MRP / Trib. Yeo offered a week

[The Falcon Strike]

Need to challenge that - use the ump as evidence

 

[RookiePick]

Stays at 1 week if we challenge and fail?

 

[Eagle87]

Well done Watson and C7!

 

[bassmanx]

That's unfortunate ... Challenge!

 

[Bender_]

*en turd.

 

[WCEbrody]

What a joke, surely we'll challenge it ?

I can't help but feel the media has played a massive part in something that shouldn't even have been looked at in the first place.

 

[bodazoka]

Needs a challenge!

 

[steve hucka]

It's bloody wrong !!!!

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Disgrace, would love to see how they argue that. So much evidence for them if they challenge, just do it.

 

[ep2018]

Stays at 1 week if we challenge and fail?

2 weeks I think if we lose, as obvious he hasn't pled guilty

 

[West Coast Weasel]

Bloody hell! Talk about a storm in a tea cup. We'd better contest it

 

[HoneyBadger35]

"It's in the contest, there was no second action." There's your defence.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Clubs need to challenge more often - otherwise the MRP just keep trying to push and push the boundaries

As the ump said - it was in the contest

 

[nameless]

Challenges are so rare these days.

Terrible decision - don't even bother spoiling any more...

 

[twce13]

That's s**t. Challenge

 

[DickDunn]

Elliot Yeo, West Coast, has been charged with charged with striking Jimmy Webster, St Kilda, during the second quarter of the round eight match between West Coast and St Kilda, played at Etihad Stadium on Saturday May 23, 2015.

In summary, he can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the St Kilda Football Club, it was the view of the panel the incident should be classified as careless conduct with medium impact to the head. The offence was classified as a two-match sanction. The player has no applicable bad record. An early plea can reduce the penalty to a one-match sanction.

 

[Eagle87]

They've pinged him for a strike. The same offence, with less severity, as you'd get for just punching a bloke randomly.

If that's a strike, they are trying to do to the spoil what they've done to the bump. Spoil but don't make incidental high contact. Which given the location of the ball is seriously problematic

 

[Bender_]

"It's in the contest, there was no second action." There's your defence.

What annoys me even more is that fat sack of s**t Steven trying to rub his head on Yeo.

 

[Eagle87]

We won't challenge because we risk 2. That's the genius of the system ...

 

[SpaceClef]

Medium impact? It was basically all in the wrist.

That's ******* bullshit

 

[94_Eagles]

He'll get off

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Striking, was better off belting someone. He left his feet at an appropriate time to spoil, he attempted a spoil before the mark had been completed, he arrived fractionally late and made contact to the head, it's a 50 at most. It was all one action, umpire got it spot on (apart from not giving a 50). Players will start going for high tackles on players who've ducked soon if this is the letter of the law way they're going to adjudicate.

 

[ndot]

He'll get off

not if we don't challenge it, which we won't

 

[placebo]

Absolutely horrible decision.

 

[RookiePick]

I think we'll have to cop it on the chin as the risk of a failed chalenge will be too unpalatable.

Any of those other hits from the weekend get looked at? Mc(Bra)Veigh from the Swans for example...