Play Nice Was that Gaffs last game for WC?

[kranky al]

If Gaff has good people around him they’ll instruct him to do the following:

Explain himself (intent v actual)
Enter his previous good record
An apology and acceptance of whatever punishment is handed down

Beyond that he shouldn’t say a thing. There are no mitigating circumstances for what happened.

Thats pretty much exactly what id expect - no more - no less.

 

[Scotland]

If Gaff has good people around him they’ll instruct him to do the following:

Explain himself (intent v actual)
Enter his previous good record
An apology and acceptance of whatever punishment is handed down

Beyond that he shouldn’t say a thing. There are no mitigating circumstances for what happened.

Agreed.

Any kind of 'they started it' as a defence would be embarrassing.

'This is what happened, it's never happened before, I won't do it again, I'm sorry, I'll accept the tribunal's decision.' Should be a short hearing.

 

[BG__]

I can't wait for the suspension to be handed down so people can finally start moving on. There will be a bit of debate in the 24hrs after on if the suspension was correct, but after that hopefully everyone can start focusing on the upcoming round of footy. Sick of the million Foxfooty and Channel 7 articles/stories coming out every 30min on the topic.

 

[Mcarcherey]

OK explain the relevance to me. Does it make him more or less of a good bloke in your view? Is that it?

If he intended to hit the chest, in your words, he is less of a shit bloke (than if he intended to hit the face).

 

[Scotland]

What's the cut off point for a suspension to be declared 'manifestly inadequate' by Gerard Whateley?

 

[salim malik]

He wasnt trying to spin that at all, christ some poeple here are impossible to reason with.

Why is it not OK for Nisbett or whatever his name is to be wrong about a golf game, I highly doubt he had first hand knowledge of that - why would someone of his level know details like that? Its more likely that he was misinformed by his team there.

That doesn't mean he came out to intentionally tell some porkie pies and spin some crap story to make everyone ease up.

Yet at the same time, everyone is seemingly OK with Freo trotting out the "he's only 18" line, the "100m off the ball" crap.

The idea that you think that the CEO of a football club came out and intentionally told a lie about the most mundane detail of this whole thing is ridiculous.

I have not seen a single person here there or anywhere say "Oh its ok that he hit him, they're mates", it is literally relevant to nothing.

You would think that an important fact like they are mates and played golf together would be checked by the club before Nisbett walzted that little gem out at his presser. Youre niave or stupid to think that golf story wasnt wheeled out to help Gaff,s case.

 

[SloppyJoe]

If Gaff has good people around him they’ll instruct him to do the following:

Explain himself (intent v actual)
Enter his previous good record
An apology and acceptance of whatever punishment is handed down

Beyond that he shouldn’t say a thing. There are no mitigating circumstances for what happened.

But the first 2 things you listed are mitigating circumstances.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Agreed.

Any kind of 'they started it' as a defence would be embarrassing.

'This is what happened, it's never happened before, I won't do it again, I'm sorry, I'll accept the tribunal's decision.' Should be a short hearing.

Hope that’s all that happens. I also hope the AFL dont **** this up and it ends up being appealed as “manifestly inadequate”. He just needs to rock up, cop his licks and move on. System has to do its job now and let everyone move on. Big test for the AFL.

 

[Sir_Loin]

But the first 2 things you listed are mitigating circumstances.

No they’re not. It’s his explanation of what happened which is his right. It’s more of a chance for him to speak to the public through this forum than anything else. If he does get a discount it’ll be negligible if anything.

 

[Scotland]

Hope that’s all that happens. I also hope the AFL dont **** this up and it ends up being appealed as “manifestly inadequate”. He just needs to rock up, cop his licks and move on. System has to do its job now and let everyone move on. Big test for the AFL.

If they hand out an extreme penalty I can see the club appealing. I mean if Bugg gets 6 and Cameron 5 and the tribunal manages to come up with 12 for Gaff, the club has every right to question how they came to that decision. Gaff will just sit there like a stunned mullet regardless.

 

[Belnakor]

I take Angus suggestions anything less than 7 weeks is unacceptable.

Angus also liked the idea of Gaff having to sit out part of next year too.

I think Whately might be on the money.

 

[Freoforever86]

Lachie Neale retweeted Pav's tweet. Neale has Brayshaw living with him and he is currently looking after him. Now confirmed by other reporters for AFL. They are not friends and there was no golf game.

Angus confirmed on a podcast too. He’s filthy about the whole thing. Very interesting perspective. Talks a bit about Hamish too

 

[zero]

No.
The classification of intentional is simply whether Gaff intended to punch/strike Brayshaw.
It's not a case of whether Gaff intended to strike Brayshaw in the mouth, break his jaw and crack 4 teeth. The classification of conduct is simply careless or intentional and this was obviously an intentional effort by Gaff to hit Brayshaw. Where he hit him is not factored in to the classification of conduct. That factors in to the classification of contact ... which in this case is also clearly high.

this seems correct, as far as the tribunal classifications are concerned, it will certainly be intentional.

gaff will argue that in front of the tribunal, but its impossible to see how it could possible end up as a lower grading.

however morally speaking it changes things quite considerably. if it was a mistake to hit him in the face (and theres little to suggest it wasnt), then comparisons to hall-staker are a long way off.

cameron went for 5 weeks for an intentional, high contact and severe hit that left harris andrews in medical trouble.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-06-26/cameron-cops-fivegame-ban-for-intentional-hit

i dont see why it would be much different to that

 

[Chuckie357]

Didn’t see it but read an article about a channel 7 interview with Adam Simpson by big nosed basil. My hat is off to the producer or whoever put the question in about the eagles having an arrogance problem

 

[Scotland]

Mitigating circumstances would be something like 'he hit me first, it was self defence' or 'he said something about my tattoo'. Helping old ladies cross the street and rescuing kittens from trees isn't the same.

 

[Sir_Loin]

If they hand out an extreme penalty I can see the club appealing. I mean if Bugg gets 6 and Cameron 5 and the tribunal manages to come up with 12 for Gaff, the club has every right to question how they came to that decision. Gaff will just sit there like a stunned mullet regardless.

I dont think it’ll be 12. I’d be shocked if he was to miss that many games. 8 feels about right.

 

[Belnakor]

You would think that an important fact like they are mates and played golf together would be checked by the club before Nisbett walzted that little gem out at his presser. Youre niave or stupid to think that golf story wasnt wheeled out to help Gaff,s case.

I think Nisbett knew it was bullshit and was intending to be like "my bad - wrong brother".

I don't know why character witnesses are even relevant for a case like this. He smashed in the face of an 18 year old rookie. What ever his previous "character" was like, we all know he is a dog with no character.

 

[Belnakor]

If they hand out an extreme penalty I can see the club appealing. I mean if Bugg gets 6 and Cameron 5 and the tribunal manages to come up with 12 for Gaff, the club has every right to question how they came to that decision. Gaff will just sit there like a stunned mullet regardless.

The closest incident is Barry Hall who got 10 (and then the system got him back to 7).

Staker played 2 weeks later, Brayshaw would be out for 4-5 weeks minimum. 12 seems right to me.

 

[Peel67skin]

I dont think it’ll be 12. I’d be shocked if he was to miss that many games. 8 feels about right.

I think 10 but good record decrease to 8 .

 

[Belnakor]

What's the cut off point for a suspension to be declared 'manifestly inadequate' by Gerard Whateley?

IF the AFL somehow contrive to give him less than 7 Whateley is going to lose his shit.

 

[Belnakor]

I think 10 but good record decrease to 8 .

good record isn't applied to tribunal.

 

[Darcy 2 Fyfe]

Yeh Brayshaw boys definitely not happy Mr Nisbett. Confirms the golf story is a lie also-

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-08-07/podcast-emotional-angus-on-brother-gaff-hit

 

[Carl Spackler]

If they hand out an extreme penalty I can see the club appealing. I mean if Bugg gets 6 and Cameron 5 and the tribunal manages to come up with 12 for Gaff, the club has every right to question how they came to that decision. Gaff will just sit there like a stunned mullet regardless.

The degree of injury for was significantly less, Mills missing one game and Andrews two. At least the Andrews injury was on ball, as cheap and dangerous as it was. If the injury in the Bugg incident had been as severe as this one (instead of a minor concussion and sore jaw) then I reckon Bugg would have been in similarly big trouble. He's fortunate that is cheap, off the ball blind-side punch didn't bust out teeth and put Mills on a four-week liquid diet.

 

[SloppyJoe]

Mitigating circumstances would be something like 'he hit me first, it was self defence' or 'he said something about my tattoo'. Helping old ladies cross the street and rescuing kittens from trees isn't the same.

I disagree the definition is that narrow, but no point dwelling on it as the terminology doesn't matter. He'll answer the questions put to him and that'll be it.

 

[BG__]

If the whole 'good character and clean previous record' is deemed irrelevant by people, then i think people need to stop trying to bring up the '18 year old rookie' thing as that seems pretty irrelevant too. I mean, if Gaff had struck David Mundy i don't think it makes any difference to the situation, at the end of the day he struck a player.