Cotch reported and cops 4 weeks!!! [update: appeal fails]

[Jacosh]

For the Pro - Tankers.
Who was it that said coaches can manufacture losses.  One way is to let the players know they can get away with this sort of behavoiur with no repercussions from the club.
Cant win if you dont have your best players out there. Dont bother appealing the decision, let him rest for 4 weeks then Lids or Martin or someone else can have a rest for a few weeks.  At least we will get a name as a tough (albeit dirty) team and will be feared for the next few seasons.

For the Anti - Tankers.
Or on the other hand, appeal with legal council. Precedents have been set and the match review panel are to be held to those or face legal action. Taking it to court if necessary, this will force the AFL to look at the inconsistency of the whole reporting and sanctioning of players.  At present they believe they are a law unto themselves and one way or another this has to be stopped.

[mightytiges]

Garbage decision.
Byist decision.
Inconsistent Decision.

Good call Hutchy Tucky  

[Infamy]

Must challenge, there was no high contact at all
Would suggest they could argue against the high impact also as the damage was done by his head hitting the ground

[camboon]

With a foot in each camp, I belive we should play the kid and test those  guys who havnt had a go to step up when close such as Browne, Goudis, Cotin Post Grimes etc and if we win fantastic. Win all round as we find out whos worth keeping.

But we should challenge this one, for starters how was it high contact. 

[TigerLand]

It's a bigger issue for me.

Short term a shame we're not full strength against the Pies but ah well, it's best we focus on development rather win at all costs.

Long term I fear for the sport.. I've never had less faith then the officials of the AFL as I do now. The GC GWS concessions are a disgrace, The majority of rules is stacks on holding the ball and the MRP lotto.

It's not a huge issue Cotch missing if it happened next year round 1... You get it..

[Damo]

A poster on PRE put forward the theory that the TAB is putting a lot of pressure on the AFL to do everything in its' power to ensure we get the wooden spoon, after paying out on us early, so they don't lose a shed-load of $$$. Some may argue that this is paranoid thinking.

It is paranoid and totally incorrect.

1 - It was Sportsbet. Not the TAB.
2 - It was a cheap marketing ploy that was worth a fortune more than what they paid out. They had prime news in all major media for a small outlay.
3 - The people they pay out early turn the money over anyhow at the sportsbook and they are a big chance of winning back there regardless. Not to mention the good will they get for doing it.
4 - It is a common method of advertising used in the UK, and mainly by Paddy Power, who happen to be major owner of sportsbet.

So yeah, basically put, the guy on PRE has NFI and should stick to footy.

And am I guessing? I work fulltime in the sportsbetting industry and personally know the owner of Sportsbet.

[jackstar is back again]

they paid out $20,000, big deal

[Infamy]

they paid out $20,000, big deal

Pretty sure it was over $100k

[Damo]

they paid out $20,000, big deal

Pretty sure it was over $100k

It was over a 100k. But who cares.

They payout over 100k, they keep clients happy who then bet more at the joint. Not to mention the 100s of K's worth of advertising.

Smart business model that has worked very well in the UK. Over there it is an extremely common thing and done for reasons that the Aussie betting public hasnt been exposed to.

[mightytiges]

they paid out $20,000, big deal

Pretty sure it was over $100k

It was over a 100k. But who cares.

They payout over 100k, they keep clients happy who then bet more at the joint. Not to mention the 100s of K's worth of advertising.

Smart business model that has worked very well in the UK. Over there it is an extremely common thing and done for reasons that the Aussie betting public hasnt been exposed to.

The AFL has done similar with Falou and Hunt. The free publicity savings outweighs the cost of their multi-million dollar contracts.

[Gigantor]

will we really miss cotch?yes i grant you this kid has superstar written all over him,but at the minute he is barely averaging 20 touches a game ,hardly earth shattering..maybe he does off the ball stuff thats helping the cause...But nah as a midfielder his job is to get the pill

[mightytiges]

will we really miss cotch?yes i grant you this kid has superstar written all over him,but at the minute he is barely averaging 20 touches a game ,hardly earth shattering..maybe he does off the ball stuff thats helping the cause...But nah as a midfielder his job is to get the pill

We'll miss Cotch more from a team perspective more. The opposition tag will now move onto Lids and/or Dusty. They don't tag Tucky or even Jacko if he was playing because they aren't that damaging for the many possies they get.


I just saw a replay Andrew Walker's front on bump on FC. That kind of bump is dangerous. What a joke he only copped a reprimand. So typical of inconsistency of the MRP  .

[one-eyed]

Tigers consider appealing Trent Cotchin's three-game suspension
Bruce Matthews
Herald Sun
July 20, 2010

RICHMOND is considering challenging Trent Cotchin's three-game suspension at the AFL Tribunal tonight.

The Tigers will be guided by legal advice on whether they have a case to overturn or at least downgrade the charging offence.

The AFL match review panel assessed Cotchin's late spoiling attempt on North Melbourne's Sam Wright on Sunday as reckless conduct with high impact, resulting in a four-match penalty that can be reduced by one by pleading guilty today.

Cotchin was only three weeks from receiving a heavier sentence as an additional 93.75 demerit points from a 2009 striking conviction had expired after Round 13.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/tigers-consider-appealing-trent-cotchins-three-game-suspension/story-e6frf9jf-1225894326401

[eliminator]

Appeal it. Nothing to lose. Not high impact. At best negligent. Not reckless.

[RollsRoyce]

A poster on PRE put forward the theory that the TAB is putting a lot of pressure on the AFL to do everything in its' power to ensure we get the wooden spoon, after paying out on us early, so they don't lose a shed-load of $$$. Some may argue that this is paranoid thinking.

It is paranoid and totally incorrect.

1 - It was Sportsbet. Not the TAB.
2 - It was a cheap marketing ploy that was worth a fortune more than what they paid out. They had prime news in all major media for a small outlay.
3 - The people they pay out early turn the money over anyhow at the sportsbook and they are a big chance of winning back there regardless. Not to mention the good will they get for doing it.
4 - It is a common method of advertising used in the UK, and mainly by Paddy Power, who happen to be major owner of sportsbet.

So yeah, basically put, the guy on PRE has NFI and should stick to footy.

And am I guessing? I work fulltime in the sportsbetting industry and personally know the owner of Sportsbet.

Okay,maybe the guy on PRE (and me by mentioning it) were drawing a bit of a long bow there. But honestly, I'm just flabbergasted and struggling to understand and come up with reasons why we ALWAYS cop the spikey end of the pineapple when it comes to umpires and the MRP.