What will Buddy get?

[i'm-uninformed2]

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

No. AFL changed the rules a year or so back to say for the vast bulk of offences (including this one) you can challenge and instead of risking the 'extra' week, if you lose you pay a $10,000 fine included under football department spending cap.

[Steve]

What will Buddy get?

There’s not much to lose challenging, personally I think a week off isn’t the worst thing for him, and we can give Armartey, McDonald, McLean or Sinclair a go in case we need them later in the year.

FWIW I think he does deserve a week for it - but so too did Daniher, Astbury and Shuey. Saying it was low impact doesn’t seem a huge stretch.

There’s a bit the of AFL having it both ways with the force grading - when you use outcome (eg. concussion) to lift the grading, IMO you have to be consistent and assess it as low impact if there’s minimal harm caused.

[Matty10]

The hearing is on now…

Follow it LIVE: Lance Franklin fronts the Tribunal

[Beerman]

The hearing is on now…

Follow it LIVE: Lance Franklin fronts the Tribunal

I note that Charlie Gardiner was a Senior Associate for Arnold Bloch Liebler before he joined the Swans. Pretty good person to have on the team at the moment I would think. He's also smart enough to know not to act on the matter himself (even if he's licensed to do so).

Also, just in - Gleeson was trying to block us from suing the the other three examples this season as precedents. But we've got permission to use them. That's promising.

[707]

VFL argues against us using the three low impact examples from previous rounds this year.

Tribunal allows us to use them

[Matty10]

Gleeson (AFL) seems to be keeping his argument more on point (based on the summary). For some reason Miller (Swans counsel) is discussing intent (which is not the basis for our appeal). That’s not a good sign.

[stevoswan]

The jury is deliberating now.....and now we wait.

[giant]

There’s not much to lose challenging, personally I think a week off isn’t the worst thing for him, and we can give Armartey, McDonald, McLean or Sinclair a go in case we need them later in the year.

FWIW I think he does deserve a week for it - but so too did Daniher, Astbury and Shuey. Saying it was low impact doesn’t seem a huge stretch.

There’s a bit the of AFL having it both ways with the force grading - when you use outcome (eg. concussion) to lift the grading, IMO you have to be consistent and assess it as low impact if there’s minimal harm caused.

Tend to agree - league got this wroing with the Astbury decision which is the worst of the lot - he should have got 2 weeks and the other examples all one week.

[Go Swannies]

IT'S DOWNGRADED TO A FINE

[Matty10]

Free to play!

[Rob2120]

Franklin free to play


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Go Swannies]

Sorry - I was filling out a form when the news came through and had the caps lock on. I didn't mean to shout, although it is exciting.

[Kafka's Ghost]

Really good news. After seeing the previous incidents, the tribunal had no other option. The Astbury decision in particular was a poor one, resulting in the precedent we now have. Excellent for us, and hopefully Buddy plays a blinder on Saturday night, helping us to bring home the points.

[Ludwig]

A fair decision based on the precedent. The AFL need to say that MRO made a mistake in the grading in all 4 cases and in the future this sort of action will result in a suspension. It has to stop sometime..

[Hotpotato]

There you go.
Now just tidy that up Buddy .