- Jan 30, 2016
- 1,504
- 2,190
- AFL Club
- GWS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That would be the hope for Toby. Camera angles don't always tell the whole story. Fingers crossed he really didn't actually come into contact.Where’s the contact?
And if there was contact, why didn’t the Umpire immediately put him on report?
At no point is the umpire jolted by perceived contact.
It’s a down the ground long camera lense that does not show the distance between Toby and the Umpire.
View attachment 1219794
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
This is how Michael Christian and the MRO adjudicated the same incident for the Lions.
Toby receives the same treatment and pays $1,500.
Or is there an integrity problem at the MRO?
Equal Justice or Cats/Hocking justice?
View attachment 1219768
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Looks like Pendlebury is on board with this take
Where’s the contact?
And if there was contact, why didn’t the Umpire immediately put him on report?
At no point is the umpire jolted by perceived contact.
It’s a down the ground long camera lense that does not show the distance between Toby and the Umpire.
View attachment 1219794
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
The only exception is if the umpire comes forward and says he wasn't contacted - he just moves in anticipation and it looks like contact as a result. But I'm not going to pretend that's what I think happened - it's trying to see what you want to believe, like a second shooter in the Zapruder film.You have to be suspended for that. You just have to be.
Pretty clearly shows the "umpire jolted".
Watching the replay I did wonder why he wasn't put on report though.
You have to be suspended for that. You just have to be.
Will be staggered if he doesn't get a week. I'd like to know what the conversation was about. You can almost read his lips.
The only exception is if the umpire comes forward and says he wasn't contacted - he just moves in anticipation and it looks like contact as a result. But I'm not going to pretend that's what I think happened - it's trying to see what you want to believe, like a second shooter in the Zapruder film.
I'm shocked you don't believe there was a shooter on the grassy knoll.The only exception is if the umpire comes forward and says he wasn't contacted - he just moves in anticipation and it looks like contact as a result. But I'm not going to pretend that's what I think happened - it's trying to see what you want to believe, like a second shooter in the Zapruder film.
The footage makes it more clear than not that he was contacted. Given the umpire is an employee of the AFL I have no doubt he will be asked what happened and that will be the basis for any charge.The umpire hasn’t said he was contacted.
So on the contrary, the umpire would have to come forward and say he was contacted.
Although there is the Toby tax, so I agree he is always ‘presumed guilty’ by the VFL media.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
I'm shocked you don't believe there was a shooter on the grassy knoll.
Conspiracy to commit the charge of contact with an umpire. OR Attempted contact with an umpire.Obviously its Toby so he will be charged with “It looked like he made contact so he’s guilty” and still get 6 weeks.