MRP / Trib. Tom Lynch Tribunal Discussion - Not guilty free to play

[tony__montana]

Richmond: "The bottom line is what Tom Lynch says he wanted to do was shove him away so he can get field position. All of his actions are consistent with someone who was trying to do just that."

That concludes the submissions from the AFL and Richmond. The jury will now retire to consider their verdict.

Should have also said anyone that understands thw game would realise a fwd 50 metres away with the ball coming is very much in play

boom mic drop

 

[darcytiger]

“Lynch’s record not relevant”. Fine at worst

 

[beema limapep]

Here it comes......

 

[Sterge]

Anything more than a week which is high low force and intentional and the afl can gft

 

[tigs2010]

Tribunal chairman David Jones: "There's been quite a bit of publicity and media comment about this matter and Tom Lynch's position in general. You ignore that and you have to determine the matter on the evidence before you." Lynch's record is "not relevant" to the Hurley incident.

Lol nice cover from Myer

 

[Dunger]

“Lynch’s record not relevant”. Fine at worst

He's bloody unlucky if he gets a fine!

 

[Godspeed]

Meh, trial by public and media. Move on and win the premiership.

 

[muzhogg]

Sooooo...

The AFL's position is that the footage clearly shows Lynch making contact with Hurley's throat and chin.

Yet the MRO didn't think it sufficiently clear to immediately cite Lynch for striking.

That works for me.

 

[Maybenextyear]

Watch the AFL shine . They will make a ridiculous decision and won’t address a thing . Just don’t talk about it and it will go away.

 

[beema limapep]

Here it comes!

 

[mauricerioli]

Our counsel did well at the end there, this will be not guilty in record time.

 

[Muddiemoose]

I think they don't allow this any more because players just said there was nothing in it.

I thought it was because Hurley was in a chemically induced coma

 

[_RT_]

So yesterday it was reported that the tribunal could consider all 4 incidents, but the tribunal chairman has said that they can only consider the Hurley incident is important

 

[SunshineBoy]

Watch the AFL shine . They will make a ridiculous decision and won’t address a thing . Just don’t talk about it and it will go away.

They announced all the redundancies because this would take all the coverage

 

[Jack5]

Anything more than a week which is high low force and intentional and the afl can gft

How the **** they didn't argue insufficient force to any high region I don't know.

 

[joelsyt]

That changes the argument from Lynch needing a rest just before we play the 2nd or 3rd or 4th best team in the comp? And also when we are not yet in the top 4 ourselves, with only 4 games to go and the 'premiership favs' (Geelong) still to play?

My point is with the witch hunt against us at the moment an appeal wouldn’t work. Don’t get me wrong I don’t want Lynch suspended, I agree, we need him against West Coast. If we appealed there’s a high probability that Lynch would miss west coast and Fremantle and then we have a bye just before Geelong, that’d be three weeks out of football.

 

[tigs2010]

So yesterday it was reported that the tribunal could consider all 4 incidents, but the tribunal chairman has said that they can only consider the Hurley incident is important

amateur hour

 

[Underarm]

Tribunal chairman David Jones: "There's been quite a bit of publicity and media comment about this matter and Tom Lynch's position in general. You ignore that and you have to determine the matter on the evidence before you." Lynch's record is "not relevant" to the Hurley incident.

Then why send it to the tribunal?

Chrisso just wanted the day off.

 

[banana_bus]

So yesterday it was reported that the tribunal could consider all 4 incidents, but the tribunal chairman has said that they can only consider the Hurley incident is important

Has to be found guilty on this one first, then if guilty they can use the previous incidents to give a harsher sanction.

 

[SunshineBoy]

So yesterday it was reported that the tribunal could consider all 4 incidents, but the tribunal chairman has said that they can only consider the Hurley incident is important

Mate that’s just talk, the reality is.....

 

[_RT_]

Tribunal chairman David Jones going over the guidelines for what a strike is. "It has to be delivered with such force to Hurley as to constitute the reportable offence of striking ... if you're not clearly satisfied with that on the balance of probabilities, then he's not guilty. If you are satisfied he delivered a blow and it was sufficient force to constitute striking, he's guilty of the offence, subject to the grading you consider should apply."

 

[69vintage]

Here it comes!

Campaigner .

On SM-A520F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[db26]

"Hurley's immediate response was genuine and spontaneous. And if there was no contact to his throat at all, as Mr Lynch suggests, it was a somewhat miraculous piece of quick thinking to clutch at the very area it sure looked like contact was made to."

What ridiculous nonsense from Gleeson, claiming it was "miraculous thinking" from Hurley to grab at his neck if he wasn't struck there, you could be the dumbest person on earth and know to grab at your neck to try and get a free if an opponent had pushed or whacked you to the upper chest and maybe lightly touched his neck.

And it's the exact same thing Vlastuin did!!!

Wow beyond a belief a response like that.

 

[tony__montana]

Tribunal chairman David Jones going over the guidelines for what a strike is. "It has to be delivered with such force to Hurley as to constitute the reportable offence of striking ... if you're not clearly satisfied with that on the balance of probabilities, then he's not guilty. If you are satisfied he delivered a blow and it was sufficient force to constitute striking, he's guilty of the offence, subject to the grading you consider should apply.


That right there is why we should have argued insufficient force

 

[Jack5]

Who is on the tribunal?