MRP Round 15

[bornadog]

Details here (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-07-13/match-review-panel-full-statement-round-15)

Main ones effecting us, - Taylor Dog Adams - two weeks , so won't play against us. Can't be reduced by early plea.

Joel Sook Selwood - Two match suspension but early plea becomes one match sanction?

[Ozza]

Details here (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-07-13/match-review-panel-full-statement-round-15)

Main ones effecting us, - Taylor Dog Adams - two weeks , so won't play against us.

Joel Sook Selwood - One match suspension but early plea becomes one match sanction?

2, reduced to 1 for Selwood. Works for us.

[Axe Man]

Details here (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-07-13/match-review-panel-full-statement-round-15)

Main ones effecting us, - Taylor Dog Adams - two weeks , so won't play against us.

Joel Sook Selwood - One match suspension but early plea becomes one match sanction?

It's a 2 match suspension, down to 1 week with an early plea for Selwood:


Joel Selwood, Geelong, has been charged with charged with engaging in rough conduct against Sam Wright, North Melbourne, during the second quarter of the Round 15 match between Geelong and North Melbourne, played at Etihad Stadium on Saturday July 11, 2015.

In summary, he can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the North Melbourne Football Club, it was the view of the panel the incident should be classified as intentional conduct with medium impact to the body. The offence was classified as a two-match sanction. The player has no applicable bad record. An early plea can reduce the penalty to a one-match sanction.

[G-Mo77]

Yeah works for us.

If something that Selwood did was/is intentional 1-2 week seems like a pretty weak suspension. He should take it and run.

2 weeks for kneeing someone in the head while he's on the ground? He had about 2 - 3 goes at it before he finally laid it. Intent was to hurt so why is he getting the same as someone like Vickery who's intent was to block an opposition?

[bornadog]

2, reduced to 1 for Selwood. Works for us.


It's a 2 match suspension, down to 1 week with an early plea for Selwood:

Thanks mis-read it. Even better.

[bornadog]

2 weeks for kneeing someone in the head while he's on the ground? He had about 2 - 3 goes at it before he finally laid it. Intent was to hurt so why is he getting the same as someone like Vickery who's intent was to block an opposition?

I don't understand it either. If you are in general play and careless, fine you get a penalty, but if you are intentionally whacking someone, then surely the AFL has to be tougher than they are. I would have thought, at minimum Adams gets 4 to 5 weeks.

[Remi Moses]

Not surprising when you hear people on the tribunal like Daniel Harford.
Honestly he'd let Ivan Milat off if he played football.

[LostDoggy]

Not surprising when you hear people on the tribunal like Daniel Harford.
Honestly he'd let Ivan Milat off if he played football.

Champagne Comedy ;)

Love it :D

[Twodogs]

Not surprising when you hear people on the tribunal like Daniel Harford.
Honestly he'd let Ivan Milat off if he played football.

Didn't know he was on the tribunal
That's interesting, He says some pretty boneheaded stuff on his show but you don't have to mean everything you say on the radio I guess.

[westdog54]

How Adams wasn't sent straight to the tribunal is beyond me.

[bulldogtragic]

How Adams wasn't sent straight to the tribunal is beyond me.

Yep. They should bank the two weeks and laugh their heads off.

[LostDoggy]

Yeah works for us.

If something that Selwood did was/is intentional 1-2 week seems like a pretty weak suspension. He should take it and run.

2 weeks for kneeing someone in the head while he's on the ground? He had about 2 - 3 goes at it before he finally laid it. Intent was to hurt so why is he getting the same as someone like Vickery who's intent was to block an opposition?
It's the MRP. There is no why.

[Sedat]

Selwood out for our game this week. Adams out for our game the following week. Job done as far as I'm concerned.

[aker39]

Not surprising when you hear people on the tribunal like Daniel Harford.
Honestly he'd let Ivan Milat off if he played football.

Yes, Daniel Harford is on the tribunal but not the MRP. He has nothing to do with these or any other penalties handed down by MRP.

I think he has heard one case at the tribunal all year.

[SonofScray]

What Selwood did and what Adams did are far, far worse than any of the tackles that resulted in players getting KO'd. I reckon you're pretty lucky to get away with 1-2 weeks when you deliberately set out to injure someone and act outside the skills of the game to intentionally attempt to injure someone.

[LostDoggy]

The match review panel spend too much time listening to media and talkback from ex-players who'll maintain that even Lethal was just another footballer who was “tough”. They try too hard to please everybody. Considering players have rights of appeal to the tribunal, they really should lean more to the harsh side of penalties in cases like these.

I sometimes wonder whether the AFL has given them guidance that in cases that make the game look bad, like Selwood's, like Adams', to adopt a light stance so their club won't appeal and keep the footage on the front page for the entire week.

Whatever the case, it's certainly far more to do with brand management than a fair system.

[bulldogtragic]

MRP refused to allow Cooney any less than 3 weeks under its jurisdiction. So Cooney went to the tribunal and pled not guilty.

Got 1 week... 1. One. Single. Uno. Not multiple. Not plural. Singular.....

The system appears broken again... It was interesting that Cooney's rep had Rodney Eade called to give character evidence about their time at the WBFC.

[GVGjr]

Just an observation but Rodney Eade must find coaching the Suns an easy gig. If he's not being a character witness for Cooney he is expressing his views on if Brisbane deserve a priority pick in this years draft. It must be an outdated notion for coaches to just coach struggling clubs nowadays.

[bulldogtragic]

Where was the media screaming 'we don't want to see him lose a Brownlow over something like that' with Grant? And it's the third time in one season. Angry for the current game and past guys in Grant and also McKernan. Joke. A bad joke.

[Stefcep]

The AFL will not allow a Chris Grant to happen to Fyfe, unless he actually causes the death of an opponent.

[bornadog]

The AFL will not allow a Chris Grant to happen to Fyfe, unless he actually causes the death of an opponent.

Fyfe incidence was no more than a free kick.

[bulldogtragic]

Fyfe incidence was no more than a free kick.

You'd be happy to hear Brown and Dunstall saying the Brownlow should allow one week suspension to avoid minor incidents rubbing a player out.

[bornadog]

You'd be happy to hear Brown and Dunstall saying the Brownlow should allow one week suspension to avoid minor incidents rubbing a player out.

I watched that tonight and don't agree.

The Brownlow tradition is for the BEST and FAIREST player. The report by the umpire yesterday was just ridiculous. However, the tripping charge from early on in the year when Fyfe virtually kicked Koby off his feet - that should have been at least a weeks suspension.

[GVGjr]

I watched that tonight and don't agree.

The Brownlow tradition is for the BEST and FAIREST player. The report by the umpire yesterday was just ridiculous. However, the tripping charge from early on in the year when Fyfe virtually kicked Koby off his feet - that should have been at least a weeks suspension.
Fairest and best isn't it?

[Stefcep]

Fyfe incidence was no more than a free kick.

In your opinion. Others have said otherwise.

Besides how many has he had like that? Funny how the umps keep getting it wrong for the same guy, who happens to be the Brownlow favourite.

[soupman]

Fyfe incidence was no more than a free kick.

I agree with this. It was clumsy and not malicious.

Some of the opther stuff he has done this year has been worse, but his incident this week was fine.

[KT31]

I agree with this. It was clumsy and not malicious.

Some of the opther stuff he has done this year has been worse, but his incident this week was fine.

I also agree BAD and Soup, we would be screaming out loud if it was one of our players and they got a week for it.
The true misjustice is Hodge only getting two weeks.

[bornadog]

I also agree BAD and Soup, we would be screaming out loud if it was one of our players and they got a week for it.
The true misjustice is Hodge only getting two weeks.

The Hodge one was so dangerous and the consequences could have been horrific. That was no spot to lay a bump.

[Ozza]

I am certainly in the camp that Fyfe's was no more than a free kick. Would hate to see players rubbed out (or even fined) for there being incidental contact in a contest. The North player just got to the footy slightly before him, and if Fyfe pulled up/pulled out it would have looked ridiculous.

Agree with BAD also regarding Hodge. His was quite despicable. Now he gets a two week freshen up and a clean slate before the finals.

[Sedat]

The Hodge one was so dangerous and the consequences could have been horrific. That was no spot to lay a bump.
Nothing in it BAD - just ask fanboi Lingy and all the other Ch 7 lemmings. Hodge is "hard but fair", "he would never deliberately slam someone into the point post", "Wingard was at fault for dropping the knees". Another 7 years of these scumbags on TV :mad: