Daniel Jackson cops 3 weeks for headbutting

[rufio_1991]

dan jackson 2 weeks for head butting
c brown got nothing......go figure?

[WilliamPowell]

dan jackson 2 weeks for head butting
c brown got nothing......go figure?

Not surprised Dan's been cited - brain fades seem to get punished 

As for Brown - strike another one up for the inconsistent Match Reveiw Panel

[one-eyed]

Here's the official MRP report......


Daniel Jackson, Richmond, has been charged with a Level Three misconduct offence in that he headbutted Campbell Brown, Hawthorn, during the fourth quarter of the Round Eight match between Richmond and Hawthorn, played at the MCG on Sunday May 16, 2010.

In summary, his previous poor record means that his two-game sanction must remain at two games, even with an early plea.

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 250 demerit points and a two-match sanction. He has 80 points carried over from within the last 12 months, increasing the penalty to 330 demerit points and a three-match sanction. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to 247.50 points and a two-match sanction.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/94481/default.aspx

[RollsRoyce]

Once again the Tigers get right royally rogered. Not only did we not receive a free kick for head high contact against Jacko, Tambling and Webberley. But now Jacko is rubbed out for justifiably retaliating when big brave Camp-as Brown taunts him off the ground after his cheap hit.
I hope we challenge it. Even if we lose we have to make a statement that we wont lie down and take this continual injustice.

[Owl]

These pricks just bend the rules to suit themselves, just like the umpires did during the game.  There seems to be a conspiracy between the media, the AFL and the umpires to fk with us.  There was no way Brown was playing the ball, you see him drop the shoulder and charge in lining up Jacko.  If the player doesn't have possession, does that mean that players all around the ground can start shoulder charging each other as fair bumps off play?  If so, I think we have something for Polly and Rance to start practicing, they are both big units, get em splitting opposition players down the trunk without the ball, hell even off the play, its all kosher apparently.

[yellowandback]

Joke decision. If you were a mum - the so called target the afl are anxious to placate re:- head high contact  being a perceived deterrent to their kids playing AFL - and you saw browns hit and then jacksons retaliation, you'd be bemused by the consequential suspensions handed out. Idiots.

[Smokey]

These pricks just bend the rules to suit themselves, just like the umpires did during the game.  There seems to be a conspiracy between the media, the AFL and the umpires to fk with us.  There was no way Brown was playing the ball, you see him drop the shoulder and charge in lining up Jacko.  If the player doesn't have possession, does that mean that players all around the ground can start shoulder charging each other as fair bumps off play?  If so, I think we have something for Polly and Rance to start practicing, they are both big units, get em splitting opposition players down the trunk without the ball, hell even off the play, its all kosher apparently.

 

[Smokey]

Identifies the next step our club has to take - stand up to the AFL.  We have 'small man syndrome' and need to address that as much as any deficiency in our list or match day outcome.  While we continue to bend over they will continue to shaft us. For proof, go research the case of Kennett vs AFL.  And if that doesn't convince you then research the case of McGuire vs AFL.

[Hellenic Tiger]

The head is only sacrasanct when a RFC player comes into contact with it.

I would like to see Jake King in round 17 in his final RFC game against the Pies put himself into MRP folklore and have a DVD of what he does to Didak, Thomas and Maxwell become the memo sent out to all AFL teams in the next pre season.

What one has to do with the other I don't know. Just feeling vitriolic towards some other clubs right now.

[one-eyed]

Jacko is off to the tribunal to challenge the report. He risks being 3 weeks out if the appeal fails.

[WilliamPowell]

Jacko is off to the tribunal to challenge the report. He risks being 3 weeks out if the appeal fails.

Staggering

[RollsRoyce]

Jacko is off to the tribunal to challenge the report. He risks being 3 weeks out if the appeal fails.

Staggering

Why is it staggering? Nick Maxwell busted a guys jaw and got away with it. Aside from the fact that Jackson hardly touched Brown, he did what any reasonable human being would have done after he gets KO'd, no free kick, Brown dobs him in to the umpire under the blood rule, then follows him to the bench taunting him about the hit.
This case will really test whether or not the AFL has an agenda against Richmond, as many of us suspect, because if there is any degree of consistency in the MRP process he will have to get off. And if you don't believe me,ask David Hille and Campbell Brown, the luckiest players to still be running around next week.

[WilliamPowell]

]

Why is it staggering? Nick Maxwell busted a guys jaw and got away with it. Aside from the fact that Jackson hardly touched Brown, he did what any reasonable human being would have done after he gets KO'd, no free kick, Brown dobs him in to the umpire under the blood rule, then follows him to the bench taunting him about the hit.
This case will really test whether or not the AFL has an agenda against Richmond, as many of us suspect, because if there is any degree of consistency in the MRP process he will have to get off. And if you don't believe me,ask David Hille and Campbell Brown, the luckiest players to still be running around next week.

Firstly let me make this very clear - I think the MRP is a joke. Their lack of consistency every week proves that.

Why do I find the decision to contest staggering?

Because and you've actually highlighted one of my reasons why - Retaliation. The tribunal historically have not looked favourably on people who use retaliation as an excuse (defence) and seriously what other defence can they use? I understand why Daniel did what he did but none the less it was a "brain fade" and I reckon they wont look favourably on that either

Also (again you've mentioned it) CONSISTENCY. With the process the way it is with not one iota of consistency I question is it really worth risking 3 weeks over the 2 he was offered? The Tribunal are about as consistent as the MRP

If he gets off I will be rapted but he he doesn't you have to question whether it has been smart to challenge it

And I don't think you can compare the Maxwell, Hille or Brown incidents - totally different actions IMHO. Were the 3 you mention lucky? Absolutely, but that isn't going to be make one shred of diffenrece at the tribunal tonight

[Tigermonk]

Richmond shafted again

[TigerLand]

WP look at it like this

He accepts = Misses 2 weeks vs Ess and Port
He charges and gets done for 3 weeks = Misses vs Ess, Port and Saints.

All he is risking is the game against Saints to play against Essendon and Port. Games we may be a slight chance to win. The risk is missing out on the game against Saints which we have no chance of winning.

So in laws of averages probably a clever challenge. Worst case scenario he misses the Saints game compared to accepting it and missing the next 2 anyway.