What will Buddy get?

[Matty10]

Swans are challenging the ban.

Good. I suppose that means the Swans don’t want to rest Franklin this week (unless they are challenging as a matter of principle).

[Go Swannies]

Good. Especially as two of the other, more significant hits that only got fines were on Swans players. His suspension makes it appear that the AFL regards whacking Swans players is a lesser crime.

[Nico]

Good. Especially as two of the other, more significant hits that only got fines were on Swans players. His suspension makes it appear that the AFL regards whacking Swans players is a lesser crime.

Shows that we rate our chances to go top 4.

[KTigers]

Everyone saw OTC last night with all the other elbow incidents. The other three guys got fines, then so does Bud.

[Bangalore Swans]

I think the grading of medium impact was arrived at so there would be a weeks suspension, cart before the horse thinking

The VFL got it wrong way back when they graded Astbury? as low impact, that should have been a week then all that followed would have rightly been a week and we might have seen flying arms not used any more.

Lets be honest, fining an AFL player $1000 does absolutely nothing to stop these incidents but suspensions may?

Is a tribunal fine regarded as a work related expense for players?

Good way to potentially lower their taxable income.

[Molly dooker]

I always see that Buddy gets punished because he's such a huuuuge unit.

When he does anything that wouldn't bat an eyelid for anyone else, he gets a free against and when the other team does worse, he gets nothing due to his size.

Then I see Dixon who is also a unit and he gets frees regularly for soft stuff.

Yep, it's a Swans thing.

[i'm-uninformed2]

I thought Buddy deserved a week, but if we're appealing, personally think the Astbury one is the better precedent. Shuey was awkward, but didn't look as calculated as Buddy or Astbury in kinda (but not really) lining the bloke up.

[Nico]

The penalty was a week suspension with an early plea. Does that mean that if the appeal fails he gets 2 weeks.

[AB Swannie]

The penalty was a week suspension with an early plea. Does that mean that if the appeal fails he gets 2 weeks.

I think the loophole is that he pleads guilty but challenges the impact severity. Therefore, it stays at 1 week even if the appeal is dismissed.

[crackedactor 01]

Everyone saw OTC last night with all the other elbow incidents. The other three guys got fines, then so does Bud.

Got a sneaky suspicion there is a bit of cat and mouse play going on with the Swans Challenge.

[Markwebbos]

Got a sneaky suspicion there is a bit of cat and mouse play going on with the Swans Challenge.

What do you mean?

On the Realfooty podcast they noted that Steve Hocking is no longer around to interfere in MRO decisions.

[AB Swannie]

This is an interesting case.

On one hand, he deserves a week because you shouldn't be allowed to through elbows and forearms carelessly like that. I would also argue that the other three incidents also deserved a week and I argued that at the time.

On the other hand, fairness and equity should be a major part of any justice system and since the precedents have already been set, he should get the same as the others.

[Hotpotato]

This appeal is very pleasing . Buddy is fit and well , wants to play every game possible.

[Rod_]

He will be fined hopefully and the additional time in the news for his appeal has placed the rest of the AFL on notice.

Or Buddy will be the scapegoat and will be out of this weeks game.

My vote is a fine!

[Matty10]

The penalty was a week suspension with an early plea. Does that mean that if the appeal fails he gets 2 weeks.

There is no risk here. The incident was classified as a one-match ban (which is a fixed sanction). There is actually no reduction with an early plea for fixed sanction assessments (which was put in place when they got rid of the points system). The is a financial cost to the club if we lose, but otherwise it is a free hit.