judd eye gouging - Charge Confirmed (Gouging)

[AnnieH]

Did you miss the first 7 Swans games this year Annie?

As for Judd copping one match - mwah ha ha ha ha. Commit the crime, pay the time. However, I expect them to appeal and he'll probably get a reprimand.

if i recall correctly, goodsey didn't really win the brownlow until the final three votes.
hypothetically, if he played like a god for the rest of the season he would still have had a chance.

[ScottH]

Not sure if that is possible.

The charge has already been graded as low impact and negligent, the lowest categories possible. The head high bit is indisputable.

So either they have to determine it was completely accidental and clear him, or the one match ban will stand.

Only other possibility is that they deem it not to be an eye-gouge but still unnecessary contact to the face. There may be some combination of assessments that will bring that to a reprimand.

They stated that yesterday. If they appeal, he'll still get one match.

[NMWBloods]

I think they plan to appeal just to clear his name. Interesting that a number of players and observers have come out in support of him.

[Layby]

I think they plan to appeal just to clear his name. Interesting that a number of players and observers have come out in support of him.

No suprise there, he is a great player who plays the game very fairly, does not whinge about tagging and is well liked. Unfortunately, he made a mistake and will have to pay the price.

[Triple B]

No suprise there, he is a great player who plays the game very fairly, does not whinge about tagging and is well liked. Unfortunately, he made a mistake and will have to pay the price.

Now that's a sensible post.

Who are you and what have you done with Layby?

[Damien]

I fully expect the Tribunal to rule in Judd's favour tonight, I like Judd a lot and would give up half our team to have him at the Swans!, but I believe what he did was reckless and deserves the punishment put on the table.

I think some of the media etc would be singing a different tune if Baz or Jonathon Brown did the same thing.

[hammo]

I expect Judd to get off. It looked an ugly incident but there is no doubt Judd is a very fair player and the contact was unintentional.

[AnnieH]

I fully expect the Tribunal to rule in Judd's favour tonight, I like Judd a lot and would give up half our team to have him at the Swans!, but I believe what he did was reckless and deserves the punishment put on the table.

I think some of the media etc would be singing a different tune if Baz or Jonathon Brown did the same thing.

imagine if it were bbbh ... there would have been a frenzy (other than here).

[Triple B]

imagine if it were bbbh ... there would have been a frenzy (other than here).

He's already got 5 weeks for gouging, although in fairness it looked a lot worse than what Judd's incident appeared.

[Jewels]

I will be so disappointed if he gets off tonight (though not surprised). He is as guilty as sin! He MUST have known where his hand was, that it was somewhere in the visinity of Browns face and yet he was very slow to remove it. That in my mind, means he is guilty of contact to the face, punishable by a one weeks holiday.

[Ruda Wakening]

That in my mind, means he is guilty of contact to the face, punishable by a one weeks holiday.

If they downgraded the charge from eye gouging to making unnecessary contact to the face, he would get off with a reprimand. That's the point of challenging it.

[swansrock4eva]

Just on the news - he got off.

[Jeffers1984]

He's in the clear. Brownlow still on for Judd.

[ernie koala]

I expect Judd to get off. It looked an ugly incident but there is no doubt Judd is a very fair player and the contact was unintentional.

How can it be unintentional when he clearly has his finger jammed in Browns eye socket, even while Brown is throwing his head back....A dubious decision at best....very lucky Mr Judd, your reputation has saved you

[Robbo]

The AFL's white knight has been let off again.