MRP / Trib. 2016 MRP/ Carlton Tribunal News & Reports (aka Chook lotto)

[Blue Pulse]

I don't like violence on the footy field, and I certainly don't condone it. But if that happened at local level, I can assure you they would come from everywhere and it would get ugly, very quickly...
It's about intent for me. What was he trying to do? Certainly not compete for the footy.

Bad act, deserved a week minimum...

The fact that our boys remonstrated is a fair sign that what they saw was not accidental

 

[BlueJet]

I don't like violence on the footy field, and I certainly don't condone it. But if that happened at local level, I can assure you they would come from everywhere and it would get ugly, very quickly...
It's about intent for me. What was he trying to do? Certainly not compete for the footy.

Bad act, deserved a week minimum...

Respectfully, I'm not sure I agree, in a lot of comps there are similar (and worse) incidents to the one above.
Is it nice, no but is it some massive dog act - also no.

 

[TheCoach16]

Respectfully, I'm not sure I agree, in a lot of comps there are similar (and worse) incidents to the one above.
Is it nice, no but is it some massive dog act - also no.

That's my point. Footballers at any level know what constitutes an acceptable act on field and what doesn't. This wasn't a sniping hit, but the act was intended to cause harm, and nothing else.
In my experience, at local level, it would not have gone unnoticed and it would not have gone down well with anyone...

 

[BlueJet]

That's my point. Footballers at any level know what constitutes an acceptable act on field and what doesn't. This wasn't a sniping hit, but the act was intended to cause harm, and nothing else.
In my experience, at local level, it would not have gone unnoticed and it would not have gone down well with anyone...

Is it though? Your initial comment made it sound as though someone may whack him for a relatively minor incident.
You're a coach, out of curiosity - if someone drops back in the hole in front of your key forward. What do you expect of him?
From my own experience, coaches crack it when you don't try to take the body nor do the oppostion lose the plot when you do.
It's why standing under a high ball or going back with the flight of the ball are acts of courage.
As I mentioned previously, the lack of talk and protection for Lamb was what I found concerning.

Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk

 

[TheCoach16]

Is it though? Your initial comment made it sound as though someone may whack him for a relatively minor incident.
You're a coach, out of curiosity - if someone drops back in the hole in front of your key forward. What do you expect of him?
From my own experience, coaches crack it when you don't try to take the body nor do the oppostion lose the plot when you do.
It's why standing under a high ball or going back with the flight of the ball are acts of courage.
As I mentioned previously, the lack of talk and protection for Lamb was what I found concerning.

Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk

Yes, yes it is... And yes, he would get whacked for that "minor incident ", because... Players know the difference between courage and a cheap shot... A player sitting in the hole, or running with the flight has a choice to make and knows what might come his way, and if he wears a big hit, well that's footy and he's done so for his team, and everyone knows and acknowledges that.
No one expects to get "tunnelled", it's akin to getting pushed into the fence when the ball is out of bounds, that kind of thing.
It's the difference between footy and an unnecessary, potentially harmful, non-football act. It's the difference between tough, hard and cowardly, dirty. Players do not respond well to that sort of behaviour...

And to answer your question, I can't speak for other coaches, but my players receive a clear and concise message, "the footy is your objective, go and win it..." Simple.

And you want to label it "a relatively minor incident ", that's your call. But if Cripps or Lamb had landed on their neck, we might be having a different conversation today...

 

[BlueJet]

Yes, yes it is... And yes, he would get whacked for that "minor incident ", because... Players know the difference between courage and a cheap shot... A player sitting in the hole, or running with the flight has a choice to make and knows what might come his way, and if he wears a big hit, well that's footy and he's done so for his team, and everyone knows and acknowledges that.
No one expects to get "tunnelled", it's akin to getting pushed into the fence when the ball is out of bounds, that kind of thing.
It's the difference between footy and an unnecessary, potentially harmful, non-football act. It's the difference between tough, hard and cowardly, dirty. Players do not respond well to that sort of behaviour...

And to answer your question, I can't speak for other coaches, but my players receive a clear and concise message, "the footy is your objective, go and win it..." Simple.

And you want to label it "a relatively minor incident ", that's your call. But if Cripps or Lamb had landed on their neck, we might be having a different conversation today...

Good response, I was legitimately curious.
I suppose it may well be a difference between our respective leagues as well.

Fortunately neither were hurt, I can see your perspective though but I'd rather the game be adjudicated on what does happen as opposed to what could happen, to each their own of course.

Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk

 

[TheCoach16]

Good response, I was legitimately curious.
I suppose it may well be a difference between our respective leagues as well.

Fortunately neither were hurt, I can see your perspective though but I'd rather the game be adjudicated on what does happen as opposed to what could happen, to each their own of course.

Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk

Fair call BJ, very sporting of you. But I must disagree with your last point. I believe the game should be adjudicated on the intent and the action, not the outcome. If a player sets out to intentionally cause harm to another, in a non-football act, then whether he succeeds or not should be irrelevant. The intent is punishable in my view.

This may sound lighthearted or even "funny", but I've never understood why "attempted striking" carries a lesser penalty than "striking". All that does is reward mediocrity. Two blokes intend to punch an opponent, one succeeds and gets four weeks, the other misses and gets one week. We reward the guy that is shit at what he's trying to do...

My point is, it's the intent or the action that should be adjudicated.

 

[mediumsizered]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-06-13/mrp-lincoln-mccarthy-cleared-taylor-walker-fined-for-striking


Another fine for Levi.
If he is found guilty of another low-level offence, automatic one match suspension.





So tunneling is acceptable now!

Mistimed his approach? What is he, a ****ing aircraft? The MRP should be writing scripts for Home & Away. Their reasoning each week is extremely creative fiction.

 

[Gethelred]

The one against Robinson was a brain fade. Got frustrated that he didn't get a free kick when Robbo crashed into his back. He needs to turn this aggression from the man to the ball.

I do agree that the one against Robinson was the sort of thing we used to have a go at Waite for doing, but if it comes down to telling Levi to be careful not to get into any niggles or to think before he attacks the football - which is what you suggested - then I hope Levi/the coaching staff is perfectly willing to cop the week or two he might, because footy's hard enough without second guessing yourself.

 

[Blue Pulse]

I do agree that the one against Robinson was the sort of thing we used to have a go at Waite for doing, but if it comes down to telling Levi to be careful not to get into any niggles or to think before he attacks the football - which is what you suggested - then I hope Levi/the coaching staff is perfectly willing to cop the week or two he might, because footy's hard enough without second guessing yourself.

In defense of Levi, that was payback. Watch the footage again, he should of been awarded a free when Robinson hit him attempting to mark and the commentators agreed that Levi should have been given a free in the goal square.
Levi was fuming and handed out his own clumsy payback and questioned the umpires on why he wasn't awarded a free for the previous similar incident?
Again the commentators agreed with Levi and said they didn't blame him for seeking payback.
Not the right thing to do but remember this is a guy who throws the ball back to hard to umpires, so I don't think he has many fans there.

 

[BlueGum]

Mistimed his approach? What is he, a ******* aircraft? The MRP should be writing scripts for Home & Away. Their reasoning each week is extremely creative fiction.

Montana knew it was wrong. He had words to Webster when the play went down the other end.

 

[Dramoth]

Montana knew it was wrong. He had words to Webster when the play went down the other end.

If it had of been the Blues of old... someone like the Dominator or Jimmy Buckley would have had words with him as well... and thrown a few punches to go with the words.

 

[Aphrodite]

Dale Thomas can accept $1500 sanction, rough conduct on J Aish.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-07-04/match-review-panel-full-statement-round-15

 

[Jabba73]

So we continue to waive off all the punches thrown off the ball?

 

[Sector 7G]

So we continue to waive off all the punches thrown off the ball?

The player who is afraid of needles at * was the first player to cop a week for a punch to the guts. While thoroughly deserved he is unlucky as half a dozen others have copped a fine for the same thing.

 

[BluStreak]

seriously, a clash of heads in the midst of play and Daisy is fined - unbelievable.
What about Greenwood on Gibbs and that other scum who throw a punch into Gibbs whilst Greenwood held him.

 

[Aphrodite]

1 match for Levi:-

Levi Casboult can accept 1 match sanction, striking K Hartigan.

 

[Aphrodite]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-07-11/match-review-panel-full-statement-round-16

Levi Casboult, Carlton, has been charged with striking Kyle Hartigan, Adelaide Crows, during the second quarter of the Round 16 match between Carlton and the Adelaide Crows, played at the MCG on Sunday July 10, 2016.

In summary, he can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.
Based on the available video evidence and a medical report from the Adelaide Crows Football Club, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct with medium impact to the body. The incident was classified as a two-match sanction. The player has no applicable record which impacts the penalty. An early plea enables the player to accept a one-match sanction.

 

[HBF]

Levi got what he deserved. And I hope the club don't automatically bring him back in the following week.

 

[1981]

Levi got what he deserved. And I hope the club don't automatically bring him back in the following week.

Here here

 

[TheCoach16]

Levi got what he deserved. And I hope the club don't automatically bring him back in the following week.

I agree it was a silly, unnecessary act by Levi. And he probably deserves a week for stupidity.
But for 14 weeks, similar and worse incidents were a fine. All of a sudden it's two weeks down to one????

 

[bmaurizio]

Levi suspension is justified and hopefully we'll slowly eradicate this sort of behavior from the game.
We've evolved and come a long way from closing an eye to the odd biff or two in game of footy.
Go Baggers

 

[TheCoach16]

Levi suspension is justified and hopefully we'll slowly eradicate this sort of behavior from the game.
We've evolved and come a long way from closing an eye to the odd biff or two in game of footy.
Go Baggers

Couldn't agree more. This stomach punch trend is getting beyond the joke. Footy is the hardest, most physical team sport in the world. Blokes shouldn't have to worry about getting randomly punched in the guts. Stamp it out !
My only question is, why now? Where was this stance for the last 14 weeks?

 

[Azul]

Said in the game day thread he'd get a week and y'all hated on me.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

I agree it was a silly, unnecessary act by Levi. And he probably deserves a week for stupidity.
But for 14 weeks, similar and worse incidents were a fine. All of a sudden it's two weeks down to one????

Zaharakis also got suspended