Teddy gets offerred a week for rough conduct - CLEARED

[liz]

I accept the injustice of the MRP's decision. However, there is also the risk of Ted being out for two weeks and missing the game against Hawthorn and thereafter lacking match fitness.

No disrepect to Port Adelaide, but is it worth the risk? (Actually there is disrepect to Port)

No risk of two weeks due to the good record discount still applying. If he fails, he will just have more carry-over points but still will just serve one week now.

We are contesting!

Goody

I'm torn between knowing it should be contested due to being a ridiculous decision and not trusting the MRP to make a good decision.
We can manage against Port but I think we will need Ted against the Hawks

Think it is a logical path to take to contest. Whether it is successful or not is pretty much a toss of the coin.

If it isn't successful, I would love to hear the tribunal provide some ideas about what genuine alternative course of action Ted had in the circumstances. If he had none, he shouldn't get suspended. (And that is putting aside the fact that from the TV footage we've all seen, it is inconclusive whether there was much, if any, contact to the head.)

[Jesse Richards]

Coincidence?

Mummy last year begining to show some form. Ted this year playing extremely well. No doubt others will be able to cite similar examples from our own and other clubs.

If the MRP think that Ted was in any way negligent they should search him for an alien implant. It's the only explanation that makes sense - oh, and that they want to create problems for Sydney.

[Triple B]

Coincidence?

Mummy last year begining to show some form. Ted this year playing extremely well. No doubt others will be able to cite similar examples from our own and other clubs.

If the MRP think that Ted was in any way negligent they should search him for an alien implant. It's the only explanation that makes sense - oh, and that they want to create problems for Sydney.

I don't buy the conspiracy thing at all and I think it makes us look silly to even suggest it, but the inconsistency of the MRP is laughable.

[Big Al]

The Chris Dawes one was thrown out in 5min by the Tribunal. If they're serious this charge will be thrown out in less time making the MRP look like like the bunch of fools they clearly are.

[Jesse Richards]

I don't buy the conspiracy thing at all and I think it makes us look silly to even suggest it, but the inconsistency of the MRP is laughable.

Ok. Let's call it for what it really is then. Corrupt? Incompetent? Either way I'm not laughing.

[Triple B]

Ted's fight

According to this, he will miss 2 matches if he doesn't get off, or reduced.

"Like Trengove, Richards is risking a greater penalty by contesting the finding and could miss two games if the Swans fail."

I tend to agree with the sentiment that his 5 year good record reduction will still apply, although obviously the 'early plea' reduction will not.

Is the journo wrong ?

Should I give myself an uppercut for even asking ?

[Big Al]

Ted's fight

According to this, he will miss 2 matches if he doesn't get off, or reduced.

I tend to agree with the sentiment that his 5 year good record reduction will still apply, although obviously the 'early plea' reduction will not.

Is the journo wrong ?

Should I give myself an uppercut for even asking ?

My understanding is that he still gets the 25% good behaviour reduction which brings it under 200 points and still only 1 match. The only difference is that he doesn't get the early plea reduction so has more carry over points.

[liz]

Ted's fight

According to this, he will miss 2 matches if he doesn't get off, or reduced.

I tend to agree with the sentiment that his 5 year good record reduction will still apply, although obviously the 'early plea' reduction will not.

Is the journo wrong ?

Should I give myself an uppercut for even asking ?

Yes to both.

I am a little surprised that Freo are challenging the Fyfe one. It looked a pretty blatant case of getting in the way of the umpire's escape route and it is not obvious from the footage that he was nudged into the contact.

[Triple B]

Yes to both.

I thought as much, lucky I'm a powder puff, I should still be able to post after the uppercut...

I'm surprised that they are contesting both of the other charges.

Agree on Fyfe and I don't believe they have shown a whole lot of leniency in the past even if they are nudged into the umpires path.

Not sure how they can get Trengove's downgraded either. Definately high impact and high contact, no lawyer could possibly argue atherwise...

[ugg]

I asked Daily Tele AFL reporter @toddbalym on Twitter and he responded thusly:

@swansreserves Ted will only cop 1-week if found guilty. Gonna claim contact was shoulder not head. Flying to Melb, so they're serious.

I wonder if Gilbee will help Ted by making a statement that it was shoulder and not head.

[ScottH]

According to the news this morning, he'd get 2 if found guilty.

[satchmopugdog]

Damn..wish I had known in time to fly to Melbourne with placards.."How much does Teddy have to bear!!!" 'Bring back the trying to avoid contact"
"Contact Goal Defence"

[satchmopugdog]

Damn..wish I had known in time to fly to Melbourne with placards.."How much does Teddy have to bear!!!" 'Bring back the trying to avoid contact"
"Contact Goal Defence"

We had a more severe incident than that in my div3 hockey game on Sunday..and we are a bunch of old women..just shrug it off and get on with it.

[ugg]

Live coverage!


Triple Tribunal live at 5pm - AFL.com.au

[Big Al]

We had a more severe incident than that in my div3 hockey game on Sunday..and we are a bunch of old women..just shrug it off and get on with it.

To be fair if I had the choice between confronting a footballer and an angry female hockey player then I'd take the footballer for sure.