One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => View from the Outer => Topic started by: one-eyed on June 17, 2021, 08:19:49 PM
-
The three-member jury of Paul Williams, David Neitz and Richard Loveridge cleared Mackay after hearing more than two hours of evidence in an often testy case.
They believed Mackay's actions, which left Clark with multiple fractures to his jaw, were reasonable in the circumstances.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/632284/the-verdict-is-in-tribunal-makes-call-on-david-mackay
-
Just watched now.
Looks like he was going for the ball
-
And yet others have been suspended for the result not the action. Once again the AFL tribunal is a farce. Seemed like a pretty clear run through to me and he left the ground. But farce is as farce does.
-
Agreed tdy but the biggest problem for them surely is taking outcome into consideration rather than intent.
Some blokes go down easy, some don't. Intent is all that matters.
-
And yet others have been suspended for the result not the action. Once again the AFL tribunal is a farce. Seemed like a pretty clear run through to me and he left the ground. But farce is as farce does.
And if you are a Richmond player you get suspended for a potential result
-
SEN saying Hocking is planning to change the rules again to disallow this next year.
-
SEN saying Hocking is planning to change the rules again to disallow this next year.
See here:
AFL football boss Steve Hocking said he respected the Tribunal's decision but stood by the original grading of the incident.
If a similar situation were to happen this weekend, or for the rest of the season, the AFL would likely again send the case to the Tribunal.
"We never asserted that David Mackay set out to hurt Hunter Clark but we did consider that he acted carelessly and unreasonably in the circumstances," Hocking said.
"The AFL will not hesitate to take action where the health and safety of players is impacted or at risk.
"There is an ongoing process in review of the rules to protect the health and safety of all players.
"The outcome of the Tribunal will be considered in that review. If necessary, rules will be adjusted at the end of the season.
"We make no apologies for taking action to make the game safer for participants at all levels."
Hocking said it was "line-ball" when referring Mackay's controversial case - which angered many high-profile football figures - to the Tribunal.
"(Match Review Officer) Michael Christian and myself worked through it and took a considerable amount of time," he said.
"It got to a point with my executive powers I was able to refer it and the reason for that was it was a line-ball decision."
https://www.afl.com.au/news/632518/rule-changes-on-the-cards-after-landmark-tribunal-case
-
There was almost another similar collision as the Mackey-Clark one tonight. If Higgins had run a straighter line towards the loose ball then he and the Bulldogs' player would've smashed into each other. In a 360 degree game you can't avoid these type of incidents.
As for Hocking ::). So he claims it was a "line-ball" decision to send it to the tribunal yet now the tribunal has thrown the case out and he didn't get his way he now wants to change the rules to get his way ::). The sooner Hocking is sacked the better for the game.