.

And I quote...

"The Tribunal was satisfied the incident, on the balance of probabilities, constituted striking and described it as a reckless act."

On the balance of probabilities

Since when did recklessness start being taken into account by the tribunal again?

Darcy elbows Jolly in the "sacrosanct" head, knocking him out briefly & causing him to rupture his medial. Jolly hasn't played in a month & is still another month away! Reckless?

 

[melbournemartin]

d/w Thommo you are a star and a fair one too

 

[StingaArmstrong]

Darcy admitted on the Footy Show last week that he's talked his way out of his last 3 tribunal appearances. The tribunal need to just look at the facts of the incident and prior record and don't think about what could happen, what it can lead too etc. That's where inconsistencies come in.

Anyway a simple way to solve this would be to install a three strikes system. Using Thommo as an example.

4-5 years in the game without a tribunal appearance I think.
I don't believe it was a particularly bad or dangerous strike, so he should get a fine...say $5000 or a 2 week suspended sentence. I would go the latter because fines a relatively meaningless for a footballer on over $100,000. And then if he reoffends in the next year or two he gets the 2 week sentence. Simple.

Maybe they could go as far as rating each reportable offence that could be rated on a scale in terms of seriousness and give a set sentence.

Regardless, the system needs to be overhauled, because they're are just too many inconsistencies.

 

[BT]

Originally posted by StingaArmstrong
Darcy admitted on the Footy Show last week that he's talked his way out of his last 3 tribunal appearances. The tribunal need to just look at the facts of the incident and prior record and don't think about what could happen, what it can lead too etc. That's where inconsistencies come in.

Anyway a simple way to solve this would be to install a three strikes system. Using Thommo as an example.

4-5 years in the game without a tribunal appearance I think.
I don't believe it was a particularly bad or dangerous strike, so he should get a fine...say $5000 or a 2 week suspended sentence. I would go the latter because fines a relatively meaningless for a footballer on over $100,000. And then if he reoffends in the next year or two he gets the 2 week sentence. Simple.

Maybe they could go as far as rating each reportable offence that could be rated on a scale in terms of seriousness and give a set sentence.

Regardless, the system needs to be overhauled, because they're are just too many inconsistencies.

If ever a suspended sentence was warranted it's in this case. The Tribunal found that he "Probably" struck Rawlings. He HAD a clean record until this rather dodgy decision.

I'm not sure about grading contact, I suppose it works in NRL. Anything is better than the hit & miss situation that I think we've clearly outlined here.

 

[DemonDoob]

the inconsistent tribunal. its just like lynch not even getting sited when he broke someones jaw. i mean fair dinkum

 

[melbournemartin]

btw Thompson was drafted in the 2000 draft and he debuted in i think 2001 or 2002

 

[bomberbilly]

stop yer whinging..he hit him in the guts and got what he deserved...gee u sound like essendon supporters hi demondoob . you guys should beat brisbane this week.

 

[BT]

Thommo was missed terribly on Suday, he would've relished the challenge against a tough Brisbane midfield. To a certain extent Thommo has to accept the consequences on this & come out harder at the ball than ever this week. He was stiff to get suspended, but we'll be much improved for having him & Greeny back for the Freo game.