We should appeal!!!!

[itsintheblood]

Greg Miller if you're reading these boards, you MUST appeal Hally's penalty. It's a disgrace.

 

[jezza]

Greg Miller on SEN has just said we will accept the 2 weeks, very disappointing.

 

[roo_stew]

Greg Miller on SEN has just said we will accept the 2 weeks, very disappointing.

I'm not sure why its that disappointing really. He simply got caught biffing someone in the face. No way you can expect to get off that regardless of how hard the hit was. What are his priors?

 

[itsintheblood]

Greg Miller on SEN has just said we will accept the 2 weeks, very disappointing.

That's weak as pi$$. That is the worst decision i've seen for a long time. Judd gets one week for nearly knocking a guy's head off with an elbow and Hall gets 2 for that. Does he have any priors??

 

[evo]

I reckon we should've appealed it too.It's ridiculous that Hall should get the same amount as the Rivers 1.

One week is more than adequate>In fact I reckon it should've just been a free.

I can't remember the last time we appealed a tribunal finding.It seems like some other clubs appeal every time.What have we got to lose Greg?

 

[jezza]

I'm not sure why its that disappointing really. He simply got caught biffing someone in the face. No way you can expect to get off that regardless of how hard the hit was. What are his priors?

Not sure about his priors.

Disappointing to me because there were some really genuine grounds for an appeal.

1. The contact was minimal
2. It was not a direct strike at the head, it was more a swipe down the face, albeit with a closed fist. Rivers got 2 for a direct hit to the head, surely that is worse?
3. The umpire only played a free, no report laid, why?
4. The player had been previously concussed in the game so the fact he went down so easily should not be taken into account (as I assume it has been in offering 2 weeks)

 

[Weaver]

1. Minimal contact (1 point)
2. Behind play (2 points)
3. High Contact (2 points)
4. Reckless (2 points)

What exactly are we meant to appeal. It is already down as minimal contact. Could maybe get Reckless down to negligent but it won't help much, still two weeks worth of points.

 

[roo_stew]

1. Minimal contact (1 point)
2. Behind play (2 points)
3. High Contact (2 points)
4. Reckless (2 points)

What exactly are we meant to appeal. It is already down as minimal contact. Could maybe get Reckless down to negligent but it won't help much, still two weeks worth of points.

Couldnt agree more...my point exactly from earlier in the thread. He got caught...********e happens

 

[itsintheblood]

1. Minimal contact (1 point)
2. Behind play (2 points)
3. High Contact (2 points)
4. Reckless (2 points)

What exactly are we meant to appeal. It is already down as minimal contact. Could maybe get Reckless down to negligent but it won't help much, still two weeks worth of points.

So give us Judd's and rivers then.

 

[Weaver]

So give us Judd's and rivers then.

Judd was
Medium Impact
In Play
Negligent Contact
High Contact.

Added up to 225 points, minus 25% deduction = 168.75. 100 points equals 1 week, because he is under 200 he gets 1 week. 68.75 points carried over to next time.

Hall was 325 points, minus 25% deduction = 244 points. A two week ban.

Rivers got
Reckless contact (2 points)
Low impact (1 point)
Behind play (2 points)
High contact (2 points)

Adds up to 325 points, cop the plea, two week ban.

 

[Big Punt]

1. Minimal contact (1 point)
2. Behind play (2 points)
3. High Contact (2 points)
4. Reckless (2 points)

What exactly are we meant to appeal. It is already down as minimal contact. Could maybe get Reckless down to negligent but it won't help much, still two weeks worth of points.

Exactly. It was a mathematical decision. Not mathematically possible to get it down to one match bar a miracle.

In fact, if the tribunal agreed with each of the criteria as judged by the Match Review Panel then Ray gets three weeks (325 points). Too much of a risk.

 

[Crumden]

1. Minimal contact (1 point)
2. Behind play (2 points)
3. High Contact (2 points)
4. Reckless (2 points)

What exactly are we meant to appeal. It is already down as minimal contact. Could maybe get Reckless down to negligent but it won't help much, still two weeks worth of points.

Should have hit him in the jatz crackers instead and avoided the two points for high contact!

 

[Captain_Brown_7]

Rivers got
Reckless contact (2 points)
Low impact (1 point)
Behind play (2 points)
High contact (2 points)

Adds up to 325 points, cop the plea, two week ban.

How the hell do you punch someone in the head, make them bleed and it is classified as 'low impact'???

Can somebody PPLLLEEEAASSSE explain????

 

[sante]

We didnt appeal

 

[droppuntkick23]

He got a week in the VFL about a month ago.Striking I do beleive, so second offence this year , not good !
AFL are pretty strick about any contact to the face and so they should be.
Thats why Tambling got a free kick against him when he put his arm in the face of a collingwood player on sunday.It works both ways.