Play Nice Was that Gaffs last game for WC?

[Cuzz09]

Whats the point of this tribunal? He hit him. Give him a number of games

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Malifice]

It’ll be for nothing, he’s getting more than 5. So much for mitigation

Of course he gets more than 5 weeks.

What else do you want him to do? Sit there and say nothing while the AFL Counsel argues it was a front on king hit, after which Gaff laughed about it with his mates?

He gets a chance to mitigate the sentence, and explain what happened. Just like anyone else.

Otherwise, why the **** is he even there?

 

[DivideandMultiply]

More than 5 weeks could 10 or 15, Gaff would sure as hell to get it down
So much for mitigation

Between 8 and 12.

 

[largebus]

Between 8 and 12.

I dunno mate it could be 30 years

 

[Sir_Loin]

More than 5 weeks could 10 or 15, Gaff would sure as hell to get it down
So much for mitigation

The AFL will err on the lower side, they always do. Any mitigation will be negligible and inconsequential.

 

[PurpleSnowman]

Stomach.... no wait... chest... no wait it was a push. No wait it was the victim's fault for moving.

What an absolute germ Gaff is.

 

[kaiserchief13]

What if he got Brayshaw in the throat?

And no injury? Gaff probably gets a week, maybe not even. That's what the AFL has created - the result is more important than the action. Just ban all punching and this would never have occurred, as well as other incidents previously as well

 

[Underarm]

Gaff's defence is doing a number on his reputation going forward.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

I dunno mate it could be 30 years

There are some really weird units on sports forums.

 

[Malifice]

Cross examination:

“You square yourself, you extend your arm backwards, you swing as hard as you could and extend yourself in a rising motion. You maintain you didn’t swing as hard as you could?” Gleeson asks.

That's how you cross examine ladies and gents. Basically telling the Tribunal (via a question to Gaff) something that amounts to: 'You upper cutted him directly on the chin as hard as you could didnt you, and now you're saying it wasnt that hard'

Even though Gaff denied it, the tribunal will be left with the impression that Gaff wound up and swung as hard as he could.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Of course he gets more than 5 weeks.

What else do you want him to do? Sit there and say nothing while the AFL Counsel argues it was a front on king hit, after which Gaff laughed about it with his mates?

He gets a chance to mitigate the sentence, and explain what happened. Just like anyone else.

Otherwise, why the **** is he even there?

You’re clearly not reading what I’m posting. He has every right to turn up and plead his case. I’m saying it’s not going to have an impact in mitigating a reduction in the sanction given the nature and grading of the offence. He’d have been better sticking to his record as a factor in getting a reduced sanction. Get it?

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Stomach.... no wait... chest... no wait it was a push. No wait it was the victim's fault for moving.

What an absolute germ Gaff is.

Use your main account.

 

[largebus]

References from Simmo, Woosha and Ploddus

 

[Milanista28]

Woosha said he's a good bloke. He's coming to us. **** yes!!

 

[Tony Harrison]

Whats the point of this tribunal? He hit him. Give him a number of games

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Lawyers acting important as they rake in the big bucks.

 

[Jobe Watson]

This is like This Is Your Life.

Have we heard from his high school girlfriend yet?

 

[Malifice]

You’re clearly not reading what I’m posting. He has every right to turn up and plead his case. I’m saying it’s not going to have an impact in mitigating a reduction

Then what the **** is the point of him attending?

And why is he even talking at the moment for? Why is he being cross examined and giving evidence?

He's already admitted the charge!

Mate, youre so wrong it isnt funny.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Cross examination:

“You square yourself, you extend your arm backwards, you swing as hard as you could and extend yourself in a rising motion. You maintain you didn’t swing as hard as you could?” Gleeson asks.

That's how you cross examine ladies and gents. Basically telling the Tribunal (via a question to Gaff) something that amounts to: 'You upper cutted him directly on the chin as hard as you could didnt you, and now you're saying it wasnt that hard'

Even though Gaff denied it, the tribunal will be left with the impression that Gaff wound up and swung as hard as he could.

I genuinely don't like Gleeson.

His job isn't to be a prosecutor, and he absolutely mauls players. The Gaff thing, I understand, but he has pulled off some absolute stitchups before.

 

[Dan]

The amount of character references this guy is getting is cringe as ****.

 

[Magus]

You can use video evidence, biomechanical experts etc to help figure it out but yes in the end you cannot really know for certain what the intentions of a player are at the time.

I can believe one thing and Freo supporters will believe another. Both can be justified by the available physical evidence.

I wish theyd ask him why he ran away after accidently pushing him too hard in the face obviously by accident.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

This is like This Is Your Life.

Have we heard from his high school girlfriend yet?

It always is.

 

[Malifice]

Lawyers acting important as they rake in the big bucks.

You're free to go to Law school if you want.

 

[Firestarter]

The amount of character references this guy is getting is cringe as ****.

I'm wondering why it's relevant if the entire WCE coaching panel says he's a good fella.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

The amount of character references this guy is getting is cringe as ****.

I am still shocked that no one seems to have watched a tribunal appearance before.

 

[Tony Harrison]

You're free to go to Law school if you want.

Looks like I offended the lawyer.