Tyler Sonsie punch (VFL) - how many weeks? (poll added)

[sherb]

Please do keep bring up irrelevant stuff from 50 years ago...

Actually, it's quite relevant, because it shows that nothing much has changed at Richmond. Still belting players who aren't expecting it after all these years.........

 

[BF Tiger]

So you refer to an equally old incident in response?

Anyway, I was just talking about the supposed Richmond "persecution tax". Simply pointing out that it hasn't always been the case.

Any idea when the "persecution tax" on the poor old Tigers was brought in?

Good question that I don’t know the answer to. Do you think it was before or after Carlton last won a flag?

 

[tiger_tough]

Actually, it's quite relevant, because it shows that nothing much has changed at Richmond. Still belting players who aren't expecting it after all these years.........

Take it to the bay son.

 

[BF Tiger]

Actually, it's quite relevant, because it shows that nothing much has changed at Richmond. Still belting players who aren't expecting it after all these years.........

At least it is opposition players. Not sure Cain Ackland and Cameron Cloke were expecting whacks and kicks from “team-mate” Setanta.

 

[Generalissimo]

Richmond may get a hard time from the umps occasionally, but there's no doubt they get a very cushy run with the MRO and tribunal.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Three weeks is woefully inadequate when you crack the sads about a tackle and decide to just walk up to your opponent and belt him as a result.

Yes but of course 3 weeks would be perfectly adequate if you gave your opponent a smack in the mouth for any other reason. Wtf.

 

[sherb]

Take it to the bay son.

The "persecution tax" absurdity set the tone for this discussion.

 

[Hank Heavenly]

View attachment 1781315


Told you so, Meteoric Rise

Ooops, didn't age well did it!

Three weeks?

Congratulations Richmond fans you can officially now never complain about the umpires + MRO having it out for you.

Richmond may get a hard time from the umps occasionally, but there's no doubt they get a very cushy run with the MRO and tribunal.

So Mansell gets 3 weeks yet McCartin gets off with zero, same type of incident, same argument at tribunal but Richmond get looked after LOL

 

[Roby]

How so? I assume there was a favourable medical report. If there north player wasn't concussed and had no injuries then a impact rating of high rather than severe fits the bill. If they wanted to give him more weeks their MRO should've changed him with an ambiguous charge like serious misconduct where they can go beyond the matrix.

Not really. He's only a 2nd year player and has played good AFL level football ya tool.

You're happy for people to get punched this way?

This is disgusting.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Jokes aside, what are all you hanging judges giving a full force punch like McCartin on Black? And what are you giving that if the victim was actually concussed and or seriously injured?

Looks its not fault Sonsie's fault he got a light sentence (well done to his legal team for managing to pull it off) I suspect he can a lot of square ups/evening up acts from other players in the VFL (not just from North Melbourne) when he returns.

He has a massive target on his back now.

 

[tiger_tough]

You're happy for people to get punched this way?

This is disgusting.

Excuse me? I didn't say anything like that

All I said was that 3 weeks fits the VFL grading matrix for intentional conduct with high impact and high contact. If the bloke had no concussion or injury Sonsie couldn't get more than 3 weeks for a striking charge.

 

[tiger_tough]

Looks its not fault Sonsie's fault he got a light sentence (well done to his legal team for managing to pull it off) I suspect he can a lot of square ups/evening up acts from other players in the VFL (not just from North Melbourne) when he returns.

He has a massive target on his back now.

BS. Did that happen to Gaff? or any other player charged with striking in the last 20 years?

 

[Elmer_Judd]

BS. Did that happen to Gaff? or any other player charged with striking in the last 20 years?

There is a lot more that goes unnoticed in the VFL tbh.

Not saying I condone or support any type of retaliation/eye for an eye retribution against Sonsie, but I think it's a distinct possibility, esp if Richmond go far in the VFL finals.

 

[Roby]

Excuse me? I didn't say anything like that

All I said was that 3 weeks fits the VFL grading matrix for intentional conduct with high impact and high contact. If the bloke had no concussion or injury Sonsie couldn't get more than 3 weeks for a striking charge.

3 weeks means you're pretty much happy with it.

3 weeks isn't really much of a detterent.

Did you notice Sicily still goes for his tackles aggressively despite getting 3 weeks for his legal tackle.

 

[tiger_tough]

3 weeks means you're pretty much happy with it.

3 weeks isn't really much of a detterent.

Did you notice Sicily still goes for his tackles aggressively despite getting 3 weeks for his legal tackle.

What are you on about? I'm not on the tribunal panel, I didn't give him 3 weeks. In fact I said it's a bit light on.

Again, it came down to where the charge fits within the VFLs own matrix. Sicily was stiff, but that has nothing to do with this.

 

[tiger_tough]

VFL has appealed, unsurprisingly.

 

[Chadwiko]

 

[Meteoric Rise]

VFL has appealed, unsurprisingly.

Based on what I wonder?

Surely nobody can argue with a straight face that was severe impact.

Funny thing here. How often do the AFL or VFL appeal against their own Tribunal's decisions?

Bachar Houli. Richmond FC

Tyler Sonsie. Richmond FC

Can anyone recall any others? Anyone else see a pattern here?

 

[Chadwiko]

Can anyone recall any others? Anyone else see a pattern here?

Tell me you don't pay attention to anything other than Richmond stuff, without telling me.

 

[Roby]

What are you on about? I'm not on the tribunal panel, I didn't give him 3 weeks. In fact I said it's a bit light on.

Again, it came down to where the charge fits within the VFLs own matrix. Sicily was stiff, but that has nothing to do with this.

So you agree it should get more? Jesus, what are we even arguing here?

6 should be the minimum. If 6 was given the first time, then nobody would be in this thread at this moment arguing the number.

 

[JackFlash]

It's now going to be challenged and rightly so, if they had given him 6 weeks in the first place, the whole thing would be over, but hot on the heels of a bloke getting hit outside a pub, delivering a deliberate left hook was never going to be accepted as a 3-week suspension.

 

[sherb]

Based on what I wonder?

Surely nobody can argue with a straight face that was severe impact.

Funny thing here. How often do the AFL or VFL appeal against their own Tribunal's decisions?

Bachar Houli. Richmond FC

Tyler Sonsie. Richmond FC

Can anyone recall any others? Anyone else see a pattern here?

Yep. Richmond players getting manifestly inadequate sentences.

 

[Roby]

It's now going to be challenged and rightly so, if they had given him 6 weeks in the first place, the whole thing would be over, but hot on the heels of a bloke getting hit outside a pub, delivering a deliberate left hook was never going to be accepted as a 3-week suspension.

If you check my first post in this thread, there was very little doubt in my mind that this was going to be challenged.

 

[tiger_tough]

So you agree it should get more? Jesus, what are we even arguing here?

6 should be the minimum. If 6 was given the first time, then nobody would be in this thread at this moment arguing the number.

We're in discussion because you stupidly asked me if I was happy for people 'to be punched this way' because I said he must have got a favorable medical report....

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Based on what I wonder?

Surely nobody can argue with a straight face that was severe impact.

Funny thing here. How often do the AFL or VFL appeal against their own Tribunal's decisions?

Bachar Houli. Richmond FC

Tyler Sonsie. Richmond FC

Can anyone recall any others? Anyone else see a pattern here?

Oh boo hoo.

They were furious when Cripps got off at the Appeals board last year (which is an independent body with no AFL or club figures on board)

There is no damn long time AFL conspiracy against Richmond and Richmond players, despite what a couple of admirably passionate but one eyed naive fans like yourself believe)