Tom Lynch sent straight to Tribunal(dismissed) Sanity Prevails!

Remove this Banner Ad

ferball said:
That stuff is drivel.

The tribunal said Logue should have gone lower for the ball to avoid a suspension but two players actually did that yesterday and they both got knocked out. Then they said some other s**t about Lynch and he'd actually hurt someone!

We have had our players consistently knowcked out since the AFL started protecting players from concussion and I don't think a single case has resulted in a suspension. Last year a Suns player ran past Ben McKay and swung an elbow at his head. He missed that game and the next one as a result. It was called a football act. So obviously that week the tribunal had gone back in time 35 years. And at the same time we get players suspended for s**t that other players get off/don't get reported for for every two or three weeks.

No North support is gonna take the s**t those w***ers say seriously. Its all garbage. I'm not even gonna bother reading it.
Click to expand...
It was a marking contest mate, it's completely different to those examples. If you read the tribunals reasoning you'd be in agreeance.

Chrisso is the problem.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

FWIW, I felt Lynch would have been bloody stiff to get rubbed out for that. People complain about the way the game is going but then lobby hard for players to get suspended for everything. They are part of the problem.

We may yet become a game where most contact is illegal, but that's not today.
 
tiger_tough said:
It was a marking contest mate, it's completely different to those examples. If you read the tribunals reasoning you'd be in agreeance.

Chrisso is the problem.
Click to expand...
But it wasn't a marking contest was it. He failed to get to the marking contest, otherwise he might have made it a contest. Instead of letting the other guy take an uncontested mark.

Honestly tho none of Logue, Acres, McKay or Lynch should really get suspended. I don't think Lynch was nasty in this contest and I think he's a bit of a cowardly sniper. But this time it was one of those footy things. The were all just footy things and if anything McKay's was the worse, he just elbowed the kid in the head, but he didn't go thru with it so it wasn't anything really. Its just the annoying consistency we see.

And yeah Christian is the real issue.

The AFL would piss him off and develop a proper system for match reviews if it was a professional organisation with a clue but it isn't so we get this s**t. I guess everyone already knows this.
 
ferball said:
But it wasn't a marking contest was it. He failed to get to the marking contest, otherwise he might have made it a contest. Instead of letting the other guy take an uncontested mark.

Honestly tho none of Logue, Acres, McKay or Lynch should really get suspended. I don't think Lynch was nasty in this contest and I think he's a bit of a cowardly sniper. But this time it was one of those footy things. The were all just footy things and if anything McKay's was the worse, he just elbowed the kid in the head, but he didn't go thru with it so it wasn't anything really. Its just the annoying consistency we see.

And yeah Christian is the real issue.

The AFL would piss him off and develop a proper system for match reviews if it was a professional organisation with a clue but it isn't so we get this s**t. I guess everyone already knows this.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was.
 
mrposhman said:
Some on here seem to think that Lynch had the time running into the contest to think what to do when he realised he'd run under it.

You can see from behind footage (I posted it several pages ago) where Keaths arm is almost touching Lynch. Lynchs eyes are still on the ball and preparing to jump, you can see he is planting his left foot at the time.

People think in that time period, he has the time to think "s**t I'm going to miss the mark, oh look who's this guy to the left, maybe I should knock him out", when in reality he most likely plants his foot, a peripheral image comes into his vision and he instinctively turns his body not knowing what the hecks coming from his left.

He literally would have had maybe half a second to have made any decision, ie no time to make that decision, it was an instinctive response to protect himself.
Click to expand...

There are footy fans now who are so deranged they really do think that.
 
It's good to see that the Tribunal actually learnt something from their ridiculous and disgraceful effort to suspend Cripps last year.
Accidents can happen in a contact sport, and you are allowed to contest the ball in our game.
The AFL should be trying to remove dangerous actions that can cause concussions from the game (eg sling tackles), rather than working backwards from a concussion and trying to blame someone for an accident.

Unfortunately, the incompetent muppet Christian who has NFI still has a job. He should have been sacked a long time ago.
 
tiger_tough said:
Yes, it was.
Click to expand...
No it wasn't.

I guess Lynch could have made it one if he'd committed to halving the contest and getting cleaned up but he's not exactly the bravest player in the comp so its no surprise he didn't.

What happened was one played jumped up and hit the ball away, uncontested, and two others off to the side had a bit of a collision. There wasn't an actual marking contest at all.
 
The Old Dark Navy's said:
FWIW, I felt Lynch would have been bloody stiff to get rubbed out for that. People complain about the way the game is going but then lobby hard for players to get suspended for everything. They are part of the problem.

We may yet become a game where most contact is illegal, but that's not today.
Click to expand...
The thing is the AFL will be f*cked in their class action defence when they have so much inconsistency in these sorts of decisions.

You can’t on one hand be sprouting the “potential to cause serious injury” bullshit to make an example out of lesser named players or interstate teams and then pull this when someone actually gets injured from a pretty lousy attempt at a bump
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

rippersnipper said:
Can't be called that if he doesn't contest the ball mate. That's whole definition of the word
Click to expand...

Can you go to a marking contest but misread the ball and mistime your attempt? He aborted his jump at the ball because an opposition player was backing back into him and he had misread the flight. As if a key forward is going to go to a marking contest with the pre-conceived idea of not contesting. That might only happens if they are late to the contest, in which case they are aiming to spoil or make the opponent earn it. Lynch was early to the contest and got lost.
 
Last edited:
Coasters7 said:
The thing is the AFL will be f*cked in their class action defence when they have so much inconsistency in these sorts of decisions.

You can’t on one hand be sprouting the “potential to cause serious injury” bullshit to make an example out of lesser named players or interstate teams and then pull this when someone actually gets injured from a pretty lousy attempt at a bump
Click to expand...

Who got injured from a lousy attempt at a bump where the perpetrator got off? I mean, I've seen incidental bumps that weren't intended to be bumps.

The AFL are going to have to trade off their fear of legal ruin with the future of the game and how that looks. How can you have a fast moving athletic 360 degree game and not have collisions?

Do we really think that suspending players for each and every action that impacts the head is going to mitigate any legal damages anyway?
 
Coasters7 said:
The thing is the AFL will be f*cked in their class action defence when they have so much inconsistency in these sorts of decisions.

You can’t on one hand be sprouting the “potential to cause serious injury” bullshit to make an example out of lesser named players or interstate teams and then pull this when someone actually gets injured from a pretty lousy attempt at a bump
Click to expand...
The AFL ****ed themselves years ago when they decided to work backwards from a concussion to find someone to blame, rather than punishing dangerous actions in order to reduce future concussions.
The Tribunal is actually getting it more right this year.
Christian not so much.
 
look lynch is a soft little worm like most tiger players, but this was clear cut. he was clueless and there was no time to do anything else

yes, while it is true all richmond supporters are little wusses but this is the right call.
 
ferball said:
No it wasn't.

I guess Lynch could have made it one if he'd committed to halving the contest and getting cleaned up but he's not exactly the bravest player in the comp so its no surprise he didn't.

What happened was one played jumped up and hit the ball away, uncontested, and two others off to the side had a bit of a collision. There wasn't an actual marking contest at all.
Click to expand...
So by that reasoning Keaths fly wasn't part of a marking contest either as he was even further off it. So wtf was he doing?

It was a marking contest - the ball was right there to be marked, they just misread it which happens (see the Swans v port final kick). All the other incidecents you have referenced have been loose balls, that's the difference, and it's the deciding difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TY24
MRP / Trib. Charlie Cameron gets a week for dumping tackle on Lever - Tribunal = down to a fine.
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
288
Views
8K
Chief
Chief
Chief
MRP / Trib. MRP and Tribunal - 2024 - Rd 5 - Charlie Cameron 1 week?
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
282
Views
10K
Adelaide Hawk
Adelaide Hawk
danster168
Tom Mitchell staging
Replies
11
Views
814
Xtreme
Xtreme
HirdyLannister
  • Poll
Maynard cleared by tribunal for Brayshaw collision
253 254 255 256 257
Replies
6K
Views
128K
Satan
Satan
Elmer_Judd
MRP / Trib. Tom Lynch eye gouge on Adam Saad
2 3 4 5
Replies
113
Views
5K
MagpieJo
MagpieJo
maroon and blue
Jarrod Berry strangulation - eye-gouge charge goes to tribunal
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
Ari
Ari
H
MRP / Trib. Eric Hipwood to tribunal - Result $2500 fine
2 3 4 5
Replies
120
Views
5K
Generalissimo
G

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top