No Oppo Supporters Tom Stewart's targeted KO'ing of Prestia - 4 week ban

[Sterge]

Some of you need to chill out, be better than geelong supporters.

We dont need to wish injuries on anyone or hope someone evens it up.

Just be content in the fact we win when it really matters.

Also the thread is about Stewart and Prestia

 

[Bird Man]

The AFL is a Disgrace game wasn't stopped and they gave him 3 weeks

cost us the game and potentially top four

 

[juss]

This is an absolute joke.

 

[Not Important]

Do you think there is a realistic way that can happen given the AFL Counsel is instructed here by the same person who found Stewart’s action was careless and not intentional - Brad Scott? Who also happens to be the same person who would decide on any appeal against the Tribunal outcome being too light. And who also happens to be the twin brother of the current Geelong FC coach.

Thi is a massive flaw in the system. The GFC coach’s twin brother can effectively limit the penalty whilst making it look like the work of Michael Christian, the AFL Counsel and the Tribunal. And nobody in the media will mention the massive conflict of interest he has.

oh how i love a good conspiracy theory. think you'll find tribunal issues fall within the remit of the afl general counsel andrew dillon. stewart will get 3 weeks plus. what that plus is everyone is guessing.

 

[juss]

Got a bit of a feeling this will really galvanise our playing group in the run to the finals. Hope so.

Hardwick kind of alluded to this in the presser with a smirk, that hopefully we play them again this year, meaning in a final.

You can bet your house we'd be winning that game.

 

[Makeshft_Mauler]

Ill start this by saying at the end of the day i dont really care if he gets 3 weeks or 4.

at the end of the day primarily Dion, who will miss at least two games now and who knows what long term effects from concussion, and secondarily Richmond who have now lost touch with the top 4 and are at risk of not making finals due to tom stewarts act. are the big losers.

The people who benefited most from Stewart are geelong who now are entrenched in the top half of the 8 and the clubs they will play in the next 3-4weeks

North who they will smash regardless
Melbourne- who are going to finish above richmond so the result doesnt matter now we have lost this game
Carlton- who are now significantly more likely to win and maintain a 2 game buffer above us,

if tom stewart doesnt knock dion out and we win then suddenly we are only a game behind carlton where either result geelong winning or carlton losing benefits us, instead now neither really do, as were 2 games behind both teams.

Im not going to sit around and salivate over how many weeks he gets, becuase it doesnt matter, Dion and the club are the ultimate losers in this scenario.

though if i hear one more person tell me how great a guy tom is ill chuck it, you know who else is a great guy? dion, and he didnt deserve to have his brain rattled in an act such as he recieved.

tom should get 4 weeks, but i wont be cheering if he does, and i wont be howling if he gets 3.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

oh how i love a good conspiracy theory. think you'll find tribunal issues fall within the remit of the afl general counsel andrew dillon. stewart will get 3 weeks plus. what that plus is everyone is guessing.

Who do you think will instruct the AFL Counsel in this matter?

And do you agree that if the Tribunal gave a light penalty, let’s say 3 weeks, that it is Brad Scott who then considers whether the AFL appeals that decision?

And it is no conspiracy theory. It is a matter of fact that if all people at the AFL are playing their normal roles, Chris Scott’s twin brother Brad Scott is playing an active part in this case. Do you think that is incorrect? Or that he is not conflicted in the matter by his relationship with his twin brother?

 

[Not Important]

Who do you think will instruct the AFL Counsel in this matter?

And do you agree that if the Tribunal gave a light penalty, let’s say 3 weeks, that it is Brad Scott who then considers whether the AFL appeals that decision?

dillon. and it's dillon who decides whether 2 appeal or not. in my opinion 4 will b accepted. less and an appeal is likely. the afl rarely appeals. it has 2 b exceptional.

 

[Bojangles17]

That's pretty much what I was getting at earlier. There would be another outcry if it was graded intentional and Geelong argued it down to careless. Hopefully the AFL counsel challenges the careless grading and pushes for intentional because then the minimum becomes 4 weeks. If that fails then they can push for a sentence greater than the 3 week minimum, especially if the medical report isn't favourable.

I think the severe impact will make it an absolute min 4w hopefully 6w

 

[Meteoric Rise]

dillon. and it's dillon who decides whether 2 appeal or not. in my opinion 4 will b accepted. less and an appeal is likely. the afl rarely appeals. it has 2 b exceptional.

You know these things as fact?

And do you agree B Scott has at least played an active part in the MRO grading of the incident as careless?

 

[tigersnag]

dillon. and it's dillon who decides whether 2 appeal or not. in my opinion 4 will b accepted. less and an appeal is likely. the afl rarely appeals. it has 2 b exceptional.

They only appealed the Houli one because of the outcry by media flogs like Damo - who went ballistic at the decision.

Those same media flogs won't have an outcry this time because it won't suit their agenda. They're a bunch of compromised s**t stains with no integrity.

 

[Not Important]

You know these things as fact?

And do you agree B Scott has at least played an active part in the MRO grading of the incident as careless?

scott reports 2 dillon. it was widely publicised when he got the gig. if u read the letter 2 the appeals board over the toby greene appeal it had dillon's finger prints all over it referencing legal principles.

 

[Makeshft_Mauler]

They only appealed the Houli one because of the outcry by media flogs like Damo - who went ballistic at the decision.

Those same media flogs won't have an outcry this time because it won't suit their agenda. They're a bunch of compromised s**t stains with no integrity.

ill be honest mate, i thought we made out like bandits when houli originally was offered 2

 

[Meteoric Rise]

scott reports 2 dillon. it was widely publicised when he got the gig. if u read the letter 2 the appeals board over the toby greene appeal it had dillon's finger prints all over it referencing legal principles.

I stand corrected on that point.

(E) AN APPEAL OF A DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL
A Player or the AFL General Counsel may appeal the decision of the Tribunal to the Appeal Board on one or more of the following grounds:

 

[Foley#41]

Imagine if Lynch did it?

3 - 5
(years with a non parole period of 18 months)

 

[tigersnag]

ill be honest mate, i thought we made out like bandits when houli originally was offered 2

I agree, I'm not disputing that. I was ok with the outcome for Houli. More that I'm suggesting the media are playing it down this time.

Imagine if was Pickett or Lynch that did that. The media would have a completely different agenda and would be calling for a maximum penalty not the minimum or 1 week more than the minimum.

 

[Coach_Required]

It is difficult for people to understand this readily because of the way the AFL have this extremely compromised system set up. But MRO decisions as released publicly might or might not represent Michael Christian’s view, we never know that part. In every single case however, we can be certain the MRO decision represents Brad Scott’s position. This is because Brad Scott’s role includes that he approves or alters all of Christian’s recommendations before they are made public.

In this case, given the AFL website initially reported an intentional grading then shortly after altered that to careless, you would have to suspect Christian’s view was that it was intentional, and the AFL site reported that before it was checked by Scott for some reason, and that Scott has quickly intervened to have it downgraded to careless. And ordered overdrive on the good bloke, out of character narrative for T Stewart in the media.

Access All Derrieres on the AFL website featuring Matthew Lloyd and Damien Barrett very strangely did not show the incident, did not discuss it in any detail, mentioning only he will get 3 or 4, and were at pains to praise Tom Stewart’s performance. It is not plausible that could be organic commentary on the events we witnessed Saturday. They did not raise any of the issues around the incident, play carrying on, red card required or anything like that.

But the biggest issue here that the media will never mention, is the person making the MRO grading, is the same person who instructs the AFL counsel what to argue for, and this is the same person who decides whether or not the AFL appeals the Tribunal finding. And that person is Brad Scott, twin brother of current Geelong FC Chris Scott. So he is in a completely conflicted position and should have announced from the outset due to this he can play no part in this process……but he has not made any such announcement.

It is ludicrous that with all the scrutiny of 2022 available to us this is not even mentioned in passing by anybody in the media.

Thanks for clarifying and just goes to show the AFL really is amateur hour and full of corrupt boys club people.

 

[Makeshft_Mauler]

I agree, I'm not disputing that. I was ok with the outcome for Houli. More that I'm suggesting the media are playing it down this time.

Imagine if was Pickett or Lynch that did that. The media would have a completely different agenda and would be calling for a maximum penalty not the minimum or 1 week more than the minimum.

i mean david king is on sen this morning saying he cant believe they graded it careless

and kane cornes was saying stewart should have been ejected from the game.

if i had to care id be happy with 4

dions gunna miss 2 games, tom misses double that.

 

[DickieKnee]

Stewart should get more than Houli's 4 weeks. Houli's was genuinely careless he had eyes only for the ball. Stewart only had eyes for Prestia.

 

[tigersnag]

Just saw the Cameron eye gouge Pickett vision.

Why no scrutiny? FMD, nothing, no mention, no attention. Just a wrestling fine for both.

Oh that's right. Pickett is black and that Geelong cocksmoker is white.

The AFL and the AFL media are racist corrupt pigs.

 

[tigersnag]

i mean david king is on sen this morning saying he cant believe they graded it careless

and kane cornes was saying stewart should have been ejected from the game.

if i had to care id be happy with 4

dions gunna miss 2 games, tom misses double that.

King and Cornes are in the minority 'calling it out', not the majority.

 

[tony__montana]

Just saw the Cameron eye gouge Pickett vision.

Why no scrutiny? FMD, nothing, no mention, no attention. Just a wrestling fine for both.

Oh that's right. Pickett is black and that Geelong cocksmoker is white.

The AFL and the AFL media are racist corrupt pigs.

Yeah can’t believe it’s not being scrutinised. Can you imagine if Tom Lynch did that? Would be highlighted ad nauseum then there’d be a massive outsfry from media flogs on how he could
Possibly get off

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Intentional conduct
A Player intentionally commits a Classifiable Offence if the Player engages in the conduct constituting the Reportable Offence with the intention of committing that offence. An intention is a state of mind. Intention may be formed on the spur of the moment. The issue is whether it existed at the time at which the Player engaged in the conduct.
Whether or not a Player intentionally commits a Reportable Offence depends upon the state of mind of the Player when he does the act with which he is charged. What the Player did is often the best evidence of the purpose he had in mind. In some cases, the evidence that the act provides may be
so strong as to compel an inference of what his intent was, no matter what
he may say about it afterwards. If the immediate consequence of an act is obvious and inevitable, the deliberate doing of the act carries with it evidence of an intention to produce the consequence.
For example, a strike will be regarded as Intentional where a Player delivers a blow to an opponent with the intention of striking him.
The state of a Player’s mind is an objective fact and has to be proved
in the same way as other objective facts. The whole of the relevant evidence has to be considered. If the matter is heard by the Tribunal, the Tribunal will weigh the evidence of the Player as to what his intentions were along with whatever inference as to his intentions can be drawn from his conduct or other relevant facts. The Player may or may not be believed by the Tribunal. Notwithstanding what the Player says, the Tribunal may be able to conclude from the whole of the evidence that he intentionally committed the act constituting the Reportable Offence.

------------------------------


So the question of intent comes down to Stewart needing to successfully argue he was trying to do something other than what he did. He would have to convince the Tribunal he was trying to body check Prestia, but that itself would be an offence(lesser) given how late the contact was. Either way, I would have though it would be difficult for Stewart to convince anyone he was not trying to bump Prestia. And given he bumped shoulder first to the head and not hip first to the body it should really be impossible for him to argue he was intending to bump Prestia’s body.

 

[Hans Klopek]

Slobbo's take on the incident. And of course after these comments I make no change to my opinion that he is as useless a human that has ever existed.

 

[Grockadoc]

We are living rent free in Cats supporters heads. They have a whole thread about opposition posters and the last 5 pages is all about us.

To emphasise how big a pack of scumbags they are, I suggested to them that the reason we are so angry is because not many Geelong fans/supporters/staff or even media have thought about Prestia. Some of their responses are downright pathetic.

One such example from an absolute tosser when discussing Prestia's well wishers:

I only have well wishes for Tom Stewart. I hope he still doesn’t feel like s**t! Great bloke

Other pearlers in that thread suggest we are so obsessed with Geelong and aggressive towards them because we are envious of their sustained success (What success? 3 flags in 60 years?), and are scared of dropping off into obscurity again.

The fact of the matter is, the only reason Geelong have been up and about in finals is because their members would abandon ship if they weren't consistently making finals. Look at 2016. They don't make finals in 2015 and their membership number dropped. They need finals and "success" to keep their members coming back. They would fail and their supporters would turn on the club if they genuinely bottomed out.

 

[Grockadoc]

Slobbo's take on the incident. And of course after these comments I make no change to my opinion that he is as useless a human that has ever existed.

View attachment 1434349

Piss off Robbo. If this happened in a grand final to Dangerfield or Selwood or Buddy or any other player sucked off by the media, and that team loses by less than a goal, everyone would be up in arms about it. Why should a team benefit from thuggery and ill discipline?

They should be off for as long as the other player is off. Simple.