Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Tom Lynch -How many?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Probably none, but if the umpires aren't going to penalise off the ball holds etc, well then that players frustration is going to build.

Not anymore. If the MRO deems the suspension to be the minimum (4 weeks in this case) then that'll be offered.

AFL only refers it directly to the Tribunal if they want to ask for more than the minimum punishment for the grading.

Of course, the reality is most clubs decide to challenge anything in the severe category so you end up with a Tribunal hearing anyway.

There you go, I learnt something today.
 
The other point is that the Crows players have not been shown to have been doing anything out of the ordinary. There is no provocation for Lynch's tantrum other than the bath he was getting. It's not the umpires, it's not the defenders, it's Lynch.
Hang on
Are you suggesting he's responsible for his own actions?
 
True. Or he could be the leader like his title of captain should suggest and set the example. Or don’t put your hand up to Captain.

I don’t blame people wanting to further their career at other clubs at all
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

So the ball in hand gives a player an excuse to do anything he wants, even if having the ball in hand stops the victim from protecting themselves.

This notion about being in play or out of play makes no sense. All it means is players can use it as an excuse to literally almost kill someone and get away with it.

View attachment 2356427
Didn’t Nash get 4 weeks? Archer 3 weeks. Where are these actions going unpunished? Everyone knows that actions off the ball are punished more heavily, and everyone knows why. You don’t seriously need someone to explain that to you.

Lynch punched someone in the head, he’s going to get a big suspension. If you want a sympathetic ear, try the Richmond board.
 
Tom Lynch saying he was just trying to get separation from Butts is a pathetic defense.

I can understand admitting that frustrations got the best of him and he lashed out with an open handed strike but saying he was just trying to break free is piss weak.
 
Probably none, but if the umpires aren't going to penalise off the ball holds etc, well then that players frustration is going to build.
I reckon quite a few forwards these days, get generous frees in front of goal. It’s a pretty good era to be a forward in.
 
Tom Lynch saying he was just trying to get separation from Butts is a pathetic defense.

I can understand admitting that frustrations got the best of him and he lashed out with an open handed strike but saying he was just trying to break free is piss weak.

In his defence, knocking someone out will probably create separation.
 
View attachment 2356793

Sorry ****ing what? Point 5? They are taking the piss.

Point 6 too.

I know this is all manouvering but jesus the optics here are bad.

Point 6 is ludicrous.

There was no injury, so what they’re saying is a swinging arm to the head does not have the potential to cause injury.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

They aren't superhuman. I'm no umpire defender but it's pretty impossible to notice the majority of holding when you don't have eyes in the back of your head, or don't have the angle to be 100% sure you can give a free kick.

I didn't know that we were now alluding to the umpires now being at fault for player frustration reacting in whacking other blokes.

Also that in most instances, Lynch is initiating contact. If two players are engaging in a wrestle/jostle for position it makes it really hard for umpires to spot who is doing the holding. It’s why most holding the man frees in marking contest occur when one player is running and jumping at the ball.
 
I guess the league left the door ajar for Richmond to (rightfully) contest the charges when they graded it as severe but Richmond's whole handling of this one has been a bit on the nose, considering the Balta stuff and how clearly intentional the action was.

Even Yze saying they'd 'seek clarity' (read complain) about the defensive tactics etc.

It's the kind of handling old mate Caro would be lining up for a good 'tut tut tut' opinion piece...I mean, if it wasn't Richmond obviously.
 
I guess the league left the door ajar for Richmond to (rightfully) contest the charges when they graded it as severe but Richmond's whole handling of this one has been a bit on the nose, considering the Balta stuff and how clearly intentional the action was.

Even Yze saying they'd 'seek clarity' (read complain) about the defensive tactics etc.

It's the kind of handling old mate Caro would be lining up for a good 'tut tut tut' opinion piece...I mean, if it wasn't Richmond obviously.
I don't even think Caro would hold back from this one TBH.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

serious the simpsons GIF
 
I'm pretty confident its close to a formality he's gone for 5. I don't expect they'll deliberate very long.

Happy to eat humble pie if I'm wrong.
They're in there longer than I thought they'd be.
I'm sure this is a boring technical argument about the severe band.
Four weeks or five weeks.
 
Feels like a 4 weeker to me
Initally I thought that, but I just feel that in the current climate when football acts are getting rubbed out for 4, this needs an extra week to distinguish it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Tom Lynch -How many?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top