Author Topic: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]  (Read 7507 times)

tony_montana

  • Guest
Re: Rance cops 4 weeks from the Match Review Panel
« Reply #60 on: March 29, 2011, 11:17:58 AM »
ridiculous if they cop it on the chin - go and get it reduced to 1-2 weeks and we'll wear that

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 97334
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Rance accepts 3 week suspension
« Reply #61 on: March 29, 2011, 11:47:22 AM »
We've accepted the 3 weeks for Rance

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/matthew-scarlett-out-for-cats-dockers-clash/story-e6frf9jf-1226029664865


Herald-Sun's Jon Ralph: "Can't believe Tigers didn't appeal the Rance penalty. He got in Waite's path but then Waite ran into him. "

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40032
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Rance cops 4 weeks from the Match Review Panel
« Reply #62 on: March 29, 2011, 12:01:40 PM »
ridiculous if they cop it on the chin - go and get it reduced to 1-2 weeks and we'll wear that

But the problem was the chances of getting it reduced were practically zero - history shows that and we don't have a great record when it comes to taking these things on at the tribunal

If we went in and lost the penalty is 4 weeks

I don't agree with the penalty but reckon we've done the right thing by just accepting it. It was a fight we weren't going to win
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline Infamy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4426
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #63 on: March 29, 2011, 12:58:38 PM »
Was worth the risk of an extra week to challenge it
I think they were short sighted and focussed on downgrading each of the point rankings rather than simply arguing that Waite ran into Rance who was in the way to take some of the responsibility off him for the hit in the first place

tony_montana

  • Guest
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #64 on: March 29, 2011, 01:37:58 PM »
I think there was a decent chance of getting it reduced by arguing negligence? Im no legal eagle but eff me, we need to re-evaluate our legal representatives bc that is farcical

jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #65 on: March 29, 2011, 02:34:04 PM »
good to see they took the 3.
reality is that Waite got hit in the head and didnt play the rest of game
Case closed

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40032
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #66 on: March 29, 2011, 02:55:02 PM »
I think there was a decent chance of getting it reduced by arguing negligence? Im no legal eagle but eff me, we need to re-evaluate our legal representatives bc that is farcical

As I said I don't agree with the penalty it is too hard but as I said to someone via email this morning:

"Problem for Rance going by the footage is that he isn’t looking at the ball and they’ve made it clear the head is a protective area. If you bump and hit the head and you “appear” to have another option to bumping you are gone. That’s what has done Alex in I reckon."
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #67 on: March 29, 2011, 03:07:39 PM »
I think there was a decent chance of getting it reduced by arguing negligence? Im no legal eagle but eff me, we need to re-evaluate our legal representatives bc that is farcical

As I said I don't agree with the penalty it is too hard but as I said to someone via email this morning:

"Problem for Rance going by the footage is that he isn’t looking at the ball and they’ve made it clear the head is a protective area. If you bump and hit the head and you “appear” to have another option to bumping you are gone. That’s what has done Alex in I reckon."

Correct

Offline Tigermad20011

  • Future Richmond star
  • **
  • Posts: 86
Re: Rance cops 4 weeks from the Match Review Panel
« Reply #68 on: March 29, 2011, 03:10:11 PM »
ridiculous if they cop it on the chin - go and get it reduced to 1-2 weeks and we'll wear that

But the problem was the chances of getting it reduced were practically zero - history shows that and we don't have a great record when it comes to taking these things on at the tribunal

If we went in and lost the penalty is 4 weeks

I don't agree with the penalty but reckon we've done the right thing by just accepting it. It was a fight we weren't going to win
So if you do not take the chance you can not win.
The club got this one wrong.

tony_montana

  • Guest
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #69 on: March 29, 2011, 03:13:57 PM »
I think there was a decent chance of getting it reduced by arguing negligence? Im no legal eagle but eff me, we need to re-evaluate our legal representatives bc that is farcical

As I said I don't agree with the penalty it is too hard but as I said to someone via email this morning:

"Problem for Rance going by the footage is that he isn’t looking at the ball and they’ve made it clear the head is a protective area. If you bump and hit the head and you “appear” to have another option to bumping you are gone. That’s what has done Alex in I reckon."


For mine he did no more than stand his ground, he didnt line him up and go for a big bump hence I feel arguing negligence over malicious intent is reasonable? AAgree according to the rules he had to go bc head contact was made however i just find it very dissapointing that the MRP came to this decision.. I still feel they should have contested on priniciple but its done now -I will say  its these decisions that kill off a little bit more of the passion I have for this great game.

Offline RollsRoyce

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #70 on: March 29, 2011, 03:19:34 PM »
good to see they took the 3.
reality is that Waite got hit in the head and didnt play the rest of game
Case closed

Rubbish! We'll never improve as a club until we stand up to the AFL and say we won't take their crap anymore. Absolute miscarriage of justice. We have to jump up and down like Eddie McGuire did when Maxwell was outed for busting an Eagle's jaw. He had that decision turned around despite it being a much worse hit and accompanied with overwhelming video evidence. They did us on a bit of faraway, blurry footage, and in Jake King's case in the pre-season last year, no footage at all. Just the word of Cloke. Why? Because the league figures it's just Richmond, and will continue to treat us like dirt, because we always just meekly cop it on the chin.

jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #71 on: March 29, 2011, 04:15:19 PM »
Waite was concussed.
AFL Rules clearly states is that you cannot contact the head.
I was sitting behind Rance and he wasnt stationary.
interesting the club didnt contest case as it fullys understands the rules the AFL set.

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #72 on: March 29, 2011, 04:40:26 PM »
If i ever run into one of those pepe le pews from MRP i am going to kick them right in the nuts, just without enough force or intent to warrant a suspension.
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI

Offline RollsRoyce

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #73 on: March 29, 2011, 04:56:30 PM »
My point is that just getting a head high knock is not in itself an automatic suspension. Last weekend alone there were two horrific head injuries to Brown and Selwood that were much worse than Waite's, and the perpetrators, quite rightly had no case to answer.
Rance's case had to be judged on its own merits, and studying the blurry split-second and far away footage that was shown ad infinitum on the news was inconclusive evidence in itself for such a stringent penalty.
You could argue for hours about who got in who's way, whether the arm was raised, whether it was accidental or clumsy or intentional, and on that footage alone not be able to prove anything conclusively. Yet we have a damning piece of clear footage of Waite throwing his leg back and making forceful contact with McGuanes groin, and he has no case to answer.
It's this baffling inconsistency from the MRP that frustrates fans. And by the way, I sit in the cheer squad, the incident with Rance happened in front of me too, and my initial feeling was he'd have no case to answer. I should have known that these things ALWAYS go against us.   

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40032
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Rance cops 3 weeks [updated]
« Reply #74 on: March 29, 2011, 06:15:28 PM »
It's this baffling inconsistency from the MRP that frustrates fans. And by the way, I sit in the cheer squad, the incident with Rance happened in front of me too, and my initial feeling was he'd have no case to answer. I should have known that these things ALWAYS go against us.   

That's the key point though isn't it? We are more frustrated (rightly) because of the lack on consistency of the MRP

Are we as Tiger fans more annoyed that Waite got off rather than Rance getting suspended. They are 2 very different issues IMHO

I think the Rance penalty is to severe but following the rules as they stand right now the charge was a correct one unfortunately for us. Whether the rules are right or wrong is another argument altogether

Waite should have been sighted and there is no way in the world anyone can justify why he wasn't cited but to say it is unfair Rance got suspended and Waite didn't is not right either.
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)