MRP (Parker cleared but what about Sam Mitchell?)

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • vleung1208
    On the Rookie List
    • Aug 2015
    • 23

    MRP (Parker cleared but what about Sam Mitchell?)

    So it's good to see that Luke Parker was cleared by the Match Reveal Panel of any wrong doing with the accidental hit on Chad Wingard. Not even facing him, accidental and no intent to hurt at all. But can somebody please explain how Sam Mitchell gets off for this? Not even a fine? #FreeKickHawthorn Check out the vid on the AFL site and make up your own mind!
  • Maltopia
    Senior Player
    • Apr 2016
    • 1556

    #2
    It is just incredible isn't it? Mitchell swung AT Watts, he knew where is head was and he went for it. Can't have Hawthorn lose and drop out of four now, can we?

    MRP: Star Hawk Mitchell in the clear, but teammates charged - AFL.com.au

    Comment

    • chalbilto
      Senior Player
      • Oct 2007
      • 1139

      #3
      It definitely was a clenched fist, however it would not have bruised a grape. The MRP would have been better to say insufficient force to warrant a charge. Karma is bound to get him and his team mates.

      Comment

      • Ludwig
        Veterans List
        • Apr 2007
        • 9359

        #4
        Out of all the Hawthorn incidents, including 2 for Rioli (I thought he could have also been charged for a dangerous tackle when he lifted the leg of a player), the Sicily one was the least problematic as it was in a marking contest, and yet he was the one that got a week. Makes you wonder sometimes.

        I don't understand the Rioli assessment for his bump on Oliver as Careless and Low impact, as this seems extremely generous. I think he should have gotten 3 weeks, like Zak Dawson got for hitting Lloyd. Looked about the same to me.
        Last edited by Ludwig; 8 August 2016, 05:13 PM.

        Comment

        • magic.merkin
          Senior Player
          • Jul 2008
          • 1199

          #5
          They updated the article on the afl website:

          Based on the available video evidence and a medical report from the Melbourne Football Club, the incident was assessed as careless conduct with low impact to the head

          Comment

          • bloodsbigot
            Regular in the Side
            • Mar 2010
            • 813

            #6
            I heard on bigfooty a former Hawthorn CEO is the head of the MRP.

            Hawthorn are one goddamn corrupt club.

            Comment

            • vleung1208
              On the Rookie List
              • Aug 2015
              • 23

              #7
              Hitting someone in the face with intent I guess is ok as long as it's not with force. OK. So lets see what the MRP says if there's another similar incident. I'm sure they will get suspended #Inconsistency

              Comment

              • Maltopia
                Senior Player
                • Apr 2016
                • 1556

                #8
                Originally posted by Ludwig
                Out of all the Hawthorn incidents, including 2 for Rioli (I thought he could have also been charged for a dangerous tackle when he lifted the leg of a player), the Sicily one was the least problematic as it was in a marking contest, and yet he was the one that got a week. Makes you wonder sometimes.

                I don't understand the Rioli assessment for his bump on Oliver as Careless and Low impact, as this seems extremely generous. I think he should have gotten 3 weeks, like Zak Dawson got for hitting Lloyd. Looked about the same to me.
                It is simple really. Sicily is bottom six player = expendable and cops a ban for appearance sake. Mitchell and Cyril are top six in the squad = move along, nothing to see

                Comment

                • longmile
                  Crumber
                  • Apr 2011
                  • 3360

                  #9
                  @@@@ing disgusting so over it

                  Comment

                  • Danzar
                    I'm doing ok right now, thanks
                    • Jun 2006
                    • 2027

                    #10
                    Originally posted by magic.merkin
                    They updated the article on the afl website:

                    Based on the available video evidence and a medical report from the Melbourne Football Club, the incident was assessed as careless conduct with low impact to the head
                    Hang on, are you saying that the MRPs full Statement was changed after it was first posted? This Statement: Match Review Panel full statement: round 20 - M.afl.com.au ?

                    Twitter was originally saying that the MRP deemed no contact to the head, which made their decision to fine Rioli all the more strange because if it's not head, it's body, which means no case to answer.

                    Changing the 'article' is entirely bizarre given it's their full statement. What did the statement say before it was updated? No head contact?




                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                    Captain, I am detecting large quantities of win in this sector

                    Comment

                    • Meg
                      Go Swannies!
                      Site Admin
                      • Aug 2011
                      • 4828

                      #11
                      Originally posted by bloodsbigot
                      I heard on bigfooty a former Hawthorn CEO is the head of the MRP.

                      Hawthorn are one goddamn corrupt club.
                      Don't think that is right. MRP is a four-member panel, of whom three rule on incidents each week with the panel members alternating each week.

                      The current four members are:

                      Michael Christian ( ex Collingwood player)

                      Nathan Burke ( ex St Kilda player)

                      Chris Knights (ex Richmond and Adelaide player)

                      Jason Johnson ( ex Essendon player)

                      "A player's innocence or guilt is decided on a majority 3-0 or 2-1 ruling."

                      Former Tiger and Bomber join Match Review Panel - AFL.com.au

                      Comment

                      • Meg
                        Go Swannies!
                        Site Admin
                        • Aug 2011
                        • 4828

                        #12
                        Originally posted by vleung1208
                        Hitting someone in the face with intent I guess is ok as long as it's not with force. OK. So lets see what the MRP says if there's another similar incident. I'm sure they will get suspended #Inconsistency
                        It's consistent with the decision made in Round 11 when no action was taken against Melbourne?s Bernie Vince for striking Hawthorn?s Isaac Smith. A similar reason was given then - that contact was made with an open hand and there was insufficient force to constitute a reportable offence. If you watch the Saturday's video, Watts was hardly an innocent in the incident with Mitchell.

                        Comment

                        • Ludwig
                          Veterans List
                          • Apr 2007
                          • 9359

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Danzar
                          Hang on, are you saying that the MRPs full Statement was changed after it was first posted? This Statement: Match Review Panel full statement: round 20 - M.afl.com.au ?
                          A copy of the original statement is on the NM Big Footy website. The original statement had the words 'low impact to the body.' The statement was later revised and the word 'head' was substituted for 'body'. Every other player involved in a similar incident this year got at least 2 weeks. It seems to me that Sicily took the rap for Mitchell and Rioli since he hasn't been playing well and was likely to be dropped anyway.

                          It's hard to tell if the Mitchell hit was with a closed fist or open hand, but seems to be a hit rather than a push, as the motion looks continuous. But the MRP have other videos I believe.

                          Could you just imagine the outcry if Adam Goodes had been let off for either one of those incidents.

                          Comment

                          • barry
                            Veterans List
                            • Jan 2003
                            • 8499

                            #14
                            To remove bias all MRP members must have played for at least 3 clubs.

                            Doctor jolly.

                            Comment

                            • Meg
                              Go Swannies!
                              Site Admin
                              • Aug 2011
                              • 4828

                              #15
                              Originally posted by barry
                              To remove bias all MRP members must have played for at least 3 clubs.

                              Doctor jolly.
                              Mitch Morton

                              Comment

                              Working...