Tommy Jonas 6 weeks suspension

[El_Scorcho]

It's very clear that the intentional/careless/whatever grading is absolute bullshit designed so the AFL can protect those it wants to. It's an absolute crock.

As for an assault charge, that WCE supporter on the main board is a ****ing lunatic and very few of his fellow supporters (or even schadenfreudeing Crows supporters) backed him up. You could charge assault with something like Leigh Matthews back in the day. Definitely with Dave Granger. But you'd have a very time hard even arguing the Vickery, Solomon or Bickley hits are a convictable assault, let alone something that happened in a marking contest.

 

[manureid]

It is 'Outrage of the Week' for all the moral compass types. They will soon move on to something else.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The May case also looked at intentional vs careless and it got willing between counsels. Looks like he got careless rather than intentional.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-19/may-guilty-fivegame-ban-for-sun-after-huge-bump
Despite pleading guilty to the charge, the defender's lawyer Tony Burns built a case that the impact of the bump had been made greater because Ablett pushed May towards the contest. AFL counsel Jeff Gleeson QC argued that the hit was "at the upper end of carelessness (and) you could mount an argument that it would comfortably fit into intentional". Gleeson recommended a base sanction of no less than five weeks and urged the Tribunal to consider "the frightening prospect of a very serious spinal injury" when reaching its penalty.

The hearing became tense when Burns objected to the suggestion that May's bump could be considered intentional. "That's the most unfair thing I've ever heard put in this Tribunal … I ask you to reject it," May's lawyer said.

Tensions finally boiled over when Gleeson QC raised a provision in the Tribunal guidelines that the jury is able to re-classify an offence if it does not agree with the MRP's findings. Gleeson QC said he wished to remind the jury that they could find May's conduct to be intentional, rather than careless, because of this provision. Burns says such a move would be "grossly unfair". "Let's all start moving the goal posts after we have submitted a guilty plea," he said.

Chairman Ross Howie told the jury of Wayne Henwood, Shane Wakelin and Stewart Loewe that it was a matter for them. They eventually took 10 minutes to reach their final penalty of five matches.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-19/may-guilty-fivegame-ban-for-sun-after-huge-bump

The live reporting was interesting showing the tension between the counsels.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-19/the-may-verdict
6:08pm: Burns is continuing to push the case that Ablett's push made the impact of the bump more severe. He says it should be a four-match penalty, with the bad record and early guilty plea cancelling each other out.
6:10pm: Burns is also asking that the jury, which can set whatever penalty it feels appropriate, communicate in their final penalty what weight they put on his early guilty plea and what weight they put on his bad record.
6:11pm: The Tribunal doesn't usually communicate whether a discount or bad-record loading has been applied. Chairman Ross Howie says the jury may "if they are inclined to".
6:13pm: Tony Burns has also alleged that the AFL Tribunal is a "consequence driven" Tribunal, which Jeff Gleeson QC has objected to.
6:17pm: Howie suggests May's guilty plea and bad record should offset each other.6:15pm: Ross Howie is now providing a brief summary for the jury. It's been agreed by both parties that the impact is severe and the conduct careless. Howie also says the potential to cause serious injury should be considered.
6:20pm: Jeff Gleeson is "reminding" the Tribunal that the jury can re-classify the charge if they feel it is appropriate. Therefore by extension, they can find May's bump was intentional and not careless.
6:22pm: Burns says such a move would be "grossly unfair". "Let's all start moving the goalposts after we have submitted a guilty plea," he says.
6:23pm: "I am here to assist the jury ... it is me performing my role properly. (Burns's) submission that i am changing the goal posts is incorrect." - Gleeson QC
6:25pm: "You now know and it's a matter for you," Howie tells the jury.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-19/the-may-verdict

The Tommy Jonas hearing live at
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-05-24/tom-jonas-faces-the-afl-tribunal-live-coverage

 

[charcolechaddy]

6 weeks in isolation is fair. He had other options, he chose to lead with his forearm/elbow.

But how this is judged intentional, yet May overrunning the ball to knock Martin flying is careless is baffling. Once again the tribunal make it up as they go along

This is where this thread should end.

 

[LFC2010]

The May case also looked at intentional vs careless and it got willing between counsels. Looks like he got careless rather than intentional.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-19/may-guilty-fivegame-ban-for-sun-after-huge-bump
Despite pleading guilty to the charge, the defender's lawyer Tony Burns built a case that the impact of the bump had been made greater because Ablett pushed May towards the contest. AFL counsel Jeff Gleeson QC argued that the hit was "at the upper end of carelessness (and) you could mount an argument that it would comfortably fit into intentional". Gleeson recommended a base sanction of no less than five weeks and urged the Tribunal to consider "the frightening prospect of a very serious spinal injury" when reaching its penalty.

The hearing became tense when Burns objected to the suggestion that May's bump could be considered intentional. "That's the most unfair thing I've ever heard put in this Tribunal … I ask you to reject it," May's lawyer said.

Tensions finally boiled over when Gleeson QC raised a provision in the Tribunal guidelines that the jury is able to re-classify an offence if it does not agree with the MRP's findings. Gleeson QC said he wished to remind the jury that they could find May's conduct to be intentional, rather than careless, because of this provision. Burns says such a move would be "grossly unfair". "Let's all start moving the goal posts after we have submitted a guilty plea," he said.

Chairman Ross Howie told the jury of Wayne Henwood, Shane Wakelin and Stewart Loewe that it was a matter for them. They eventually took 10 minutes to reach their final penalty of five matches.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-19/may-guilty-fivegame-ban-for-sun-after-huge-bump

The live reporting was interesting showing the tension between the counsels.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-19/the-may-verdict
6:08pm: Burns is continuing to push the case that Ablett's push made the impact of the bump more severe. He says it should be a four-match penalty, with the bad record and early guilty plea cancelling each other out.
6:10pm: Burns is also asking that the jury, which can set whatever penalty it feels appropriate, communicate in their final penalty what weight they put on his early guilty plea and what weight they put on his bad record.
6:11pm: The Tribunal doesn't usually communicate whether a discount or bad-record loading has been applied. Chairman Ross Howie says the jury may "if they are inclined to".
6:13pm: Tony Burns has also alleged that the AFL Tribunal is a "consequence driven" Tribunal, which Jeff Gleeson QC has objected to.
6:17pm: Howie suggests May's guilty plea and bad record should offset each other.6:15pm: Ross Howie is now providing a brief summary for the jury. It's been agreed by both parties that the impact is severe and the conduct careless. Howie also says the potential to cause serious injury should be considered.
6:20pm: Jeff Gleeson is "reminding" the Tribunal that the jury can re-classify the charge if they feel it is appropriate. Therefore by extension, they can find May's bump was intentional and not careless.
6:22pm: Burns says such a move would be "grossly unfair". "Let's all start moving the goalposts after we have submitted a guilty plea," he says.
6:23pm: "I am here to assist the jury ... it is me performing my role properly. (Burns's) submission that i am changing the goal posts is incorrect." - Gleeson QC
6:25pm: "You now know and it's a matter for you," Howie tells the jury.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-19/the-may-verdict

The Tommy Jonas hearing live at
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-05-24/tom-jonas-faces-the-afl-tribunal-live-coverage

lol's!

 

[Willsy10]

When is the last time a player copped 6 weeks or more?

 

[BornPort]

The problem with going toe to toe physically with the Hawks (outside of a GF where the rules are relaxed) is that they know how to work the system and stage harder than the US government on a moon landing.

Because they're all such good blokes and speak to the umpires during the game, retaliating will tend to get you on the wrong end of the free kick count and cheap free kick turnovers will kill you against the Hawks.

So they stage harder than not at all?

 

[El_Scorcho]

So they stage harder than not at all?

Open your eyes sheeple

Jet fuel can't melt steel beams

etc etc

 

[PAFC66]

They are legitimately asking for an assault charge on the eagles board? **** these franchise clubs supporters are all the same. Soft as shit.

A marking contest should never warrant an intentional action..

The AFL will be sued for million in a decade or so for all these concussion incidents, this is all this is about.

 

[Eddie Dingle]

They are legitimately asking for an assault charge on the eagles board? **** these franchise clubs supporters are all the same. Soft as shit.

A marking contest should never warrant an intentional action..

The AFL will be sued for million in a decade or so for all these concussion incidents, this is all this is about.

This sort of hysteria isn't unique to Eagles supporters or franchises. As someone pointed out earlier we would be just as furious if it was one of our players on the receiving end.

The inconsistencies of the tribunal and supporter groups are what shits me.

If TJ was playing for an AFL approved "love in club" he would have got good bloke discount and maybe got 3-4 max.

If this was the other way around Eagles supporters would be playing it down as much as they could and we would be at Gaff's gaff with pitchforks.

Everyone can go eat a phallus.

 

[charcolechaddy]

This sort of hysteria isn't unique to Eagles supporters or franchises. As someone pointed out earlier we would be just as furious if it was one of our players on the receiving end.

The inconsistencies of the tribunal and supporter groups are what shits me.

If TJ was playing for an AFL approved "love in club" he would have got good bloke discount and maybe got 3-4 max.

If this was the other way around Eagles supporters would be playing it down as much as they could and we would be at Gaff's gaff with pitchforks.

Everyone can go eat a phallus.

I agree (whats a phallus?)

 

[manureid]

I agree (whats a phallus?)

 

[Portmanteau]

steel beams

Strong onball brigade

 

[Willsy10]

Except it's not.

Certain players and clubs have an army of journos and legends who provide character references ad nauseum, ultimately softening the blow via the court of public opinion.

Other players and clubs get hung out to dry regardless.

Tom Jonas = the birth of the red card

Alex Rance = he was just a bit frustrated when he punched a guy lying on his tummy in the back of the head

Brilliant.

 

[bomberclifford]

 

[StuMan]

View attachment 250507

It took me a few seconds to notice the difference.

 

[bomberclifford]

It took me a few seconds to notice the difference.

He's got a bad case of the small face.

 

[Boss351]

 

[danger_to_walker]

I know Tommy, he plays hard and treads a fine line at times, but this was incredibly out of character. You could see as soon as he did it, his reaction was basically WTF have I just done? There was none of the usual aggression when the Eagles players came in to remonstrate, he didn't shove back, basically just took it. Looked really bad, and he's copped his whack, but I hope he's not remembered for it.

 

[Rexie J]

I know Tommy, he plays hard and treads a fine line at times, but this was incredibly out of character. You could see as soon as he did it, his reaction was basically WTF have I just done? There was none of the usual aggression when the Eagles players came in to remonstrate, he didn't shove back, basically just took it. Looked really bad, and he's copped his whack, but I hope he's not remembered for it.

Appreciated.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Today Tonight Episode 24/5/16 "Footy Cheap Shots"
http://www.todaytonightadelaide.com.au/stories/footy-send-off

 

[FPPF]

I know Tommy, he plays hard and treads a fine line at times, but this was incredibly out of character. You could see as soon as he did it, his reaction was basically WTF have I just done? There was none of the usual aggression when the Eagles players came in to remonstrate, he didn't shove back, basically just took it. Looked really bad, and he's copped his whack, but I hope he's not remembered for it.

Which fits in with what he said about immediately regretting it and feeling terrible.

But, this is what the umpires evidence was...

Umpire Shane McInerney gave evidence that the defender had been "melancholy" when told he was on report and didn't attempt to plead his innocence on the spot like others players.

Jonas didn't act like a Luke Hodge and act all "what did I do?"
So that means apparently he's guilty.

All non Victorian clubs should do training in how to be a thug on the field like Hodge among others, and then act all innocent like trying to break people's head is no big deal. Maybe then we will see balanced tribunal results.

 

[Doctor Feel]

HIS EYES ARE SO CLOSE TOGETHER!

 

[philreich]

Which fits in with what he said about immediately regretting it and feeling terrible.

But, this is what the umpires evidence was...


Jonas didn't act like a Luke Hodge and act all "what did I do?"
So that means apparently he's guilty.

All non Victorian clubs should do training in how to be a thug on the field like Hodge among others, and then act all innocent like trying to break people's head is no big deal. Maybe then we will see balanced tribunal results.

Seeing the words balanced and tribunal in the same sentence seems odd - it's like referring to government intelligence.

 

[javaguice]

HIS EYES ARE SO CLOSE TOGETHER!

His mono starting to work it's way down his nose. He is such a discusting cretin.

Side note, would be interesting to see how many weeks Hodge would have got. 3-4 at a guess.