One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on June 25, 2022, 05:52:34 PM
-
Intentional and high impact is three matches. Intentional and severe is straight to the tribunal. Tom Stewart has already been reported @FOXFOOTY
https://twitter.com/RalphyHeraldSun/status/1540593077974626304
Should be off to the Tribunal and a minimum of 6 weeks. Actually the more times I see it that should be season over. That pathetic sniping knocking out opponents off the ball is out of the 70s/80s. That no longer should be tolerated in modern footy. It's gutless and a dog act >:(.
-
4 weeks.
-
He'll just get the minimum
3 weeks
Should be 6 but the AFL will wimp out and go three
-
I agree, tell him to go take his summer vacation early.
Dog.
-
Will be 3-4.
-
8
-
2
High contact, hard hit and intentional
Minus points for being Geelong
Or however they work it
-
I need to leave yhe G, never been so angry. 80s 90s happened weekly and you managed it. Even sent out a dribbler for revenge. Now we just have to watch a snipers run around collecting uncontested kicks and nobody can touch him.
Furrrrious.
-
6 weeks
-
1-2 Scott influence will come into it
-
1 week. Theyre the AFLs darlings.
-
Mates / Brothers rates
1 week worked out at mums house at dinner
-
Prestia will probably get a week and a fine for staging and smashing his jaw dangerously into Stewarts elbow with intent
-
Off the ball, late, high impact, deliberate. 5 weeks! But will get 2.
-
4
-
What an hole.
He knew what he was doing.
Scott probably told them to take Prestia out if they get the opportunity.
really hope we play them again in the finals...........and kick their arse!
Pretenders - Out in straight sets.
-
They took out Vlastuin in the granny 2 years ago, it is the type of people they are, total scum
-
They took out Vlastuin in the granny 2 years ago, it is the type of people they are, total scum
Don't forget Soldo's knee
-
AFL.com.au headline reads, 'All-Australian Cat Facing Nervous Wait After High Hit' as if he's some kind of anxious victim. Prestia facing a nervous wait to see if he shows early signs of CTE.
Seriously how wrong can you capture the spirit of an event in a headline?
-
Stewart facing suspension for high hit
Geelong star Tom Stewart faces a nervous wait from the Match Review Officer after his high bump knocked out Dion Prestia in the first quarter. The three-time All-Australian bumped Prestia after the Tiger had tapped the ball on with his shoulder making contact to Prestia's head. The three-time premiership hero struggled to get to his feet and was eventually subbed out with a concussion. If it's graded as intentional and high impact it will result in a three-match ban, but if the MRO deems it to be severe impact then Stewart will front the Tribunal.
Jeremy Cameron may also face scrutiny after appearing to grab at the eye region of Marlion Pickett during a wrestle.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/786255/game-of-the-year-cats-prevail-in-all-time-epic
-
Worth 6 weeks for sure- weak prick
-
Worth 6 weeks for sure- weak prick
Yes but you just know there will be the usual Geelong discount down to 2 weeks with another 1 week discount for an early plea
-
It's 3 weeks under grading system.
Intentional.
Behind play
High.
Severe impact.
3 weeks.
-
Chris Scott on Tom Stewart: "When I spoke to him post-game, he said 'I've just made a horrible error and I feel terrible about it'.
"'I ran past the ball and chose to bump, I didn't mean to but it was terrible execution and I'm going to pay the price for it'."
#AFLCatsTigers
https://twitter.com/ollycaffrey/status/1540646595192291329
-
It's 3 weeks under grading system.
Intentional.
Behind play
High.
Severe impact.
3 weeks.
Needs to be more than that. That stuff ends player’s careers. Remorseful or not, 6 weeks for mine.
-
It's 3 weeks under grading system.
Intentional.
Behind play
High.
Severe impact.
3 weeks.
Needs to be more than that. That stuff ends player’s careers. Remorseful or not, 6 weeks for mine.
That's why it needs to go straight to the tribunal
-
UGLY ACT DESERVES ‘FIVE TO SIX WEEKS’
Dual premiership Kangaroo David King called for the Cat to cop a lengthy ban.
“We’ve been trying to stamp this out of the game for years. We’ve tiptoed around it,” King told Fox Footy.
“That for me is a five to six-weeker – it’s as simple as that. You’ve got to take a stance.
“We can’t have our players being carried off the ground like that when their sole focus is the footy.”
Before Cats coach Chris Scott addressed his troops at quarter-time, he had a quiet word to Stewart who looked “emotional” at the break, according to King.
Melbourne champion Garry Lyon described it as an “average” yet uncharacteristic act from Stewart, predicting the footy world would never see another incident like that involving the Cats star.
“I would imagine they’ll get right on the front foot, the Geelong footy club, and I reckon that’s a man who’s not going to fight too hard and take whatever punishment comes his way,” Lyon told Fox Footy.
“I don’t reckon we’ll see it from him ever again.”
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/live-afl-2022-geelong-cats-vs-richmond-tigers-round-15-live-scores-updates-stats-video-blog-news-how-to-watch/news-story/f1f860eb70beec3d6ec059d70bc131dc
-
So according to the idiot of a bloke Scott it was an accident. How the stuff is that an accident???
The stuffin dog should cop 10 weeks but he won’t cause the whole system is corrupt.
-
Don't mind the discussion Konrad Marshall has started on Twitter.
The idea of an arc type red card sending off system. Only for the really high grade incidents which can be easily graded the top tier which is Intentional, High, Severe impact. Effectively intentional hits which knock out players. Gaff incident hitting Brayshaw comes to mind.
Plus the idea of these severe incidents to have a week of the suspension to be carried over to when you play the opponent again. So meaning that Stewart gets 3 weeks. Misses next 2 but the 3rd must be taken when he plays Richmond next. A bit of justice for the team who has been disadvantaged. Why should Melbourne benefit from no Stewart and we don't plus lose Prestia.
-
Fair call re: Ryder getting 2 weeks for standing his ground and concussing Will Day.
This has to be 4 weeks minimum.
-
All I have read is “poor Stewart, it’s not like him”
Are the media for real? I have only respect for Kingy as he has called it exactly as it should be treated.
The rest of them are trying to butter the MRO up in going light drawing his character into play.
stuffin disgrace what happened here and if it was the other way around do you think the media would be going soft on grimesy?
This grub it seems has been treated differently in the past to others.
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/06/28/why-was-tom-stewart-cleared-when-zac-williams-was-suspended/
-
Should be 4-6.
He'll probably get 3 because the system is corrupt.
-
That no one decked Stewart is a problem. There was no retaliation. Nothing and we lost the game.
-
That doesn't happen anymore. Remember the Parker (Syd) - Shiels (Ess) incident.
And I suspect that given the game is played so quick, that not (if) any Richmond players saw what happened anyway.
Dimma's post match comments were telling "We look forward to playing them again....."
-
Barrett just said it will be 3 or 4 weeks depending on whether Stewart ends up at the tribunal or not.
Kane Cornes said there should be a sin bin for these one-off a season hits off the ball. Stewart should have been sent off as the hit disadvantaged Richmond (lose their best player while Stewart ends up BOG). That hit doesn't happen and Richmond wins the game. For the integrity of the competition you can't have sides potentially missing the Eight now because their best player gets knocked out before they hit the ground.
Watch here: https://twitter.com/FootyonNine/status/1540851914962870272
-
We were basically playing a man down for all that time till they could get him off, it really made me angry, they scored of course. Why wasn't play stopped? We get a bloke pole axed and taken out of the game and then get penalised on top of it then its all about poor Stewies feeling bad about it. Not the fact he nearly broke some bastards jaw or neck
-
We were basically playing a man down for all that time till they could get him off, it really made me angry, they scored of course. Why wasn't play stopped? We get a bloke pole axed and taken out of the game and then get penalised on top of it then its all about poor Stewies feeling bad about it. Not the fact he nearly broke some bastards jaw or neck
Not much use to us now but Barrett this morning said the AFL is investigating. The umps do have the discretion to stop the play so why didn't they?
-
We were basically playing a man down for all that time till they could get him off, it really made me angry, they scored of course. Why wasn't play stopped? We get a bloke pole axed and taken out of the game and then get penalised on top of it then its all about poor Stewies feeling bad about it. Not the fact he nearly broke some bastards jaw or neck
Not much use to us now but Barrett this morning said the AFL is investigating. The umps do have the discretion to stop the play so why didn't they?
Because and Im serious, they hate us and just plain cheat every week!
-
Tom Browne claiming right now it was careless not intentional. Oh please! Not in the contest and running past the ball to take an opponent out isn't "careless" ::).
Anyway Browne reckons it will be classed as severe and so it will head to the tribunal and the AFL will press for 4-5 weeks. Perhaps one week off for Stewart's good record.
Cameron Ling thinks 3-4 weeks while admitting people will accuse him of bias.
-
The AFL has rejected the idea of implementing a send-off rule despite widespread calls from a number of pundits after Cats star Tom Stewart's "sickening" hit on Tigers on-baller Dion Prestia.
https://wwos.nine.com.au/afl/news-2022-kane-cornes-calls-for-send-off-rule-after-tom-stewart-hit-on-dion-prestia/bbf5579e-057d-4c6e-b694-25c260a96f3e
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWJ0xfGUYAA8WKx?format=jpg&name=medium)
:facepalm
-
Straight to the tribunal. Min 4 weeks.
-
Charges laid:
Tom Stewart, Geelong Cats, has been charged with Rough Conduct against Dion Prestia, Richmond, during the first quarter of the Round 15 match between the Geelong Cats and Richmond played at the MCG on Saturday, June 25, 2022.
In summary, the player has been referred directly to the Tribunal and cannot accept an early plea.
Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Careless Conduct, Severe Impact, High Contact. The incident was classified as a direct referral to the Tribunal and the player cannot accept an early plea.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/787742/match-review-all-australian-cat-learns-fate-for-prestia-bump
-
So has it been graded as careless instead of intentional?
-
So has it been graded as careless instead of intentional?
Pigs arse, he wasn’t even watching the ball, he had eyes only for Prestia, looked intentional to me,
-
Manifestly inadequate Brad Scott u stuffen campaigner
-
I’m confused, his intention was to bump then shouldn’t it be deemed intentional?
-
Careless loool no way near the ball went for the man clowns running our game.
-
It got re-worded within 5 mins. Initially said "intentional ..... 4 weeks" 5 mins later re-published as "careless .... 3 weeks"
-
Scott says he was so upset but goes onto be best in ground. Most people who are upset are off their game and not so focussed.
I call bs and he was in fact proud to help his side win, I’m saying Due to height (Prestia head = Steward shoulder) it could only be intentional
-
Scott says he was so upset but goes onto be best in ground. Most people who are upset are off their game and not so focussed.
I call bs and he was in fact proud to help his side win, I’m saying Due to height (Prestia head = Steward shoulder) it could only be intentional
Yep I think it was part of their game plan to take him out
-
re-worded? Is that some kind farkin joke? Would love it if someone can post that adjustment the cheats made?
Its an intentional act, not stuffin careless. To think otherwise is just buttering the tribunal up.
-
He actually leapt up into the air to hit him he already towers over him he knew what he was doing
-
The minute you leave the ground I thought it automatically went to intentional because what else are you trying to do?
-
The media beat up on this incident is pretty disgraceful. All we need is a picture of Stewart with a hang-dog expression on his face while the MRO declares that Tom has learned his lesson & should be let off. In fact, lets get him a present!
Poor old Tom is the real victim here (despite Dion being the one to actually have his head caved in) so its expected that 'Good ole Tom' should walk away Scott free. (Good term that one, Scott free!)
If Toby Greene did the same thing the whole football world would demand 12 weeks & de-registration ... minimum!
So why is Tom Stewart being seen to be such a good bloke & getting his charge reduced to a lesser charge? :huh
-
Very confusing and inconsistent.
Pat Ryder got 2 weeks for standing his ground. I'd grade that as careless. At the absolute very worst, Stewart act was reckless. He chose to bump, I'm baffled as to how this wasn't intentional. Or what is deemed as intentional.
Regardless, it's at the tribunal where surely common sense prevails, and he gets 4 +weeks.
-
Pathetic from the MRO ::). It's not "careless" when a player deliberately runs past the ball and knocks out an opponent off the ball. It's an intentional dog act >:(.
-
How can this not be at least reckless? I was thinking intentional or at least reckless.
Cats clearly wanted to take him out and it's disgusting.
-
How can this not be at least reckless? I was thinking intentional or at least reckless.
Cats clearly wanted to take him out and it's disgusting.
Reckless is no longer a grading
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEAiuZaVAAA_Krt?format=jpg&name=large)
https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2021/03/22/221593f5-9b5b-46c7-b038-b032283fcd41/2021-AFL-Tribunal-Guidelines.pdf
-
Scott says he was so upset but goes onto be best in ground. Most people who are upset are off their game and not so focussed.
I call bs and he was in fact proud to help his side win, I’m saying Due to height (Prestia head = Steward shoulder) it could only be intentional
Dion would have been BOG, and Richmond would have won if that prick had not intentionally taken him out.
-
Four Points: Stewart’s strife
Michael Gleeson
The Age
June 27, 2022
Tom Stewart has been referred directly to the tribunal with a grading of his offence that he carelessly got Dion Prestia in the head and the impact was severe.
The direct referral was correct. The grading of the offence was wrong. There was nothing careless about what Stewart did. He meant it.
He’s a very good player, and hitherto a clean one, but that shouldn’t change the fact he had a brain fade, and decided to clean up Prestia.
The MRO and previous tribunals have typically regarded bumps as accidental. They shouldn’t.
Prestia had long got rid of the ball when Stewart chose not to change direction nor pull up to avoid contact. He made the decision to keep running and drop his shoulder into the exposed player and knock him down.
The AFL provides 45 examples for guidance on categories for the MRO and the tribunal, four of which are for bumps. All examples were rated careless, but they are all also only intended as a guide. Besides that, I think previously they have wrongly categorised players who deliberately bump.
Interestingly, one of the bumps cited among those examples was Patrick Dangerfield from last year when he was banned for three weeks for his bump of Jake Kelly when they clashed heads. That bump was also rated careless, high and severe.
Kelly was knocked out cold, taken off the ground on a cart with concussion and a had his nose broken. By way of comparison, Prestia was also concussed, but remained conscious. Although groggy, he walked from the field in the arms of doctors - not on a cart - and he had no broken bones.
Stewart has a good case to argue that his bump was of lower impact than Dangerfield’s and thus it should be re-rated as high impact not severe. If that happens, the Cats can argue his case is careless, high contact and high impact and falls under guidelines with a penalty of two matches.
Two matches does not pass the sniff test, the pub test, the common-sense test.
Prestia will miss at least two matches with concussion – Saturday’s game and the next round.
The AFL tribunal guidelines permit the MRO or the GM of footy to use their discretion to directly refer certain matters to the tribunal without applying the schedule of penalties for, among other things, “the circumstances of the offence”. They should have done that here.
Michael Christian as MRO and/or Brad Scott as GM of footy should have bypassed the table of offences and used that discretion. This incident was violent, ugly and with the potential for extremely serious injury and should not have been constricted to the punishment table.
Bypassing the table would have meant they take it to the tribunal and let them consider a penalty without overt regard to the inflexible table of punishments.
The AFL’s table system – which is largely meritorious – takes no account of circumstances. It does not weigh up the context of the game, nor is consideration given to the importance of the player hit nor the significance and consequence of the game, for all home and away games are considered equal.
Of course, it is fraught to more heavily punish a player for taking out a very good opponent, for it effectively conveys the message: you can hit those other scrubbers – they count for less. But the consequences of choosing to take out the opposition’s best midfielder in a critical match should also not be discounted. And no, not all games are equal for this was a contest among probable finalists and even top-four contenders.
In a game decided by three points Richmond lost their best midfielder. It is not exaggerating to say the hit cost Richmond the game. Consider for a moment that Prestia knocked Stewart out, what would the result of the match have been?
Stewart was – and is – plainly one of Geelong’s best players. On Saturday night, despite the hit, he continued to be enormously influential and ultimately took the match-saving mark.
As ever with these things it is ultimately a debate over what the right length of suspension should be? Is it two? No. Three? Maybe. Four? That’s heavy.
Last week The Age ran a series of stories quizzing the heads of clubs on a range of issues. The majority felt the match review and tribunal system was falling short.
This admittedly can be like asking if you think umpires were fair in your match, but the Tom Stewart decision needs to meet public expectation.
(Disclaimer: Tribunal chairman, Jeff Gleeson QC, is my brother)
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/four-points-stewart-s-strife-and-take-outs-as-top-sides-tangle-20220626-p5awmq.html
-
Well I’m glad there is at least one other than Kingy, who has called this out.
Why has he suggested Dion is missing 2?
Should only miss one due to protocols shouldn’t he?
-
Well I’m glad there is at least one other than Kingy, who has called this out.
Why has he suggested Dion is missing 2?
Should only miss one due to protocols shouldn’t he?
Re-read Dan
He’s counting the game against Geelong as one of the two. Indicating that Prestia missed that game and will miss the next.
-
Thanks for that Damo. :thumbsup
Is Gleeson a tiger supporter? I seldom read anything stupid from him like the rest of the imbeciles.
They should be ashamed of themselves on this one.
-
Thanks for that Damo. :thumbsup
Is Gleeson a tiger supporter? I seldom read anything stupid from him like the rest of the imbeciles.
They should be ashamed of themselves on this one.
Chris Scott was shameful in his presser
Cringeworthy
Sticking up for your player is one thing , but that was pathetic
-
Well said Kingy
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-news-2022-tom-stewart-hit-on-dion-prestia-video-how-many-weeks-concussion-rules-david-king-first-crack-geelong-vs-richmond/news-story/4310c41551d0f67462421c82b7f5d0cc
-
David King is spot on in his comments about the lack of concern for Prestia
The media is only focusing on Stewart. There should be no sympathy for Stewart. Facts are he chose to bump, he lined up Prestia, didn't have eyes for the ball and while airborne took him out.
The minimum of 4 weeks isnt enough
And great opinion piece by Mick Gleeson. It too was spot on :clapping
-
How this still happens in the game is staggering. Throw the book at him- 6+
-
How this still happens in the game is staggering. Throw the book at him- 6+
tell you why it happens because its us.
Can you imagine what Dimma would have copped if he went down this scum's route as he did in the presser.
This is the second time we have had a heart and soul player knocked out in the first quarter by this scum of a club.
-
Im all for the bump and with that know there will be some accidental contact.
But common sense please in this case. ball had gone he ran past the contest and cleaned him up.
Im sure Stewart was only trying to be physical and make Prestia know he was in a game but when it goes wrong you pay the price.
If the ball is there and you run thru a player legally well and good we have to keep that aspect of the game but late bumps off the ball bumps etc
are not on.
I even think if you get it right everything tucked in player can reasonably expect contact and there is accidental contact high then it is nothing more than a free kick.
Imo its raised elbows and arms and blokes head down copping front on contact and blokes down with their head over the ball copping it high at 100 miles an hour from the side.that needs to be rubbed out.
Its gone from running thru blokes with head down from the front and we all applauded that but i really hope we can find the right balance and keep the bump in the game. At the end of the day a huge part of the game has been it a tough hard physical game a game of contact and we have all played it with eyes wide open knowing that.
We either have the bump in the game and allow players to use it properly without fear of copping 10 weeks or we get rid of it all together which for me will be the death knell its become almost too hard to watch now without even more of the physical stuff taken out.
-
Yeah really poor by the media and scum of a club focus been on him not Prestia this is not a coincidence second time.
-
“HE DID WHAT HE DESIGNED TO DO”: KING STAGGERED BY MRO’S STEWART GRADING
By Seb Mottram
SEN
27 June 2022
David King has been left dumbfounded by the Match Review Officer’s decision to grade Tom Stewart’s bump on Dion Prestia as ‘careless’.
Stewart’s bump left Prestia concussed and struggling to get to his feet in confronting scenes for footy fans on Saturday, with the grading handed down a little over 24 hours later on Sunday.
MRO Michael Christian judged the incident to be careless conduct, severe impact and high contact. The severe impact part of the ruling sees Stewart referred directly to the Tribunal, with his ban to start at four weeks.
It was the careless aspect King disagreed with, saying the three-time All-Australian made the choice to run past the football.
“We’re doing it again, how many times do we have to have this chat … if that’s not intentional, I don’t know what is,” the North Melbourne champion told SEN’s Whateley.
“I don’t understand careless. If you go past the ball, shape to bump and execute the perfect bump in terms of the actual bump, what you’ve designed to do, (was) excellence.
“These guys, they’ve got such dexterity, they can do anything.
“It’s amazing how as soon as they make an error, they’re the clumsiest people in the world, but outside of that moment, they’re the most gifted, elite performing athletes we’ve got, so that doesn’t wash with me.
“Now, I think he’s made a mistake, but the actual act is performed with excellence. He did what he designed to do, in that exact moment.”
Post-game, Stewart’s coach Chris Scott said, “of course (the bump) wasn’t (deliberate)” while speaking about Stewart’s exceptional character.
The 2021 Geelong best and fairest winner was captured on the broadcast looking distraught at quarter-time.
However, King said those aspects need to be separated from the action of the bump.
“So he made a poor decision, but the act is what I want to talk about. Not that he’s a good guy, not that he’s made phone calls since, not that he’s shown remorse at quarter time, all of that’s fine, but the act is what we’ve got to take out,” he continued.
“Not who’s done it, the act. This has been graded as careless when it should be intentional, what happened to Dion Prestia should not happen in our game.
“He was a mess, and not one person alive can tell me what the long-lasting effect to Dion Prestia is.
“But I guarantee you that the three minutes we had to sit there and watch him be held up is just awful for our code.
“So I’m not taking the Tom Stewart side of it, I’m taking the action out. The action itself, in my opinion, is all I want to talk about it.”
Prestia was eventually officially subbed off late in the first quarter, with ruckman Ivan Soldo taking his place on the field.
The bump left Richmond without one of their most important players in the three-point loss, while Stewart was free to roam the field and be in the top handful of players.
It’s created a debate about whether the game should have a ‘red card’ or similar system to penalise offenders during the game, Kane Cornes a proponent of the idea..
But King is against the idea.
“I just think it’s impossible to legislate, it’s impossible to get right, and you get it wrong once and it’s too big a penalty to have got wrong,” he stated.
“The system should work as it sits now, but the penalties, for mine, have got to be heavier.”
The Tribunal is likely to sit on Tuesday night to decide Stewart’s fate.
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/06/27/he-did-what-he-designed-to-do-king-staggered-by-mros-stewart-grading/
-
Here comes another, "I'm shocked to be sitting here", speech ... :thumbsdown
-
If we had done what we should have done and king hit the bastard we would have won the game gotten the 4 points. Now we lost dion, lost the game, lost the 4 points and he'll get 3 weeks because geelong get discounts from the AFL.
-
Geez the reactions are over the top by everyone. you would think he killed him. the game has really gone to the dogs so many wowsers with an opinion.
Sick to death of this nonsense, lets be clear here this is about the bump and if there is carry on like this every time something goes wrong then perhaps they should have the guts and address what this is really all about and that is out lawing the bump altogether.
Game will be poorer for it and it will ultimately become outdoor basketball if it hasnt already.
-
No one reacts (aside from the MRO ::) ) if it's a football act even if it's accidentally a fraction high (eg: Pickett's shepherd on Moore).
However, this was a non-football act. The sniper wasn't in the play, he ran past the ball and admitted to his coach (according to Scott) that he deliberately went to bump and got Prestia in the head. Prestia would not have been expecting it as it was off the ball. It was a dog act that we use to see in the 70s/80s. It's just luck Prestia's jaw wasn't broken. It deserves 6+ weeks but he'll only get a couple at the most because Scott and the Geelong sycophants in the media are creating this sob story for the sniper. FFS, we've got 7news tonight interviewing the prick saying he still feels bad :chuck :facepalm :nopity.
-
Tom Stewart left feeling 'ill' after horror hit that left Dion Prestia concussed
By Chris De Silva
Nine
27 June 2022 7pm
Geelong star Tom Stewart has admitted he still feels "ill" over his hit on Richmond's Dion Prestia, opening up on his apology to the Tigers star.
Stewart will front the AFL tribunal on Tuesday night as a result of his dangerous high bump that left Prestia with a concussion, and is likely to receive a ban in excess of three weeks.
The three-time All-Australian admitted he's still struggling to come to terms with what he called a "poor act and a poor decision", and is prepared to wear whatever suspension the tribunal determines.
"I've never been through this process before," he told reporters on Monday.
"I'm at the mercy of the tribunal now and I understand that it was a poor act and a poor decision by myself, but I have to live with that now and that's the hardest thing for me."
Stewart revealed he'd gotten Prestia's number off the latter's teammate Jack Riewoldt, and commended the Tigers star for being understanding.
"Nothing that I can say now justifies the actions that I showed on the day, but my immediate response was to just make sure Dion was OK," he said.
"I reached out to him immediately after the game, (Jack) Riewoldt gave me his number, and he was in good spirits. He understood that there was no malicious intent and it was a poor decision by me.
"It was (a tough conversation). Nothing makes it easier, but the way that he understood that my intent wasn't to maliciously hurt him and the way it happened wasn't directly meant for him, made me feel a little bit more at ease. But it's still been a pretty long few days."
Stewart's hit on Prestia reignited calls for a send-off rule to be introduced to the AFL, given the starring role he played in Geelong's three-point win over Richmond, and he admitted it was tough to remain on the field after the incident.
"It was really, really difficult," he said.
"I understood that I'd made a wrong decision and it still sits in my gut and still makes me feel quite ill. I understood that in that moment all I could do was to try and help the team.
"Unfortunately, with whatever happens going forward (at the tribunal), I can't do that for however long that period is. That was the one thing I had in my mind, that I can't undo what I did, but all I could do was to help the team win on that day."
https://wwos.nine.com.au/afl/news-2022-tom-stewart-opens-up-on-dion-prestia-hit-suspension-geelong-cats/e5d950e0-f4fc-486d-854a-ce190ccb1054
-
how does go stuff urself sound Stewart?
-
Stewart was feeling so ill that he didn't play a huge game...............not
-
With all the victim blaming Prestia will get 3 weeks for hurting Stewart’s feelings
-
Not only a sniper but also a narcissist ::).
But he's a "good bloke"(TM) :nopity.
-
The Cats and their top legal counsel Ben Ihle QC were on Monday night still in meetings discussing their defence for a contrite Stewart - considered a future Geelong captain - ahead of a tribunal hearing this week.
Stewart’s bump was classified by the match review officer as careless (but not intentional) conduct, severe impact, and high contact and was sent directly to the tribunal, meaning he faces a minimum three-match ban. But the Cats could argue it was high – not severe – impact, which, under the league’s guidelines, is a two-match suspension.
However, leading sports lawyer Paul Horvath, who was a tribunal defence lawyer for the Tigers for eight years, believes Stewart should be contrite and strike a deal with the AFL in a bid to ensure he was given only a three-match ban.
The AFL could call for a suspension of four or more games, particularly at a time when brain trauma, whether that be through concussion or the degenerative brain disease chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), has become a multimillion-dollar issue and could lead to a class action.
“I am not judging Tom Stewart. I respect him as a good player and all those sorts of things, it’s just the act, the protection of the head and, more importantly, the concussion and ongoing and long-term effects that is important in this,” Horvath said.
“You have got to look at it and realistically say: ‘We can’t get any less than three weeks, let’s try and do a deal with the AFL that agrees to three weeks.’ That’s what I would be doing, regardless of the classification.
“If the AFL agree to it, on the current classification of three weeks, I reckon that would be a pretty reasonable outcome in the circumstances. I am used to being a defence lawyer, I am always trying to keep penalties down, but I think, my feeling is, three weeks is about right for it.”
If the Cats attempt to argue the incident was high - and not severe - the AFL and tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson QC may pursue a more significant penalty.
At Patrick Dangerfield’s tribunal hearing in March last year, after the star Cat crunched Adelaide’s Jake Kelly and left him with a concussion and a broken nose, Dangerfield, through Ihle, pleaded guilty to rough conduct but challenged the grading of the impact, wanting it downgraded from severe to high.
The defence team even turned to definitions of the word “severe″, including the Macquarie and Oxford dictionaries, and asking Siri for a definition. However, the AFL jury agreed that the MRO’s grading was right.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/it-still-sits-in-my-gut-sorry-stewart-urged-to-strike-a-deal-over-prestia-bump-20220627-p5awzr.html
-
I may be in the minority in that I don’t think we need to call a witch hunt on the guy or question his character or sportsmanship. Footy is played at a million miles an hour and what may seem like a contrived move to take someone out may just be a poor decision made without much thought in a split of a second. I don’t know the guy but happy to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I’m saying that spareeeeeeeee me all of the “oh he felt terrible”, “he’s such a good guy”, “spare a thought for him” energy being spewed by the cats and the footy media that almost make Prestia feel like an after thought in all of this. The fact of the matter is he ran past the ball, got off the ground, bumped high and concussed Prestia and should be suspended 4-6 weeks accordingly. How many did bachar get in 2017 again?
Also if that act isn’t intentional then I don’t know what is. It was off the ball and he decided to bump the man. Is the definition of intentional wanting to actually hurt a player because I feel like you could argue almost anything is careless if that’s the case. Even the gaff hit on brayshaw, did he intentionally hook him in the jaw and knock him out or did he carelessly swing his arm and accidentally make contact higher than what he intended?
-
How was it careless?
He didn’t intend to bump? It was classic 70’s/80’s/90’s execution.
His choice to bump and we are supposed to believe his execution was off?
So every time he kicks the ball and it’s not perfect it’s careless?
Rubbish.
He went past the ball and lined Prestia up and executed perfectly. His intent was to bump and make contact. I don’t understand the confusion and why it’s classified a careless act and not intentional. Doesn’t make any sense to me.
I originally thought 4 weeks but after seeing it again in slow motion I’d say 6 minimum.
How he lined Prestia up and tucked his arm in there’s no difference to that act and Gaffs act. Both didn’t intend to knock the player out but that doesn’t mean the intention to do something wasn’t actually present to begin with.
-
From AFL360 tonight:
Whateley showed some previous incidents comparing their grading to what the player got.
1. Tom Jonas on Andrew Gaff (2016) - raised elbow - intentional/severe/high - 6 weeks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4l84wCcw00
2. Jeremy Cameron on Harris Andrews (2018) - raised elbow - intentional/severe/high - 5 weeks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07CEB12MwK4
3. Lindsay Thomas on Scott Selwood (2018) - bump - careless/severe/high - 3 weeks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6U0_le98rAw
4. Patrick Dangerfield on Jake Kelly (2018) - bump - careless/severe/high - 3 weeks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMDZGKH7XJ8
So the typical suspension for careless/severe/high incidents is 3 weeks.
Whateley said he has always had a problem with the word "careless". Bumps aren't classed as intentional when they should be for these type of incidents. Robbo agreed and said "careless" is more like saying "there there we know you really didn't mean it". He said it should be called "reckless" instead to which Whateley reminded him the reckless category use to exist but was removed by the AFL.
Robbo asked surely it must be intentional given Stewart intended to bump Prestia (Robbo added that he believes Stewart was trying to knock out Prestia). Whateley replied Michael Christian has never classed a bump as intentional and never will.
Robbo said Stewart should cop 5-6 weeks to send a message. It's not 2016-18 anymore when concussion wasn't the issue it is now. You can't have a guy like Prestia tapping the ball on and being knocked out like that to the point where his legs are all wobbly as he is being carried off.
-
LONGEST AFL SUSPENSIONS THIS CENTURY
Andrew Gaff (WCE) 8 matches 2018
Dean Solomon (FRE) 8 matches 2008
Barry Hall (SYD) 7 matches 2008
Steven Baker (STK) 7 matches 2007
Toby Greene (GWS) 6 matches 2021
Tom Bugg (MELB) 6 matches 2017
Tom Jonas (PORT) 6 matches 2016
Campbell Brown (GC) 6 matches 2012
Jeff Farmer (FRE) 6 matches 2007
Ben Johnson (COLL) 6 matches 2007
Brodie Holland (COLL) 6 matches 2006
Byron Pickett (PORT) 6 matches 2005
The MRO's grading of careless is likely to save Stewart from the heftier penalties that have been reserved for intentional, non-football acts like striking.
Of the 12 most severe penalties this century, earning a minimum six matches on the sidelines, nine have been graded as intentional, with the remaining three fitting into the since-removed category of reckless.
Jeremy Cameron's forearm to the head of Brisbane defender Harris Andrews in 2018 was graded as intentional, earning a five-match suspension.
There are similarities between that hit and the Stewart case, but the MRO chose the lesser grading of careless, making a suspension of less than five weeks the more likely outcome.
The Tribunal is free to judge the Geelong defender's actions as it sees fit, however, using the MRO's grading as a guide only.
https://www.theroar.com.au/2022/06/28/brett-geeves-spare-us-the-good-guy-defence-chris-stewarts-brutal-hit-is-proof-afl-needs-a-red-card/
-
Spare us the good guy defence, Chris, Stewart's brutal hit is proof AFL needs a red card
Brett Geeves
theRoar.com.au
28 June 2022
This is what Chris Scott said about Tom Stewart, after Stewart sent Dion Prestia into next week with his decision to run past the ball and hit Prestia in the head with what can only be described as an intentional hit.
“I’ve known Tom for a long time and he is a scrupulously fair player and just a fantastic, strong character – fundamental to what we do at Geelong. When my time’s come and gone, I’ll look back and say I was honoured to have known and coached Tom Stewart.
“That’s partly because when I spoke to him post-game, he just said: ‘I’ve just made a horrible error and I feel terrible about it … I ran past the ball and I chose to bump. I didn’t mean to do it, but gee it was terrible execution and I’m going to pay the price for it’.
“I wouldn’t usually be this expansive, but I think it speaks to the man. He knows he’s done the wrong thing. Was it deliberate? Of course it wasn’t. He’s made an error and, as people do that I admire, he’s prepared to stand up and say ‘I was wrong’.
“It doesn’t help then the idea of restorative justice still exists. Like they (the Tigers) lose one of their best players, but we don’t run away from that fact. But he should have some comfort in the fact that it’s not him and it was an error of execution and nothing more.”
Sorry, Chris, but like I’ve been saying to my Geelong-worshipping father all week, the “good guy” defence ain’t it.
The vision of Dion Prestia being cradled in the arms of the Richmond trainer, struggling with the basics of movement like a newborn giraffe, was one of the more disturbing things I’ve seen on a football field.
It was Brent Staker’s eyes rolling back in his head, before his head hit the ground, after Barry Hall slammed his fist in his face. It was Andrew Brayshaw’s jaw being shattered by the wild swinging arm of Andrew Gaff. It was the 70s and 80s.
It was worthy of being sent from the ground.
Worse, perhaps, was the fact that the officiating umpire reported Stewart immediately for his hit on Prestia, who was in such a bad way that a Richmond team-mate had to take the free- kick, and play was allowed to continue around Prestia, and the team of Richmond medicos, who were crosschecking the safety protocols of the unknown – consciousness and a neck injury.
The three officiating umpires in that game need a couple of weeks in the VFL for that display of player care.
As for Stewart and the “good guy” defence, he could donate a retriever puppy per day to a Geelong orphanage, and it won’t remove him from the ugliness of the severe impact and high contact that left Dion Prestia needing time travel to re-enter this sphere from his current head space of Sunday the 3rd of July.
In the modern day, when the foundation of the game’s rules are being shifted so we can protect the players from the carnage that is Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE), should Chris Scott be going down this path of Angelic Tom and his impeccable character in the hope of minimising his suspension damage?
How many times have we heard that any decision to run past the ball and bump is a dangerous act? One that comes with severe consequences on the tribunal scale of MRP Lotto should you hurt the player you’ve lined up.
The difference for a report sent direct to the tribunal in “Careless” and “Intentional” as gradings, when placed alongside severe impact and high contact, is the starting point of one week.
And through the complete farce of the assessment in this case, Stewart is looking at a three-week ban, which isn’t nearly enough. This needed to start at a four-match ban, with the AFL’s prosecution lawyer working all levels of linguistic wizardry to ensure Stewart sits out a minimum of five.
As for the aforementioned restorative justice, Chris Scott is right to point out the lack of immediate justice for Richmond’s best player being taken out of the game by a dirty and unnecessary play, while the chap responsible for his departure goes on a 17-intercept-possession-rampage to be the difference between the two teams.
‘Richmond are the one that have suffered the penalty. [Geelong’s next opponent] North Melbourne shouldn’t get the benefit next week.
“They get no benefit whatsoever from losing one of their best players. That’s my version of restorative justice, that the victim should actually be [compensated] in some way.”
Is that Chris Scott acknowledging Tom Stewart should have been sent from the ground?
No. Sadly he continues and contradicts himself wildly.
“The idea of sending someone off and getting it wrong in a big game is a risk not worth taking.’”
But CTE is?
Because that is the reality when you run past the ball and choose to bump.
https://www.theroar.com.au/2022/06/28/brett-geeves-spare-us-the-good-guy-defence-chris-stewarts-brutal-hit-is-proof-afl-needs-a-red-card/
-
SEN just said the Tribunal hearing starts at 5.15pm.
-
Tim English to miss a second match with delayed concussion.
Let's see tonight how serious the AFL are about protecting the head as well as cheap shots that knock players out. I won't hold my breath ::).
-
Book needs to be thrown at him.
Had the option of moving either side of him. Prestia jumped in the air and wasnt moving in any direction. He was late and had option to put his hands up and push him if he wanted to.
Not interested in a witch hunt but with CTE information. This needs to be 5-6 weeks.
-
Will probably get 3 going off past history
Should be 4
The good guy dribble along with the Geelong factor will probably have it at 3
-
If he gets 3 will the AFL appeal the decision like how they did with Bachar?
-
Geelong nuffers on SEN making every pathetic excuse for Stewart ::). One idiot caller even compared Stewart to Bailey Smith saying Smith was a worse example to kids :facepalm
-
The WAFL has a blue card. Both the concussed player and the reported player have to leave the field for 15 minutes.
https://www.wafootball.com.au/news/21851/wafl-and-waflw-officially-implement-blue-card-rule
-
The Tribunal hearing has started. It will be only a 3 or 4 week suspension.
THREE WEEKS OR FOUR?
We're underway.
Tom Stewart's counsel is Ben Ihle and The AFL counsel is Nicholas Pane.
Ihle says Stewart accepts the charge and the classification.
Pane says the player's position is that a three-week penalty is appropriate, while the AFL's position is a four-week penalty would be appropriate.
So the boundary lines have been drawn.
NO FRACTURE
AFL confirms that Richmond has provided a subsequent CT scan to the match-day assessment of Dion Prestia and confirmed that no fracture of the cheek was present.
STEWART SUBMISSIONS
Tom Stewart has submitted two examples to The AFL he wants considered.
The first was a Sam Reid (GWS) bump on Nat Fyfe in 2021 that was graded as careless, high impact and high contact and was given two weeks.
Remember, Stewart's case here has been assessed as severe impact.
The next example is Paddy Dangerfield on Jake Kelly in 2021 that was graded as careless, severe impact and high contact. Dangerfield was given three weeks.
AFL'S SUBMISSION
AFL counsel Nicholas Pane is speaking and reiterates its want for a four-week suspension.
"The bump was delivered by Stewart at speed after he'd gone past the ball with Presita unsuspecting and vulnerable to being injured," he said.
"The Injury suffered by Prestia, concussion, is a serious injury in itself.
"It's the very type of action which can cause serious injury."
He says players in The AFL have a far greater understanding of concussion than they did even 18 months ago in the Dangerfield incident.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
-
"LESS THAN HALF A SECOND"
It's Geelong counsel Ben Ihle now. He has three points he wants to argue for Stewart.
The first centres on the circumstances and consequences of bump itself. He says Stewart had 0.39sec from Prestia tapping until the contact came. He says it's not pre-meditated, Stewart doesn't leave his feet and his elbow was tucked.
He talks about Stewart's body language and how concerned he was for Prestia.
"He made the wrong decision, but it was less than half a second."
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
-
It's Geelong counsel Ben Ihle now. He has three points he wants to argue for Stewart.
The first centres on the circumstances and consequences of bump itself. He says Stewart had 0.39sec from Prestia tapping until the contact came. He says it's not pre-meditated, Stewart doesn't leave his feet and his elbow was tucked.
He talks about Stewart's body language and how concerned he was for Prestia.
"He made the wrong decision, but it was less than half a second."
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
Just BS from Geelong but what did we expect! Scott said in his presser that Stewart told him he went to bump Prestia. That's pre-meditated ::).
3-4 weeks is a pee weak suspension. What a joke! >:(
-
STEWART CHOSE TO BUMP
Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson asks Ben Ihle (Geelong) whether Stewart chose to bump.
He says there's no way he could make any "sensible resistance" to that.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
-
STEWART CHOSE TO BUMP
Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson asks Ben Ihle (Geelong) whether Stewart chose to bump.
He says there's no way he could make any "sensible resistance" to that.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
Yes Gleeson. So why is the grade just "careless" when it was an intentional act?! :thumbsdown
-
STEWART'S GOOD CHARACTER
Geelong is now arguing the Tribunal should consider the remorse shown by Stewart and his good character.
His counsel Ben Ihle says the level of remorse in the quarter-time huddle, by Chris Scott post-match and in a doorstop interview yesterday were all noteworthy.
"He has expressed his genuine concern for Prestia and genuine disappointment in his decision."
He also says Stewart was happy to accept the "severe" classification of the impact and not argue it as high.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
-
STEWART'S GOOD CHARACTER
Geelong is now arguing the Tribunal should consider the remorse shown by Stewart and his good character.
His counsel Ben Ihle says the level of remorse in the quarter-time huddle, by Chris Scott post-match and in a doorstop interview yesterday were all noteworthy.
"He has expressed his genuine concern for Prestia and genuine disappointment in his decision."
He also says Stewart was happy to accept the "severe" classification of the impact and not argue it as high.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
If you play for Geesook and haven't insisted on a trade then you're clearly of poor character
-
Here comes the sob story :nopity.
The sniper could hardly say otherwise about it being severe and high. The vision clearly shows what a dog act it was.
-
OFF TO DELIBERATE
So there we go, after 45 minutes of submissions, the Tribunal is off to deliberate.
The AFL wants four weeks and Geelong want three.
Stay with us and we'll have the verdict soon.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
-
Geelong seem to run the AFL so he will get 3
-
4 would be more than fair off recent history
It’s a 3-4 week job
The mass hysteria is over the top
If he gets 4, it’s plenty .. don’t see how 4 is pee weak MT
3 on the other hand would be weak
-
30 mins gone in the deliberation. Still waiting.
-
30 mins gone in the deliberation. Still waiting.
4 is week as pee also. It should be a minimum of 6
-
FOUR WEEKS FOR STEWART
And it's four weeks for Tom Stewart.
Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson said:
"The bump was late. He (Prestia) was wide open, exposed and vulnerable.
"Stewart had sufficient time to see Prestia had not taken possession.
"He ran past the ball and made a conscious, albeit split-second, decision to bump Presita at speed.
"The degree of carelessness was high.
"He breached his duty of care by some margin."
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
-
"The degree of carelessness was high" Is that the same as saying it was deliberate? Seems so. That's a big F U to Christian and Scotty x 2
-
So over to the AFL to appeal the leniency of the sentence
-
FOUR WEEKS FOR STEWART
And it's four weeks for Tom Stewart.
Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson said:
"The bump was late. He (Prestia) was wide open, exposed and vulnerable.
"Stewart had sufficient time to see Prestia had not taken possession.
"He ran past the ball and made a conscious, albeit split-second, decision to bump Presita at speed.
"The degree of carelessness was high.
"He breached his duty of care by some margin."
https://www.afl.com.au/news/789194/follow-it-live-stewart-facing-the-tribunal-now
"The degree of carelessness was high" - We really think it was intentional but we won't call it intentional ::).
So much for sending a message about dog acts that cause head injuries/concussion. Weak as usual AFL. The sniper misses just two more games than Prestia the victim does :thumbsdown.
-
“He made a conscious decision” sure sounds like a fancy way of saying deliberate to me.
-
4 would be more than fair off recent history
It’s a 3-4 week job
The mass hysteria is over the top
If he gets 4, it’s plenty .. don’t see how 4 is pee weak MT
3 on the other hand would be weak
It was a non-football dog act Damo. Going past the ball and knocking out an opponent off the ball is something out of the 70s/80s that doesn't belong in the modern game. Prestia was in a serious state. It wasn't a typical "bump". The MRO should have called it intentional as that's what it was and the AFL should have demanded 5-6 weeks if they were serious. The judgement pretty much calls it intentional without using the word "intentional". Typical spineless AFL. This doesn't pass the pub test. Anytime in the future we hear Gill/AFL taking about the need to protect the head it will be just virtue signalling.
-
I thought 4 was about the mark
Just my personal take
-
This is why we needed to retaliate and king hit the bastard.
-
This is why we needed to retaliate and king hit the bastard.
We should definitely have retaliated in some capacity
We also should have called for the stretcher to stop play
I believe Pickett should have got zero for his against the Aints, and Stewart 4ish for this.
Just think if you go all mass hysteria and say this is a 6+ job, then Marlion probably got off ok
-
I thought 4 was about the mark
Just my personal take
Not having a go at you Damo.
Just peeved with the pee weak AFL and still angry at losing a pure ball player like Prestia thanks to the gutless sniper and his scum club down the highway who have form. The AFL will only have themselves to blame next time the clubs meet especially if it's a final later this year.
-
I personally don’t think Stewart is a gutless sniper
He’s a tough ball player normally
He’s being made out some cross between David Rhys-Jones and Hannibal Lector
This was a terrible act , but people make errors .. it’s not like he’s a repeat offender with a career of dogs acts
In saying that , I’d happily have us do the Yeats/Dermie 1989 as some sort of retaliation come finals time 😂😂😂
-
This is why we needed to retaliate and king hit the bastard.
The MRO would have called that intentional if we had retaliated like that and we'd lose that player for the rest of the H/A season at least.
Need to put this away in the memory bank and use it as motivation to make sure we're there come September. The best revenge would be to do the snipers over in a knockout final (excuse the pun).
-
So Prestia misses nearly a whole game and then can’t play next week, and Stewart gets 4.
I thought 4 was correct but it just doesn’t seem right.
-
4 is not stuffin correct. It’s a bloody joke.
Can someone please post up the bachar 4 week hit then perhaps someone can tell me how they both received the same result.
-
I thought 4 was about right, providing Stewart makes up the 2 that Prestia is already missing (Saturday's game & next week) & then adds the 4 onto it! 2+4=6! >:(
-
I personally don’t think Stewart is a gutless sniper
He’s a tough ball player normally
He’s being made out some cross between David Rhys-Jones and Hannibal Lector
This was a terrible act , but people make errors .. it’s not like he’s a repeat offender with a career of dogs acts
In saying that , I’d happily have us do the Yeats/Dermie 1989 as some sort of retaliation come finals time 😂😂😂
There’d be a sting in the Granny if we played them.
-
Once they went in and the AFL's rep asked for 4 weeks, he was never going to get more than 4
And of course the moment it was graded careless and not intentional, it was only ever going to be 4 weeks
It should have been at least 5
-
Unfortunately, 4’s about right if you take his record into account
-
So is it worth the same as Bachar???
Yes or no. Keen for everyone’s thoughts.
-
I reckon he wanted to hurt Prestia, just not hit his head/concuss him.
Knock the wind out of him sort of thing.
4 weeks is the minimum I'm OK with. 5 would feel better. 6 a stretch.
-
Can someone please post up the bachar 4 week hit then perhaps someone can tell me how they both received the same result.
Here's the vision: Houli swung his arm back and got Jed Lamb high knocking him out.
https://www.afl.com.au/video/99415/houli-reported-for-lamb-strike
It was graded as intentional and high impact to the head.
https://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/40942/houli-to-face-tribunal
Houli was originally given 2 weeks by the tribunal but the AFL appealed describing the verdict as “manifestly inadequate” and he ended getting suspended for 4 weeks.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/bachar-houli-back-at-the-tribunal-as-afl-appeals-twoweek-suspension/news-story/f5ab91597424daa0f5bca6929fa7b247
-
Jack Riewoldt was 360 last night and asked what he saw.
Jack said he didn't know what happened. He was wondering why Stewart was being booed all night. No one remonstrated at the time because it was off the ball so no one saw it. Jack actually went up to Stewart after the game and patted him on the head. Jack knows him well and likes him from their time together in the same AFLX side.
------------------------------------------------------------
After the Tigers’ loss, Riewoldt could be seen exchanging words with Stewart, something he explained on AFL 360.
“I didn’t even know what had happened at that point, they booed him for the whole game but I didn’t cotton on to what had actually happened,” he said.
“No one remonstrated because it was past the ball and no one saw it. I just went up to him, I’d figured out something had happened with him, I said it is what it is.
“He’s not a bad guy, I’ve had beers with him and I really like him, unfortunately he made a blunder and he’ll serve the consequences.
“He puts his hand up, he’s made a blue and he does what a good person does, he owns it and moves on.”
Source: Foxsports (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/richmond-tigers/afl-news-2022-tom-stewart-hit-dion-prestia-concussion-why-didnt-umpires-stop-the-game-jack-riewoldt-interview-video-richmond-vs-geelong/news-story/eea1bd5fe9b9eddc1010b22196adb3ba)
-
Thought houli should have had 3. Dunno how they called that intentional when he was trying to run off the bloke holding his jumper and not even looking ffs.
-
‘Stop insulting everyone’: AFL urged to fix flaw that’s been ‘consistently wrong for eight years’
Ben Waterworth
Fox Sports
June 29th, 2022
Herald Sun chief football writer Mark Robinson says the AFL must stop “insulting” the footy world by grading certain bumps ‘careless’ as AFL 360 co-host Gerard Whateley urged the league to make an “essential” MRO guidelines change.
Robinson and Whateley’s comments come after the AFL tribunal handed Geelong star Tom Stewart a four-game ban for his ugly bump on Saturday that left Richmond star Dion Prestia concussed.
“As I said from the start, I accept the tribunal’s decision. I was left to their discretion,” Stewart told reporters post-hearing on Tuesday night.
“Obviously disappointed in my actions and I had to own that as a man.
“Still my immediate response was Dion’s wellness and that of his family that have had to experience this. So as disappointed and disheartened as I am right now, it’s still not about me. It’s about Dion’s wellbeing and how he is.
“Ultimately what I chose to do resulted in somebody getting knocked out – that’s not how I play the game, never has been. My actions resulted in a consequence that I didn’t want to happen.”
The MRO graded Stewart’s rough conduct charge as severe impact, high contact and, crucially, careless conduct, with the latter definition indicating the act was assessed as a bump, not a raised elbow.
Past acts from ex-Power player Lindsay Thomas (2018) and Geelong superstar Patrick Dangerfield (2021) that yielded similar gradings under the MRO matrix led to three-game bans.
As Whateley pointed out on AFL 360 on Tuesday night, Stewart’s ban lifts the penalty for any ‘careless’ act that results in concussion for an opponent from three weeks to four weeks.
Speaking on Fox Footy, Whateley said the tribunal’s decision “further enshrines the penalties for players who inflict concussion as we go along”.
Asked if the four-week ban would be a big enough penalty or deterrent for players to stop similar actions, Whateley told AFL 360: “I would answer that partly with the game did more this time than it did last time. So 18 months ago, it settled at three weeks (for Dangerfield’s bump) and now it has lifted that to four weeks.”
The veteran broadcaster said the “natural progression” was to grade bumps like Stewart’s as ‘intentional’, rather than ‘careless’.
“There should be the intentional bump,” Whateley said.
“It‘s never been ruled this way under this regime. It’s time to stop that and actually assess intentional bumps that can have no other outcome other than serious injury and put them in the international basket, which allows you to provide greater penalty as you go. It means you’re in the five to six category (for the Stewart bump) as a starting point.
“So is the game doing enough? I think that‘s the next progression between seasons is to change that, which has been rigid and consistent – but I think it’s been consistently wrong for eight years and it’s time to adjust that to move with the overall philosophy that they clearly are aiming for.”
Robinson said it was baffling how acts like Stewart’s can be graded as ‘careless’ when he intended to bump – he ran past the ball – and showed no duty of care in the moment, despite showing obvious remorse after making contact.
“The AFL and MRO – not the person, but the system – how about you stop insulting football by calling that ‘careless’. You‘re insulting everyone,” Robinson told Fox Footy’s AFL 360.
“That wasn‘t careless. He (Stewart) said he cared for Dion after the event – ‘I was really worried’, I’m sure you were – but in that moment, you did not care because you went past the ball and you didn’t show a duty of care.
“So don‘t give us ‘he was careless’ when he actually didn’t show any care in the moment. Let’s strike that word and stop insulting us.”
Whateley added: “It’s really easy to move that to intentional once you move past the ball in such a manner. It‘s long overdue and it’s essential in its application next year.”
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-news-2022-tom-stewart-tribunal-ban-for-bump-afl-360-hosts-urge-league-to-change-mro-careless-grading-to-intentional/news-story/9c751e70283ae0851311c4738a9a70d7
-
Footy’s gone to a crazy place: Balme
Mark Stevens
RSN
29 June 2022
Senior Richmond club advisor Neil Balme has questioned the four-game ban for Geelong’s Tom Stewart.
While some have argued the suspension was too short, Balme declared on RSN 927 that it was too harsh _ even if Stewart concussed Tiger Dion Prestia.
“Footy’s gone into a crazy place,” Balme said.
“I understand why the tribunal did what they did, but it does seem extremely harsh to me. I don’t think there was any real nastiness in it.”
Balme was asked about the Richmond player remaining disciplined and not over-reacting after the collision.
“If it had have been really nasty, that’s when you do. I don’t think it was nasty,” Balme said.
“I thought he was just trying to bump him and make it hard for him to play well … I’m probably a little more forgiving than others.”
On the send-off rule discussion, Balme said: “The less power officials have got, the better off we are. That’s only my opinion”.
“They influence the game too much, we want the game to be influenced by how the players play, not how the umpires umpire.”
Balme indicated Prestia could only miss one game.
“He’s fine. I don’t think there’s too many long term issues with him,” Balme said.
https://www.rsn.net.au/afl/29/06/2022/footys-gone-to-a-crazy-place-balme/
-
Good onya Balmey
With the hysteria you would think he’d shot him
4 is PLENTY
-
Yes Balmey :shh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig85NkmAnVQ
In Balmey's day, Stewart would've left the field via a stretcher. One of the reasons Balmey went nuts in the 1973 GF was as retaliation for what Vinny Waite and co. had done targeting our smaller blokes.
-
Good onya Balmy of course there was no nastiness to it the idea was to knock him over and intimidate and it went wrong.
If the ball was there and we had the same result i would be saying free kick for high contact and that would be it.
We don't suspend people for high tackles that have gone wrong or do we now?.
Ah well the wowser brigade have had their moment but i don't think they realise the damage they are doing to the game with their hysteria.
-
We don't suspend people for high tackles that have gone wrong or do we now?.
Of course we do. What are you proposing--the William Burroughs rule?
"No, your Honour, I know I shot my wife's head off, but it was a drunken game of William Tell gone wrong. There was no intent."
"Oh fair enough, that's fine then."
-
Chris Scott on @thefrontbar7 trying to summarise the Stewart hit on Prestia - and I REALLY wanted to let this incident go - but then he bloody well sums it up through the modern player prism as “two players running full speed” at one another. Seriously?
https://twitter.com/KonradMarshall/status/1542115809027170305
-
stuffin gaslighter piece of poo this bloke is.
Has anyone got the vision of the final siren in the game? Post that up and see if he anyone has anything positive to say about this scum and his equally scum club
stuff I really hate this football club.
-
We don't suspend people for high tackles that have gone wrong or do we now?.
Of course we do. What are you proposing--the William Burroughs rule?
"No, your Honour, I know I shot my wife's head off, but it was a drunken game of William Tell gone wrong. There was no intent."
"Oh fair enough, that's fine then."
:lol :rollin
-
Sorry but Balme take is crap. Have we forgotten what happened to Shane Tuck? Danny Frawley? And how that has impacted our club and the game in general?
The game has changed. The days of cheering for Scotty Turner absolutely ironing out Gary O'Donnell is gone.
If you choose to bump and hit them in the head you are toast. If you concuss them or knock them out cold you are I enormous trouble.
Nastiness has nothing to do with it. He ran well passed the ball, Intention was to bump, got him high and knocked him out. That's not a footy act anymore and 4 weeks was minimum. If that was Grimes I'd be going you idiot now we are without you for a month.
-
He is not wrong with this
“The less power officials have got, the better off we are. That’s only my opinion”.
Their influence on the game has already stuffed the game, would be worse if they decided on send offs
-
He is not wrong with this
“The less power officials have got, the better off we are. That’s only my opinion”.
Their influence on the game has already stuffed the game, would be worse if they decided on send offs
Truth
-
Dimma putting Tom Browne back in his place over this :snidegrin.
3:15 min mark https://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/1160770/hardwick-previews-west-coast
------------------------------
Geelong’s All-Australian defender Tom Stewart copped a four-match ban for his heavily-scrutinised bump on Prestia, with calls growing for a send-off rule in the wake of that incident.
“That, to me, is not a Damien Hardwick decision or a Gill McLachlan decision,” Hardwick said.
“That’s an 18-club decision. I think we’ve got to get better at a collaborative approach about it. Let’s figure out what the clubs want. They’re the key stakeholders, so let’s put it to the clubs.”
But Hardwick was keen to “move on” after Stewart received his sanction, arguing it was “a brutal game” and players had only a split second to make on-field decisions.
“Things happen in AFL footy – some good, some bad. What we’ve got to understand is that these things will happen from time to time,” he said.
“Dion won’t play this week. Would I have loved him to be available last week and this week? Absolutely. Sometimes things happen in footy that are unexplainable.
“Tom’s got his four weeks now, so we move on. We’re looking forward to the West Coast game.”
Source: HeraldSun (https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/afl-richmond-coach-damien-hardwick-confident-that-liam-baker-will-stay-at-the-tigers-despite-west-coasts-interest/news-story/04f5c922f6ab31d885c0366e83eab56d)
-
stuffin gaslighter piece of poo this bloke is.
Has anyone got the vision of the final siren in the game? Post that up and see if he anyone has anything positive to say about this scum and his equally scum club
stuff I really hate this football club.
Don't have the vision but Scott was banging on the glass and celebrating like they had won the flag.
How about Selwood laughing and patting Stewart after the siren ::).
(https://www.foxsports.com.au/pmd/images/2022/06/27/828970_640x360_large_20220627091047.jpg)
-
stuffin gaslighter piece of poo this bloke is.
Has anyone got the vision of the final siren in the game? Post that up and see if he anyone has anything positive to say about this scum and his equally scum club
stuff I really hate this football club.
Don't have the vision but Scott was banging on the glass and celebrating like they had won the flag.
How about Selwood laughing and patting Stewart after the siren ::).
(https://www.foxsports.com.au/pmd/images/2022/06/27/828970_640x360_large_20220627091047.jpg)
Yep i saw that. Hope Dimma puts that up before our next game against them.
I just read somewhere perhaps a twitter comment someone had made regarding Scott's comments in that punching the wall incident.
Was probably nothing other than he is the biggest flog in the afl coaching right now.
-
We don't suspend people for high tackles that have gone wrong or do we now?.
Of course we do. What are you proposing--the William Burroughs rule?
"No, your Honour, I know I shot my wife's head off, but it was a drunken game of William Tell gone wrong. There was no intent."
"Oh fair enough, that's fine then."
I suppose when we have nothing else we resort to spurious arguments.
What game are you watching.tackles bumps everything in the game is done with intent EVERYTHING they are not the last time i looked illegal as long as they stay with in the rules yet we dont rub out players for a tackle that goes high nope thats a simple free kick and we move on but a bump that goes wrong and look at what we get mass hysteria from a whole pile of wowsers.
-
We don't suspend people for high tackles that have gone wrong or do we now?.
Of course we do. What are you proposing--the William Burroughs rule?
"No, your Honour, I know I shot my wife's head off, but it was a drunken game of William Tell gone wrong. There was no intent."
"Oh fair enough, that's fine then."
I suppose when we have nothing else we resort to spurious arguments.
What game are you watching.tackles bumps everything in the game is done with intent EVERYTHING they are not the last time i looked illegal as long as they stay with in the rules yet we dont rub out players for a tackle that goes high nope thats a simple free kick and we move on but a bump that goes wrong and look at what we get mass hysteria from a whole pile of wowsers.
You say spurious I say reductio ad absurdum.
We punish players for tackles that inadvertently damage and endanger the head (and brain). A clear case is a tackle that drives the head dangerously into the ground. And that's not even a high tackle!
You seem to be confusing intent as a general concept with specific intents, ie yes all football acts are done with intent--with intentionality--but they could be done with intent A: dispossess my opponent legally or intent B: damage and incapacitate my opponent or intent C D E ... n.
To make the argument that all football acts have intentionality and therefore it is inconsistent to ban players for specific intents is spurious indeed.
If you think that a high tackle that slips above the shoulder and slings the neck is the same thing qualitatively as a high speed bump to someone's cranium then you would identify reversing into your wheelie bin and getting hit by a 10 ton truck at 100 km/h as the same thing--they're both 'collisions'. I put it to anyone else reading this that that is absurd, as is comparing a high tackle to a severe impact bump to someone's brain cavity.
That's reductio ad absurdum.
-
bump to someone's brain cavity.
That's reductio ad absurdum.
Nice work! You could've just gone with gluteous maximus ... :thumbsup
-
bump to someone's brain cavity.
That's reductio ad absurdum.
Nice work! You could've just gone with gluteous maximus ... :thumbsup
Biggus Dichus? :)
-
stuffin gaslighter piece of poo this bloke is.
Has anyone got the vision of the final siren in the game? Post that up and see if he anyone has anything positive to say about this scum and his equally scum club
stuff I really hate this football club.
Don't have the vision but Scott was banging on the glass and celebrating like they had won the flag.
How about Selwood laughing and patting Stewart after the siren ::).
(https://www.foxsports.com.au/pmd/images/2022/06/27/828970_640x360_large_20220627091047.jpg)
It'll never make up for all those finals the Cats choked in against us :rollin
-
bump to someone's brain cavity.
That's reductio ad absurdum.
Nice work! You could've just gone with gluteous maximus ... :thumbsup
Biggus Dichus? :)
:lol
-
Time for the AFL to emerge from its hermit kingdom and send players off
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/time-for-the-afl-to-emerge-from-its-hermit-kingdom-and-send-players-off-20220701-p5ay7v.html