One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Gigantor on August 25, 2013, 07:52:18 PM
-
Anyone see the elbow to the head titch dished out early in the game?...Will it come under scrutiny?
-
Not Guilty. besides its just a hit to the head. I was reading the new Jack Dyer book and Jack knocked out some bloke and the stretcher came off and they put the sheet over his head. Jack thought he'd killed the bloke. When Jack came off he saw Ray Dunn and told him that he thought hed killed the bloke. Dunn said dont worry its just Manslaughter, Ill get you off that easy.
Dont know why you worry about Suspensions. Getting blokes off at the tribunal is in our blood except for poor Neville Crow. And we got plenty of good lawyers around the club theses days as well.
-
Yeah, I reckon it might G, they'll check how much contact was made, was a bit reckless though
-
It will be looked at.
Hopefully he wont get rubbed out as the contact made was minimal.
At the most, one week. Probably will get off IMHO.
-
:banghead where the tribunal is a joke. He'll get harder for it being head high than plenty of nobs that intentionally jab people in the guys
-
Not Guilty. besides its just a hit to the head. I was reading the new Jack Dyer book and Jack knocked out some bloke and the stretcher came off and they put the sheet over his head. Jack thought he'd killed the bloke. When Jack came off he saw Ray Dunn and told him that he thought hed killed the bloke. Dunn said dont worry its just Manslaughter, Ill get you off that easy.
A posthumous piece of literature ?
What a crock.
-
Anyone see the elbow to the head titch dished out early in the game?...Will it come under scrutiny?
It should be that the force of impact wasn't sufficient enough to be a reportable offence but with the MRP you can never know :-\.
-
Patrick Keane @AFL_PKeane twitter:
"Shane Edwards can accept one match for striking Liam Sumner. Penalty impacted by six-year good record."
-
Don't think he will be missed at the moment, not having a shot but he has been down, could probably do with the rest again.
Lonergen anyone????
-
AFL denying him natural justice + human rights
take it to court
Skata
Don't think he will be missed at the moment, not having a shot but he has been down, could probably do with the rest again.
Lonergen anyone????
god no
-
Shane Edwards, Richmond, has been charged with a level three striking offence (225 demerit points, two-match sanction) for striking Liam Sumner, GWS Giants, during the first quarter of the Round 22 match between Richmond and the GWS Giants, played at Skoda Stadium on Sunday August 25, 2013.
In summary, due to a six-year good record, he can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the GWS Giants Football Club, the incident was assessed as reckless conduct (two points), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points, resulting in a classification of a level three offence, drawing 225 demerit points and a two-match sanction. He has an existing six-year good record, reducing the penalty by 25 per cent to 168.75 points and a one-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 126.56 points and a one-match sanction.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-26/mrp-full-statement-round-22
-
Don't think he will be missed at the moment, not having a shot but he has been down, could probably do with the rest again.
Lonergen anyone????
He hadn't played for 2 weeks but I know what you meant ;D
Lonergan = absolutely no way
Newy is due back
In: Newman
Out: Titch
-
AFL denying him natural justice + human rights
take it to court
Skata
Don't think he will be missed at the moment, not having a shot but he has been down, could probably do with the rest again.
Lonergen anyone????
god no
Been ripping it up in the two's, probably see Batch get a gig, maybe try him in a different role...
-
Can Lonergan even play? Who was he upgraded for? Either way hope he doesn't get a gig
-
Shane Edwards, Richmond, has been charged with a level three striking offence (225 demerit points, two-match sanction) for striking Liam Sumner, GWS Giants, during the first quarter of the Round 22 match between Richmond and the GWS Giants, played at Skoda Stadium on Sunday August 25, 2013.
In summary, due to a six-year good record, he can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.
Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the GWS Giants Football Club, the incident was assessed as reckless conduct (two points), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points, resulting in a classification of a level three offence, drawing 225 demerit points and a two-match sanction. He has an existing six-year good record, reducing the penalty by 25 per cent to 168.75 points and a one-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 126.56 points and a one-match sanction.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-26/mrp-full-statement-round-22
How can Hockings elbow be classed the same as Titches?
One nearly killed the bloke and the other hardly touched him!!
-
because it is a gay system, developed by gay gimps who are too gay to admit just how gay it is.
-
big gay al :clapping
-
:lol
-
I've still got pic from last time caught up, gerks
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTFyWDy5lj_jVCt3IuGHsO-LGzOKByB-It7MMQ8QthCw4AKKKF8bA)
-
reminds me i need to get that scarf back mate
-
Is that where the rat went from your old photo?
-
ah good old rat, i see he signed up to the forum the other day, must have made it back from al's place
goat is around here somewhere too
-
He deserves a week IMO. Stupid thing to do. He should take the early plee and be grateful.
-
AFL News Post @AFLNewsPost twitter:
Richmond's Shane Edwards will contest his MRP charge at the Tribunal at 5pm tonight. All other players accepted their R22 sanctions #AFL
-
If his guilty does it stay 1 week? If not his an idiot :banghead
-
If his guilty does it stay 1 week? If not his an idiot :banghead
+1 on this. We need for the elimination final.
-
If his guilty does it stay 1 week? If not his an idiot :banghead
Yes it does,
From the AFL site:
There is no real downside for Edwards to contest the charge at the tribunal because even if the charge is sustained, he misses just one week and will be available to play the following week in Richmond's first final in 12 years.
Full article: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/edwards-goes-to-tribunal
-
natural justice
human rights
:clapping :clapping
-
AFL News Post @AFLNewsPost twitter:
Richmond's Shane Edwards will contest his MRP charge at the Tribunal at 5pm tonight. All other players accepted their R22 sanctions #AFL
Blood oath he should challenge it. Reckless conduct ?? Crap ! Medium impact ? Crap ! I'd say negligent conduct and low impact would be more like it.
-
natural justice
human rights
:clapping :clapping
lets hire Burnside to get a Not Guilty Verdict ;D
-
The AFL asked Shed to contest so the media pack out the front have someone to talk to and bring them dinner
-
The AFL asked Shed to contest so the media pack out the front have someone to talk to and bring them dinner
Blobbo's hogging all the chicken dippers though.
-
have it on good authority he is reporting from a wheelie bin full of tartare
-
have it on good authority he is reporting from a wheelie bin full of tartare
:lol
Saw that idiot Tony Jones on the news last nite standing outside AFL house and he says " Well we're still here waiting , nothing much happening , but I can tell you that James Hird has just come out of one room , gone into another room then went back into the original room , so there's something going on. Obviously a lot of back and forth between the AFL and his lawyers "
You've been there for 8 hours and thats what you dish us up ? Hey Tony , He probably went for a pi$$ you moron. Funniest and worst bit of reporting ever.
-
:lol
-
Nathan Schmook:
Edwards' advocate is Michael Tovey QC. He'll be calling on GWS doctor William Craddock.
Tigers are aiming to downgrade impact from medium to low.
Edwards says he wasn't aware of the incident until a phone call from his Dad, who told him it was a topic of conversation between commentators. He couldn't remember it.
Edwards repeating he can't remember the incident. Can't comment on the force of the hit.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
Nathan Schmook:
GWS football admin manager Alan McConnell now being called to give evidence via phone.
His role was to be the conduit between coaches and fitness staff/doctors.
Liam Sumner was not examined after the hit from Edwards.
Sumner had an issue with a sore Achilles tendon. This was impacting his ability to play, but GWS weren't aware of any issue with his eye.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
The AFL asked Shed to contest so the media pack out the front have someone to talk to and bring them dinner
Blobbo's hogging all the chicken dippers though.
Holy stuff dude do you remember Ali G when he went bezerk and starting screamin out..... Chickan dipppppeeerrzzzz!!
:lol :rollin
Expect robbo will open his trap and throw them in, they wont even touch the sides of his mouth :lol
-
Nathan Schmook:
The point of interviewing McConnell is to ascertain whether Sumner was subbed because of the impact from Edwards' hit.
The decision to sub Sumner was because there were two issues with him to manage (Achilles, eye). Eye needed to be assessed and doc wanted more time.
The doctor didn't explicitly says Sumner was injured, however.
GWS doctor William Craddock now to give evidence over the phone.
Sumner first complained about his eye at half time.
Doc says the ankle/Achilles could have been treated with a pain killer at half time.
Doc's man concern was the eye. He couldn't see to the right out of his right eye.
He suspected Sumner had a "retinal detachment".
He was going to be a "liability to the team and a liability to himself" if he played on because of the eye concern.
Doc had very limited time to make a decision on substituting, and he decided Sumner should be substituted. GWS had determined they wanted to make a substitution at half time.
"If a player is missing their right visual field, they're at danger of performing poorly, but more importantly they're at risk of increased injury.
"I would have removed him from play anyway."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
Nathan Schmook: "Not looking good for Edwards, based on the doc's evidence."
:-\
-
What a name :lol :lol
-
Nathan Schmook:
It's odd for them to be called. Usually a medical report is submitted. Richmond would have called the doctor hoping he would say Sumner wasn't substituted because of an eye injury but the Achilles/ankle complaint.
Dr Craddock says the injury to Sumner is consistent with what he saw in the incident with Edwards.
Dr Craddock repeats it would have been negligent of him to allow Sumner to play on with the eye complaint.
Dr Craddock spent three-and-a-half years with the Swans before he was at GWS. Also spent a season with the Hawks.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
For the record, Sumner won't be questioned.
-
Nathan Schmook:
Dr Greg Hickey from Richmond now being called for evidence.
Dr Hickey now on the line. Facing questioning from Edwards' counsel.
I suspect they want him to contest the GWS doctor's evidence.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
Nathan Schmook:
Richmond doctor says it would be appropriate to remove the player if they had suffered the symptoms Sumner had....
HOWEVER, he says it "seems a bit strange" that a player would have a visual impairment early in the game and not bring it to the doctor's attention until half time.
He suggests Edwards' blow wasn't all that forceful, it just happened to get Sumner in the right spot.
"I certainly don't want to question (Dr Craddock's) opinion at all".
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
Nathan Schmook:
Vision now being shown of Sumner kicking a goal moments after the incident. Will form part of the evidence.
Worth repeating, Edwards only risking an extra 40 demerit points on his record. Tonight is a free swing for him. Certain this case wouldn't have gone ahead if he risked missing the Tigers' first final.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
Nathan Schmook:
Andrew Woods now summarising. All evidence points to medium impact, he says.
Michael Tovey QC summarising. He says vision is not definitive re medium/low impact.
He says the MRP would not have graded impact medium without GWS medical report.
Tovey asking jury to consider if the medical report convinces them it is medium impact? He says the vision clearly suggests it was a low impact hit. "Safe and fair" decision is low impact.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
Nathan Schmook:
John Hassett now giving directions to the jury of Richard Loveridge, Wayne Henwood and Wayne Schimmelbusch.
For those asking, Edwards' counsel haven't raised the issue of whether contact was to the eye that Sumner injured.
The jury might decide to place more weight on the vision than the medical report, which would help Edwards.
Jury yet to deliberate. we could be here for another 10-15mins before a decision is reached.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
Nathan Schmook:
Jury will beasked 2 questions.
Was impact low or medium?
What is the appropriate penalty in demerit points?
Jury now deliberating.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
-
Failed
-
Nathan Schmook:
Jury says contact was medium impact
Penalty is 168.75 demerit points
That's all folks.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-edwards-challenges
So Titch is officially out this week :(.
-
Who cares.
Underachieved this year.
Bring in someone with a brain that can execute
-
Who cares.
Underachieved this year.
Bring in someone with a brain that can execute
I strongly disagree. Has been great this year. His ability to dish out a handball and hit a target in heavy traffic has been a real asset to the team