One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on May 05, 2014, 03:28:31 PM
-
Brett Deledio can accept one game for striking Matthew Stokes.
Matt McDonough cleared contact Steve Johnson.Both players were attempting to take possession & action by McDonough was not a bumping action.
Matthew Stokes can accept one game for striking Steven Morris.
https://twitter.com/AFL_PKeane
Edit: Tribunal downgraded the charge to reckless conduct so that's a just a reprimand. Lids is free to play against Melbourne.
-
Great!! :banghead
-
Would like to see footage
-
Brett Deledio, Richmond, has been charged with a Level Three Striking Offence (225 demerit points, two-match sanction) for striking Matthew Stokes, Geelong Cats, during the second quarter of the Round Seven match between Richmond and the Geelong Cats, played at the MCG on Sunday May 4, 2014.
In summary, due to a six-year good record, his two-match sanction can be reduced to a one-game penalty with an early plea.
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Geelong Cats Football Club, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Three Offence, drawing 225 demerit points and a two-match sanction. He has an existing six-year good record, reducing the penalty by 25 per cent 168.75 points and a one-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 126.56 demerit points and a one-match sanction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact between the Geelong Cats’ Steve Johnson and Richmond’s Matt McDonough from the first quarter of Sunday’s match was assessed. Johnson and Richmond’s Bachar Houli had been contesting the ball on the wing area and the ball had come loose. Johnson had won front position over Houli when McDonough came in to contest the ball in a bid win to possession. A head clash occurred between McDonough and Johnson. It was the view of the panel that both players were attempting to take possession of the ball and the action by McDonough was not a bumping action as he tried to win the contest and that therefore the head clash was deemed accidental. No further action was taken.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-05/mrp-full-statement-round-seven
-
Would like to see footage
X2........WTF!!!!!!!!!
-
lol where's the footage AFL muppets? 2 weeks even haha
-
No idea what incident they are talking about lol but welcome to the weekly MRP russian roulette ::). It's a joke!
Lids has nothing to lose fighting the charge at the tribunal. If it's incidental contact in the wet conditions then fight it all the way to get off. Otherwise, at least aim to get the 'intentional' charge downgraded to 'reckless'. If successful, Lids would then only end up with a reprimand and be able to play against Melbourne.
-
No idea what incident they are talking about lol but welcome to the weekly MRP russian roulette ::). It's a joke!
Lids has nothing to lose fighting the charge at the tribunal. If it's incidental contact in the wet conditions then fight it all the way to get off. Otherwise, at least aim to get the 'intentional' charge downgraded to 'reckless'. If successful, Lids would then only end up with a reprimand and be able to play against Melbourne.
How do you know he has nothing to lose? and where's the footage? Don't tell me there isn't any footage lol
-
Must admit I can't remember seeing it on TV. The TV stations usually love highlighting these things over and over and over again too. :whistle
-
No idea what incident they are talking about lol but welcome to the weekly MRP russian roulette ::). It's a joke!
Lids has nothing to lose fighting the charge at the tribunal. If it's incidental contact in the wet conditions then fight it all the way to get off. Otherwise, at least aim to get the 'intentional' charge downgraded to 'reckless'. If successful, Lids would then only end up with a reprimand and be able to play against Melbourne.
How do you know he has nothing to lose? and where's the footage? Don't tell me there isn't any footage lol
Not taking the early plea won't cost him any more weeks. It's one week whether he takes the early plea or not. So he's got nothing to lose challenging this at the tribunal.
"... 168.75 points and a one-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 126.56 demerit points and a one-match sanction."
-
No idea what incident they are talking about lol but welcome to the weekly MRP russian roulette ::). It's a joke!
Lids has nothing to lose fighting the charge at the tribunal. If it's incidental contact in the wet conditions then fight it all the way to get off. Otherwise, at least aim to get the 'intentional' charge downgraded to 'reckless'. If successful, Lids would then only end up with a reprimand and be able to play against Melbourne.
How do you know he has nothing to lose? and where's the footage? Don't tell me there isn't any footage lol
Not taking the early plea won't cost him any more weeks. It's one week whether he takes the early plea or not. So he's got nothing to lose challenging this at the tribunal.
"... 168.75 points and a one-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 126.56 demerit points and a one-match sanction."
We'll then we'd be silly not challenge it. Won't get off because the map are *%#^ but
-
No idea what incident they are talking about lol but welcome to the weekly MRP russian roulette ::). It's a joke!
Lids has nothing to lose fighting the charge at the tribunal. If it's incidental contact in the wet conditions then fight it all the way to get off. Otherwise, at least aim to get the 'intentional' charge downgraded to 'reckless'. If successful, Lids would then only end up with a reprimand and be able to play against Melbourne.
This is the incident l mentioned to you during the game l 1st thought lids dropped the player with a perfect punch & then Newman was on top of the Geelong player very quickly. Then l thought maybe it was Newman & in the same incident Morris had Stokes
-
geez Louise
-
No idea what incident they are talking about lol but welcome to the weekly MRP russian roulette ::). It's a joke!
Lids has nothing to lose fighting the charge at the tribunal. If it's incidental contact in the wet conditions then fight it all the way to get off. Otherwise, at least aim to get the 'intentional' charge downgraded to 'reckless'. If successful, Lids would then only end up with a reprimand and be able to play against Melbourne.
This is the incident l mentioned to you during the game l 1st thought lids dropped the player with a perfect punch & then Newman was on top of the Geelong player very quickly. Then l thought maybe it was Newman & in the same incident Morris had Stokes
I could be wrong but what I saw/remember in that incident was Taylor Hunt trash talking Lids (he was tagging Lids at that stage) after the goal and then Newy and I think Duncan came in and Newy dumped Duncan down on the ground. I don't remember Stokes being anywhere need Lids in that incident but I could be wrong.
Like everyone here I'm waiting for the footage of what Lids has allegedly done. Dermie on SEN just before said Lids was very lucky to get just a week but didn't mention or elaborate what actually happened.
-
No idea what incident they are talking about lol but welcome to the weekly MRP russian roulette ::). It's a joke!
Lids has nothing to lose fighting the charge at the tribunal. If it's incidental contact in the wet conditions then fight it all the way to get off. Otherwise, at least aim to get the 'intentional' charge downgraded to 'reckless'. If successful, Lids would then only end up with a reprimand and be able to play against Melbourne.
This is the incident l mentioned to you during the game l 1st thought lids dropped the player with a perfect punch & then Newman was on top of the Geelong player very quickly. Then l thought maybe it was Newman & in the same incident Morris had Stokes
Bullwackers
-
Must admit I can't remember seeing it on TV. The TV stations usually love highlighting these things over and over and over again too. :whistle
if you look in the game topic you will see where l posted it ;D
-
Richmond players always get suspended by the MRP, they hate us. Bet Stokes get overlooked
-
The incident was just on now on fox sport replay its at 18.10 to go 2nd quarter
-
Richmond players always get suspended by the MRP, they hate us. Bet Stokes get overlooked
Stokes got a week for striking Morris.
-
The incident was just on now on fox sport replay its at 18.10 to go 2nd quarter
Yer just saw it too. There must be better footage than they just showed otherwise all you see is a scuffle in which a Lids gets a free kick, taken by Vickory in the middle of the ground.
-
Here's the footage of when it happened apparently.
http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-05-04/tempers-flare-at-the-g
Look at the 0.07 sec mark in the video. BF claiming "apparently he threw an elbow into stokes face that started the melee".
-
The footage is on the RFC website. It was taken from high up. Occurs very quickly and he is pushed into Stokes too.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/round-7-deledio-striking-charge
-
lol he gets rag dolled by a few players, gets a free kick and is suspended. dat gud smart :thumbsup
-
So Lids get the free kick for what exactly. high contact or whatever they did to him he reacted very sharp & quick cause Newman was on top of the player very quick & others got into it ;D just what l like to see a biff match. Hope this starts a ongoing rumble
-
The footage is on the RFC website. It was taken from high up. Occurs very quickly and he is pushed into Stokes too.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/round-7-deledio-striking-charge
There was alot better footage on the TV
-
The footage is on the RFC website. It was taken from high up. Occurs very quickly and he is pushed into Stokes too.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/round-7-deledio-striking-charge
This is the actual footage the used to suspend him? Absolute joke if that's the case. Both of the vids show nothing
-
I would be fighting that, footage shows nothing. Act like a big club Tigers and stand up for one of your players. We ask the players to be brave, I hope the club is. F+^king joke the whole system!
-
The footage is on the RFC website. It was taken from high up. Occurs very quickly and he is pushed into Stokes too.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/round-7-deledio-striking-charge
There was alot better footage on the TV
The footage from tv is the same
-
Sounds as though Geelongs medical report has had an influence on the decision. Bunch of wankers, we should fight it, that footage is crap
-
Just doesnt make sense. :huh
You cant see poot from that angle.
The afl probably wants to Melbourne to win at all costs in round 9
-
l just rewind the live replay on foxsports & the geelong player crashes into them & 2 geelong players go down. Deledio should contest it l cant see how them pricks get a report out of that & not report Stokes or Morris
-
:birthday
I dont mind a bit of biffo.
If that what it takes to make us a more hardened team im all for it.
Im sick of being the softest team in the league. Weve been the pansy team for too long.
I'd like to see someone go in to deck the tagger and keep on decking him until he learns not to mess with our captain.
I reckon this mob needs to harden up and start picking fights & not letting teams like geelong push 'em around anymore.
It bloody makes me sick!!! :chuck
Well done Deledio for leading the way. :clapping :clapping :clapping
If we are going to lose then lose swinging!!!!
Maybe we can at least be feared again even if its for being a bunch of hard arses.
-
:birthday
I dont mind a bit of biffo.
If that what it takes to make us a more hardened team im all for it.
Im sick of being the softest team in the league. Weve been the pansy team for too long.
I'd like to see someone go in to deck the tagger and keep on decking him until he learns not to mess with our captain.
I reckon this mob needs to harden up and start picking fights & not letting teams like geelong push 'em around anymore.
It bloody makes me sick!!! :chuck
Well done Deledio for leading the way. :clapping :clapping :clapping
If we are going to lose then lose swinging!!!!
Maybe we can at least be feared again even if its for being a bunch of hard arses.
:clapping :clapping :clapping
-
The footage is on the RFC website. It was taken from high up. Occurs very quickly and he is pushed into Stokes too.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/round-7-deledio-striking-charge
You can't ping someone using that footage from that distance. No certainty what happened there and where if it did occur did it collect Stokes. Oops silly me it's the MRP we are talking about ::). Clearly if it did occur then it was with such force that Stokes barely flinched and was able to get involved in the melee and play out the rest of the game ::).
-
was that Deledio that dropped that cat player fronting him
this is what l post in the other topic during the game just after it happened
-
The footage is on the RFC website. It was taken from high up. Occurs very quickly and he is pushed into Stokes too.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/round-7-deledio-striking-charge
You can't ping someone using that footage from that distance. No certainty what happened there and where if it did occur did it collect Stokes. Oops silly me it's the MRP we are talking about ::). Clearly if it did occur then it was with such force that Stokes barely flinched and was able to get involved in the melee and play out the rest of the game ::).
Correct. Gibson can knock out Conca with a blow to the head and get off. A glance by Deledio and barely touches Stokes and it's a grade 3 striking offence. :gobdrop
-
TM the footage linked is the TV footage shown. There is a wider angle footage that was shown where you see Stokes and Lids coming together just before the melee and it certainly looks like Lids makes contact with Stokes with his right arm as he tried to run back to the middle. Looks more of a shove to the chest as Stokes doesn't seem to react or hold his face. Its from a higher angle its impossible to see whether he hit him high or not. Stoke certainly doesn't react to it with any sort of pain. Can't have been with much force.
Stokes didn't go to remonstrate with Deledio, he stayed back, can't have been that bad. If you get elbowed to the face genuinely you react by holding your face or kicking back your head from the shock of the action.
-
Hope RFC has big enough pills to fight that, what a joke! If that is the footage used please..... Stokes does not even react apart from giving some back, should get off that you'd reckon.
-
Here we go, this shows it clearly.. don't think contact was strong enough to warrant even low impact, which makes it even more certain the cats have ratted him out. behindholes!
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-05/mrp-full-statement-round-seven (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-05/mrp-full-statement-round-seven)
-
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-05/mrp-full-statement-round-seven
Much more clear there.
For me there is not enough force to warrant a report. That is what I would be appealing.
-
l think they have got it wrong & it was not Stokes that got hit. 2 Geelong players hit the deck. Newman was on top of the player that was struck to the ground & Stokes was fighting with Morris. The umpires make a mistake ;D
-
Got ya by 12 seconds ybb hehe
-
Got ya by 12 seconds ybb hehe
Darn! :banghead :banghead
-
Got ya by 12 seconds ybb hehe
Darn! :banghead :banghead
great minds, comments were similar too :cheers
-
He is gawn
:(
-
Got ya by 12 seconds ybb hehe
Darn! :banghead :banghead
great minds, comments were similar too :cheers
:cheers
-
Get a room.
-
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-05/mrp-full-statement-round-seven
Much more clear there.
For me there is not enough force to warrant a report. That is what I would be appealing.
Thats the one l seen. his gone ;D Morris should have finished that little prick off. Newman was the other one l also seen ;D
-
Get a room.
:cuddles
-
The 3rd video clearly shows it. Poor from lids but will we challenge ? Do we have anything to lose ?
-
Can I ask what exactly constitutes insufficient force to warrant a report??????
Whose eminent opinion is it????
-
throw a dart at a wall..
remember when glass smashed wingard and wingard went to hospital for observations? that was officially graded as low impact. ::) ::) ::)
nuff said
-
Yeah, silly from lids as he was crappy about falling over and gifting goal, which won't help him much. Having said that, when are the AFL going to crack down on players getting into another players face? Sellwood did the same to Newy last year. Reckon I would raise an arm too if someone came at me.
-
Good job Lids. Spread his snot box across his chevy chase next time, he might think twice about giving you the shell grits.
-
more of it boys.
More they do, the more they'll get away with
-
Good job Lids. Spread his snot box across his chevy chase next time, he might think twice about giving you the shell grits.
[/quote
Like getting booked for 64 in a 60 zone,
-
What a load of crap, don't think they'll fight it, never win and there goes another week
-
What a load of crap, don't think they'll fight it, never win and there goes another week
Why not. Nothing to lose. It will still be a week anyway.
-
:-\
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport5.jpg)
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport6.jpg)
-
:-\
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport5.jpg)
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport6.jpg)
So what? We see that almost every week and there is no report because of insufficient force….
-
Im fairness,
I did hear him say, prior to contact,
"I'm gonna be swinging my elbow like this and if anyone gets in the way, it's their fault"
-
Yeah we need this, FFS.
-
The footage is on the RFC website. It was taken from high up. Occurs very quickly and he is pushed into Stokes too.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/round-7-deledio-striking-charge
You can't ping someone using that footage from that distance. No certainty what happened there and where if it did occur did it collect Stokes. Oops silly me it's the MRP we are talking about ::). Clearly if it did occur then it was with such force that Stokes barely flinched and was able to get involved in the melee and play out the rest of the game ::).
Correct. Gibson can knock out Conca with a blow to the head and get off. A glance by Deledio and barely touches Stokes and it's a grade 3 striking offence. :gobdrop
Gibson had both feet off the ground and was 5 seconds late but anyway.
Moral to the story. The UFO sighting striking charge. We think it happened so it must have hapenned.
If we know what happened then we can downgrade it simplify and with good behaviour we can let you off. Garbage. Anyone who hits that little drug dealer should be let off. Community grounds.
-
:-\
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport5.jpg)
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport6.jpg)
So what? We see that almost every week and there is no report because of insufficient force….
I reckon that elbow has been photoshopped in, :shh
-
The MRP really have gone out of their way to get that footage.
I reckon Geelong made a complaint for sure. Effing country preppies
-
The footage is on the RFC website. It was taken from high up. Occurs very quickly and he is pushed into Stokes too.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2014-05-05/round-7-deledio-striking-charge
You can't ping someone using that footage from that distance. No certainty what happened there and where if it did occur did it collect Stokes. Oops silly me it's the MRP we are talking about ::). Clearly if it did occur then it was with such force that Stokes barely flinched and was able to get involved in the melee and play out the rest of the game ::).
Correct. Gibson can knock out Conca with a blow to the head and get off. A glance by Deledio and barely touches Stokes and it's a grade 3 striking offence. :gobdrop
Gibson had both feet off the ground and was 5 seconds late but anyway.
Moral to the story. The UFO sighting striking charge. We think it happened so it must have hapenned.
If we know what happened then we can downgrade it simplify and with good behaviour we can let you off. Garbage. Anyone who hits that little drug dealer should be let off. Community grounds.
Gibson's was classed as negligent contact, medium impact, high contact = reprimand.
It's the "intentional" contact that is rubbing out Lids. He needs to try and get it reduced somehow down to "reckless".
-
stuff me, he wasn't even looking at him when he struck him.Tuckers comparison to the gibson incident is apt.
these filthy rooster gobblers are a disgrace, as is is the emphasis on result rather than intent.
stuff me, looking at the link tony gave,even viney is being screwed for being hard at the ball.
girly softies can GFTS
-
stuff me, he wasn't even looking at him when he struck him.Tuckers comparison to the gibson incident is apt.
these filthy rooster gobblers are a disgrace, as is is the emphasis on result rather than intent.
stuff me, looking at the link tony gave,even viney is being screwed for being hard at the ball.
girly softies can GFTS
:lol :clapping :lol
-
As a comparison, Winderlich last week copped a reprimand for something similar because it was judged as reckless rather than intentional conduct ...
Go to 6:00 min mark to see the vision: http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-04-29/the-verdict-round-six
Jason Winderlich, Essendon, has been charged with a Level One Striking Offence (125 demerit points, one-match sanction) for striking Nick Maxwell, Collingwood, during the third quarter of the Round Six match between Essendon and Collingwood, played at the MCG on Friday April 25, 2014.
In summary, due to a six-year good record, he can accept a reprimand and 70.31 demerit points towards his future record with an early plea.
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Collingwood Football Club, the incident was assessed as reckless conduct (two points), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of five activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level One Offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has an existing six-year good record, reducing the penalty by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 93.75 points towards his future record. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 70.31 demerit points towards his future record.
http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-football-blog/match-review-panel-round-6/20140428-37doi.html
-
The points system was bought in as a belated attempt to copy the NRL and bring some consistency, but the reality is that it is just as inconsistent and bewildering as it ever was.
staggering that those responsible get good money for overseeing such a balls up.
but it is an inspiration for those which chromosomal disorders the world over that you can reach a position of influence if you know how to play the game
-
stuff me, he wasn't even looking at him when he struck him.Tuckers comparison to the gibson incident is apt.
these filthy rooster gobblers are a disgrace, as is is the emphasis on result rather than intent.
stuff me, looking at the link tony gave,even viney is being screwed for being hard at the ball.
girly softies can GFTS
If Conca stayed down for a while had his jaw busted or Richmond submitted a non favourable medical report to the MRP that same incident would have a totally different adjudication.
This is not a match review panel this is merely a panel that is suspending players based on keeping mums and dads happy in that footy is no longer rough and violent.
How can Fyfe be given two weeks or young Viney go straight to a tribunal yet if the bloke gets up like Garry Hocking after Dipper gave him a beauty and continues to play Officer Bar Brady claims nothing to see here folks. Malakies boys.
-
stuff me, he wasn't even looking at him when he struck him.Tuckers comparison to the gibson incident is apt.
these filthy rooster gobblers are a disgrace, as is is the emphasis on result rather than intent.
stuff me, looking at the link tony gave,even viney is being screwed for being hard at the ball.
girly softies can GFTS
If Conca stayed down for a while had his jaw busted or Richmond submitted a non favourable medical report to the MRP that same incident would have a totally different adjudication.
This is not a match review panel this is merely a panel that is suspending players based on keeping mums and dads happy in that footy is no longer rough and violent.
How can Fyfe be given two weeks or young Viney go straight to a tribunal yet if the bloke gets up like Garry Hocking after Dipper gave him a beauty and continues to play Officer Bar Brady claims nothing to see here folks. Malakies boys.
On that basis, how did Lids get time? Stokes hardly flinched.
-
stuff me, he wasn't even looking at him when he struck him.Tuckers comparison to the gibson incident is apt.
these filthy rooster gobblers are a disgrace, as is is the emphasis on result rather than intent.
stuff me, looking at the link tony gave,even viney is being screwed for being hard at the ball.
girly softies can GFTS
If Conca stayed down for a while had his jaw busted or Richmond submitted a non favourable medical report to the MRP that same incident would have a totally different adjudication.
This is not a match review panel this is merely a panel that is suspending players based on keeping mums and dads happy in that footy is no longer rough and violent.
How can Fyfe be given two weeks or young Viney go straight to a tribunal yet if the bloke gets up like Garry Hocking after Dipper gave him a beauty and continues to play Officer Bar Brady claims nothing to see here folks. Malakies boys.
On that basis, how did Lids get time? Stokes hardly flinched.
The inconsistencies of a poor judicial system that has huge holes in it's interpretation.
Can't put it any other way y&b. :thumbsup
-
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport6.jpg)(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreportcomparedtowinderlich.jpg)
Lids this week is "intentional" yet Winderlich's last week was "reckless" :huh3.
Welcome to MRP world :P.
-
Winderlichs looking ay him.
Lids is a parting cheap shot.
Given what Maxwell has got away with I thought hitting Maxwell would have been a greater evil. ::)
-
stuff me, he wasn't even looking at him when he struck him.Tuckers comparison to the gibson incident is apt.
these filthy rooster gobblers are a disgrace, as is is the emphasis on result rather than intent.
stuff me, looking at the link tony gave,even viney is being screwed for being hard at the ball.
girly softies can GFTS
If Conca stayed down for a while had his jaw busted or Richmond submitted a non favourable medical report to the MRP that same incident would have a totally different adjudication.
This is not a match review panel this is merely a panel that is suspending players based on keeping mums and dads happy in that footy is no longer rough and violent.
How can Fyfe be given two weeks or young Viney go straight to a tribunal yet if the bloke gets up like Garry Hocking after Dipper gave him a beauty and continues to play Officer Bar Brady claims nothing to see here folks. Malakies boys.
it really is sad isnt it?
i remember when someone could be charged with attempted striking.
Now, if you prepare for contact and you opponent doesn't, and they get hurt, you get crucified.
but if your intent is to hurt the opponent and by nothing more than good luck you don't hurt them too bad, then you get off.
it's just mental, and most people can see it, except those half wits setting the agenda
-
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport6.jpg)(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreportcomparedtowinderlich.jpg)
Lids this week is "intentional" yet Winderlich's last week was "reckless" :huh3.
Welcome to MRP world :P.
Not sure what you are on about OE.
looking directly at the bloke while you hit him high is clearly reckless, while not looking at him is clearly intentional.
would love some bozo in the media to to put this to those that make the decisions, but none of them have the balls, or the brains, to do so
-
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/49422422.jpg)
-
(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreport6.jpg)(http://oneeyed-richmond.com/images/matchreviewpanel/Lidsreportcomparedtowinderlich.jpg)
Lids this week is "intentional" yet Winderlich's last week was "reckless" :huh3.
Welcome to MRP world :P.
Not sure what you are on about OE.
looking directly at the bloke while you hit him high is clearly reckless, while not looking at him is clearly intentional.
would love some bozo in the media to to put this to those that make the decisions, but none of them have the balls, or the brains, to do so
Lids was initially looking at Stokes. He was pushed towards Stokes by another Geelong player.
In any case, both pics are an elbow to the head and Winderlich had more time to think what he was doing. They are either both "intentional" or both "reckless".
-
hmm, should re-read i think ;)
-
hmm, should re-read i think ;)
Sorry al, I missed the sarcasm ;D :thumbsup.
-
this site needs a sarcasm emoticon
-
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2014-05-06/deledio-to-challenge-at-tribunal
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
Don't think they can.
:thumbsup
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
Don't think they can.
:thumbsup
I think they can
-
Brett Deledio, Richmond, has been charged with a Level Three Striking Offence (225 demerit points, two-match sanction) for striking Matthew Stokes, Geelong Cats, during the second quarter of the Round Seven match between Richmond and the Geelong Cats, played at the MCG on Sunday May 4, 2014.
In summary, due to a six-year good record, his two-match sanction can be reduced to a one-game penalty with an early plea.
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Geelong Cats Football Club, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Three Offence, drawing 225 demerit points and a two-match sanction. He has an existing six-year good record, reducing the penalty by 25 per cent 168.75 points and a one-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 126.56 demerit points and a one-match sanction.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-05/mrp-full-statement-round-seven
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
Don't think they can.
:thumbsup
they can if they decide the impact is worse than it was judged. Doubt it though.
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
Don't think they can.
:thumbsup
they can if they decide the impact is worse than it was judged. Doubt it though.
Inb4 upgraded to intentional high attempted murder.
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
Don't think they can.
:thumbsup
they can if they decide the impact is worse than it was judged. Doubt it though.
Inb4 upgraded to intentional high attempted murder.
:lol
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
Don't think they can.
:thumbsup
I think they can
No they can't. This is pretty straight forward. He pleads guilty to being reckless with his arm as it was NOT intentional. With both a guilty plea and the good record he will only get a reprimand. Need a good lawyer to convince the panel that they would have to be mind readers to prove it was intentional if Brett says it wasn't. :pray
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
Don't think they can.
:thumbsup
I think they can
No they can't. This is pretty straight forward. He pleads guilty to being reckless with his arm as it was NOT intentional. With both a guilty plea and the good record he will only get a reprimand. Need a good lawyer to convince the panel that they would have to be mind readers to prove it was intentional if Brett says it wasn't. :pray
Johnny Cochran ?
-
Reckon they'll give him 2 now
Don't think they can.
:thumbsup
I think they can
No they can't. This is pretty straight forward. He pleads guilty to being reckless with his arm as it was NOT intentional. With both a guilty plea and the good record he will only get a reprimand. Need a good lawyer to convince the panel that they would have to be mind readers to prove it was intentional if Brett says it wasn't. :pray
Johnny Cochran ?
Hope he uses the Chewbacca Defence. "It does not make sense!" ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwdba9C2G14
-
If unsuccessful, Deledio is looking at a two-match sanction, and the first suspension in his 198-game career.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-06/live-viney-fronts-tribunal
:huh AFL website doesn't understand the points system.
Viney is up first at the tribunal so Lids' hearing could be held back quite late.
-
Let em both off! The game is becoming more like friggin netball every day! Tape your nails boys, cant have anyone being scratched. :banghead :banghead
-
heard on sen this morning that Lids wont be able to get the charge downgraded from intentional to reckless bc it was off the ball?
I don't know what else Viney was meant to do, anybody can see he wasn't trying to nail him, it was just an unfortunate instance. Very harsh if he gets rubbed out
-
Both off but wouldnt be suprised if lids cops 2 and Viney off.
We should have taken the week and be done with it.
big risk
-
Let em both off! The game is becoming more like friggin netball every day! Tape your nails boys, cant have anyone being scratched. :banghead :banghead
What he said^^
-
heard on sen this morning that Lids wont be able to get the charge downgraded from intentional to reckless bc it was off the ball?
If that's the case then we should go all out claiming the contact was insufficient to be a reportable offence.
If that fails then we should show up the MRP's inconsistency using the Winderlich case from just last week as Lids' defence. Winderlich's was off the ball yet that one was classed as reckless. This week the same act is classed as intentional. Demand a public explanation for why the difference in the space of just a week?
I don't know what else Viney was meant to do, anybody can see he wasn't trying to nail him, it was just an unfortunate instance. Very harsh if he gets rubbed out
Don't agree with it but he's gone under the rules. Viney will get blamed for bumping which caused a head clash. The fact Lynch also ended up with a broken jaw will make it worse for him.
-
heard on sen this morning that Lids wont be able to get the charge downgraded from intentional to reckless bc it was off the ball?
I don't know what else Viney was meant to do, anybody can see he wasn't trying to nail him, it was just an unfortunate instance. Very harsh if he gets rubbed out
I've heard that too. Not sure how Winderlich got reckless as that was off the ball too... :huh
-
Lids 200th is coming up so if he gets suspended for a week, it will be against the bummers and not gws
-
The jury is still deliberating in the Viney case. 10 minutes and counting.
-
Viney found guilty of rough conduct.
They are now deciding on the penalty. Looking at 3 weeks apparently.
-
Viney got 2 weeks.
Lids is up next.
-
Deledio case is underway.
Deledio's case highlighting he was pushed towards Stokes. A lot of slow motion vision being shown to the jury.
Gleeson now quizzing Deledio on issue of force.
-
:pray :pray :pray :pray :pray :pray :pray :pray :pray :pray :pray :pray
-
Gleeson proposing Deledio was angry his opponent was involved in a scoring chain, feels contact and lashes out with his arm. Deledio disagrees.
Deledio accepts he made high intact.
Issue is whether there was sufficient force. Factors to be taken into account there are Stokes' head going backwards. Medical report showed no injury.
-
We're going back and forward between Gleeson and the chairman, trying to establish intent.
-
Gleeson is a wanker
-
Tough call on Viney. What else was he meant to do? Regardless of the fact that it was actually Georgiou that made the actual blow with Lynch's head.
-
Coaching and performance manager Tim Livingstone there for club support, Deledio's cousel is Michael Tovey QC
Deledio's cousel now submitting he is a fair ball player and never engages in retaliation.
Tough call on Viney. What else was he meant to do? Regardless of the fact that it was actually Georgiou that made the actual blow with Lynch's head.
They said the break was on the left side of Lynch's jaw which is the side Viney's shoulder collided with.
-
Tovey QC: He is shoved forcefully towards Stokes and shoves Stokes out of the way when he is off balance.
If it's found that there was sufficient impact to constitute a reportable offence, then the jury will consider if it was in fact intentional.
-
Reckless incidents used in the pre-season tribunal video were "much more severe" than Deledio's incident, Deledio's counsel proposes.
They should bring up Winderlich's case only a week ago.
-
Jury will first decide if Deledio struck Stokes with more than negligible impact. If yes, they will then decide if it was actually intentional.
Jury now deliberating.
-
Gleeson proposing Deledio was angry his opponent was involved in a scoring chain, feels contact and lashes out with his arm. Deledio disagrees.
Deledio accepts he made high intact.
Issue is whether there was sufficient force. Factors to be taken into account there are Stokes' head going backwards. Medical report showed no injury.
Judge judy
-
Deledio case is basically that intended to shove Stokes but he was pushed and off balance so hit went high...
If this is deemed reckless he'll escape with a reprimand.
-
I reckon he'll get away with it, praying atleast.
-
Do you mr deledio deny you we're upset your so called player was I involved in a in a SCORING CHAIN
-
Do you mr deledio deny you we're upset your so called player was I involved in a in a SCORING CHAIN
Can't believe they ran with this
-
Reckless!
He is free to play!!!
-
Guilty of recklessly striking.
Low impact.
Reckless, low and high for a strike draws 125 points. Good behaviour takes it down to 93.75 points
So that's just a reprimand and Lids is free to play against Melbourne.
:thumbsup
-
Do you mr deledio deny you we're upset your so called player was I involved in a in a SCORING CHAIN
Can't believe they ran with this
They gave viney two weeks cause he didn't pivot onto his left foot and avoid the contest instead of going for the ball
The game is in a sick state
-
Gold Jerry Gold!!! :bow :clapping
-
Well at least the tribunal got something right this evening
Game has forever changed with the Viney decision. That one is just so wrong
-
JUSTICE!!!!!!!!!
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
-
That's a relief :thumbsup
Thank you for the updates OE.
The Viney case proves that you don't have to be dead to be stiff. Poor decision.
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
Did Emmett Dunne sit on the Viney Case?
If he did he should hang his head in shame, that was a terrible, pathetic decision
As for the cowardice shown by Joel Bowden and his cohorts at the MRP :banghead :banghead
-
The rfc played them like a piano, nice work tigers............again :clapping
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
Did Emmett Dunne sit on the Viney Case?
If he did he should hang his head in shame, that was a terrible, pathetic decision
As for the cowardice shown by Joel Bowden and his cohorts at the MRP :banghead :banghead
No different from the way he played
-
Well at least we not have to worry about Viney ,
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
No excuses now for not winning
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
Did Emmett Dunne sit on the Viney Case?
If he did he should hang his head in shame, that was a terrible, pathetic decision
As for the cowardice shown by Joel Bowden and his cohorts at the MRP :banghead :banghead
I don't agree with the rule but the rule is there. If you choose to bump and the player gets injured your in trouble. I don't think the panel had a choice. Why didn't Viney tackle? He chose to bump.
It's the RULE THAT'S THE PROBLEM WP!!!
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
Did Emmett Dunne sit on the Viney Case?
If he did he should hang his head in shame, that was a terrible, pathetic decision
As for the cowardice shown by Joel Bowden and his cohorts at the MRP :banghead :banghead
No different from the way he played
I'll let you get away with that. Only once. Only once will I let you get away with a comment like that.
First and only warning, Chuck.
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
Did Emmett Dunne sit on the Viney Case?
If he did he should hang his head in shame, that was a terrible, pathetic decision
As for the cowardice shown by Joel Bowden and his cohorts at the MRP :banghead :banghead
No different from the way he played
I'll let you get away with that. Only once. Only once will I let you get away with a comment like that.
First and only warning, Chuck.
Yeh OK but the thing that stands out most about Joel on a football field for me is him walking away from that all in
-
Ordinary from him but it shouldn't undo the 250+ games of good service he gave us. And he did put his body on the line on plenty of occasions.
-
Ordinary from him but it shouldn't undo the 250+ games of good service he gave us. And he did put his body on the line on plenty of occasions.
True
-
Opinion aside on the ruling on bumping etc.
Did Viney, elect to bump? Yes
Did Viney make contact to the head? Yes
Was the opponent injured? Yes - broken jaw.
I understand the backlash over social media and radio, but if you elect to bump, hit the player in the head you are 99% chance of being suspended and if they are injured it seems you have no chance of getting off.
I don't agree with the verdict but its the way the game is now. I think the clash of heads one is far worse than Viney. He elected to bump and got him high and broke his jaw. Thats not as harsh as someone electing to bump, executing the bump correctly in the shoulder but because of the force and the pace of the game you clash heads, injuring yourself and your opponent and you get weeks.
#suchislife
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
Did Emmett Dunne sit on the Viney Case?
If he did he should hang his head in shame, that was a terrible, pathetic decision
As for the cowardice shown by Joel Bowden and his cohorts at the MRP :banghead :banghead
I don't agree with the rule but the rule is there. If you choose to bump and the player gets injured your in trouble. I don't think the panel had a choice. Why didn't Viney tackle? He chose to bump.
It's the RULE THAT'S THE PROBLEM WP!!!
Have you seen the reply in real time
Would have been hard situation to lay successful tackle
As other has said - viney was within rights to expect the ball was going to bounce to him
Then only other real option was to not go ball
-
Well at least the tribunal got something right this evening
Game has forever changed with the Viney decision. That one is just so wrong
How could it get any worse/>?
-
Good
-
Well done Emmet Dunnne.
The Melbourne game is a must win and so got rid of Viney and reinstated Lids in one evening! :clapping :clapping :clapping :bow :bow :bow
Did Emmett Dunne sit on the Viney Case?
If he did he should hang his head in shame, that was a terrible, pathetic decision
As for the cowardice shown by Joel Bowden and his cohorts at the MRP :banghead :banghead
I don't agree with the rule but the rule is there. If you choose to bump and the player gets injured your in trouble. I don't think the panel had a choice. Why didn't Viney tackle? He chose to bump.
It's the RULE THAT'S THE PROBLEM WP!!!
Agree the rule is in part the problem but...
In this case Viney did not line Jenkins up. He actually turned to ensure he didn't hit with the shoulder
The panel had a choice and they have chosen to ignore the vision in real time it would seem and concentrate on the frame by frame slow-mo.
And what difference does it make of he tackles? If the blokes jaw still gets broken what happens then? Oh that's right it's an accident? What happens if Viney gets injured as well? Do both players get suspended
I posted a few weeks back about the Douglas bump and said based on the rule as it stands Douglas was always in trouble because it was behind play and away from the contest
The Viney case is the opposite, in play, in a contest
A terrible decision that has taken away another piece of the fabric of the game IMv, sad day indeed
-
agree CUB,
its about 4 points.
the game is stuffed anyway regardless of this rule.
-
l'm in :o a Richmond player got away with being suspended ;D Great News :clapping
The Jack Viney decision is one of the worst in the history of the game. Its time everyone who enjoys our great game voices their opinion to the AFL or Local comps on what they want to see instead of letting the few who want our game to be more like soccer & have our players thrashing around on the ground wanting cheap free kicks cause mummy prefers that to the bump, biffs & brawls. ;D
-
The Jack Viney decision is one of the worst in the history of the game.
x 2
-
Clearly if it did occur then it was with such force that Stokes barely flinched and was able to get involved in the melee and play out the rest of the game ::).
I know this is an older post and the decision by MRP has changed but this is what you want from the MRP. They should be basing their decisions on the intent on what happened, not the result. Basing it purely on Stokes ability to play on is silly, it should be based on Deledios attempt to elbow Stokes (which the MRP has deemed wasn't intentional)
-
The MRP really have gone out of their way to get that footage.
I reckon Geelong made a complaint for sure. Effing country preppies
I'm sure they check what starts all melees
-
Lids talking about the report ....
“As I was going through, I could hear Matty Stokes in my ear, yelling at me.
“I saw him coming at me, so I’ve put my arm up to fend him off, as you do. You just put the forearm up because you’re not allowed to do anything else.
“I turned away and it slipped up off his shoulder, I think, and hit him in the chin.
“It looks like I’ve gone at him with a blatant elbow, which is something I’ve never done for 10 years (of AFL football), and never done it previous to that, even playing juniors.
“I’ve never been reported once in my entire football career, from the age of eight.
“I pride myself on not being a dirty player, and (I’m) a ball player . . .”
Full article at: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2014-05-07/deledio-opens-up-on-report-drama