Mummy, downgrade - 2 week ban - swans consider appeal

[SwansFan1972]

It'll be thrown out for sure.

They have an identical tackle from Lenny Hayes tonight (which was pinged for a 50m as it came after a free kick against another STK player). To uphold Mummy's, the MRP would have to report Hayes, and that just aint gonna happen.

Unrelated to Mummy, Blues have put the cleaners through the Saints. By enough to push us up to fourth. Nice ... very nice!

[AnnieH]

Might get some Indian next week!?!?!?

Pyke and Currie. Whoda thort?

Who else can cover? LRT??? (Did we find out what happened to two-dads??)

[mcs]

IMO its only cause Ablett was on the recieving end. Nothing different to the ROK incident. The club better fight it, and I'll be mightily pissed if he doesn't get off, as we will be up @@@@ creek without a paddle if we have to rely on Currie and Pyke (Moreso because of their vast lack of experience than their actual quality- I think both have the potential to be excellent players.)

[Molly dooker]

Pyke and Currie. Whoda thort?

Who else can cover? LRT??? (Did we find out what happened to two-dads??)

If we have to be without Mummy, then this is my choice too. White is improving each game and is a massive concern for the oppositions defense.

I heard that Two-Dad's had hammy tightness and was rested as a precaution. Will be back next week.

[digital]

This type of tasckle happens 20 times per game; there were at least 5 similar tackles by the Cats defence on Sunday, but there are two diufferences: 1. Is that bald headed one, and 2. all other tackles are in congested play, whereas, with Mummys it was in the open. There is nothing wrong with the tackle, his should hit the ground first. How many weeks to the opposing player when Ablett does hi hammy next week? The issue with Ablett is that the umpires give him so long to get rid of it after he is tackled, the only way to stop is to put him of the ground. Definitely a very protected species

[Glenn]

If the Tribunal blindly follows the MRP and ignores similar tackles, Gioodes/White to ruck?

[alison.z]

Goodes. Will. Not. Ruck.




Ever. Again.

[liz]

I've only just read the details of how the charge has been assessed. If they are trying to crack down on unduly rough tackles, surely they need to come up with a different grading system. The concept of that being "high contact" is just stupid. Yes, Ablett's head hit the turf but heads hit the turf frequently when tackles bring a player to ground.

ROK was cleaned up in Sunday's game by a legitimate bump - ie the bump itself made no head high contact - but the bump was strong enough to bring him to ground, a ground on which he hit his head. Does that mean that bump was "high contact"? (Answer is obviously not - it's just an illustration of the stupidity of the charge for a rough tackle unless there is a clear spear tackle motion.)

[laughingnome]

After seeing the tape many times, a couple of thoughts:

1 - Ablett drops/attempts disposal/whatever the ball in the tackle, but Mummy would not know this, so disregard any "late" arguement that may come up.
2 - Mummy grabs Ablett by the hips (like we're all taught way back in the Under 12's), and spins him as the momentum shift happens - Ablett is a moving force, after all. That energy has to go somewhere.
3 - Mummy's hands do not move up Ablett's body as he hits the ground. As such, Mummy is driving Ablett's hip into the ground, on the side. He is not pushing in the back.
4 - Similarly to 3, because Mummy's hands don't move he is not driving Ablett's head into the ground ala a 'spear tackle'. Ablett's head hits the ground after his shoulder because inertia's a bitch. (see also Liz's post re: Rok, above)
5 - The umpire on the scene had no problem with it.

If this doesn't get thrown out by someone then I don't know what to think. I have no doubt it hurt Ablett, but so what? Plenty of players get legitimately hurt every week. It goes with the territory and the game. The players know it, the fans know it, it seems only the MRP are clueless.

[giant]

Was Ablett even paid a free kick at the time? I don't believe so. You would think they could cobble together a DVD of 150 previous unreported examples.

I remember thinking at the time, "don't get yourself reported ya big meathead".

[alison.z]

When do the Swans challenge? (assuming they decide this morning to do so)

[liz]

When do the Swans challenge? (assuming they decide this morning to do so)

They have to decide by 11am this morning. If they do, presumably the case will be heard tonight, starting 5-6ish? May depend on any other cases being heard.

[ScottH]

Seems a lot of the media are up in arms about the deicision.

Luke Darcy said it was ridiculous.He's on the Rules Committee.
Big Ed agreed.

[stellation]

They don't watch the footage with the commentary turned on, do they? A dozen replays of it with the unbiased Liam Pickering saying it was out of line may be enough to convince them.

[johnno]

Have only just switched on the computer at work and have read/heard of this for the first time. Total bull@@@@@. I'm pissed off right now.