What will Buddy get?

[MattW]

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..

Exactly - whatever clarification note or tweak is necessary. I hate that action.

[Steve]

What will Buddy get?

That’s the problem with the system - Christian had to fiddle one of the criteria to land at 1 week, which I’m sure is what the AFL would have expected.

He had to choose between intent or force - if he goes for intentional that’s hard to definitively prove, so most likely gets downgraded on appeal, but arguing medium force when players aren’t injured (or even go off the ground) is going to be vulnerable to appeal.

But then if he plays it safe and says high/careless/low it is only a fine and doesn’t seem sufficient for incidents like this one.

They probably need a different or better criteria for intent, more than careless but less than intentional - then even with low impact they could still arrive at 1 week, it gets much harder to get downgraded, and be reasonable overall for scenarios where players are throwing back elbows or forearms.

[bodgie]

Buddy will get rested this week.

[Hotpotato]

Nope

[Meg]

That’s the problem with the system - Christian had to fiddle one of the criteria to land at 1 week, which I’m sure is what the AFL would have expected.

He had to choose between intent or force - if he goes for intentional that’s hard to definitively prove, so most likely gets downgraded on appeal, but arguing medium force when players aren’t injured (or even go off the ground) is going to be vulnerable to appeal.

But then if he plays it safe and says high/careless/low it is only a fine and doesn’t seem sufficient for incidents like this one.

They probably need a different or better criteria for intent, more than careless but less than intentional - then even with low impact they could still arrive at 1 week, it gets much harder to get downgraded, and be reasonable overall for scenarios where players are throwing back elbows or forearms.

Exactly. AFL needs to bring back the ‘reckless’ category.

In my view there is a big gap between ‘intentional’ and ‘careless’. And ‘reckless’ fits that gap.

[The Great One]

That’s the problem with the system - Christian had to fiddle one of the criteria to land at 1 week, which I’m sure is what the AFL would have expected.

He had to choose between intent or force - if he goes for intentional that’s hard to definitively prove, so most likely gets downgraded on appeal, but arguing medium force when players aren’t injured (or even go off the ground) is going to be vulnerable to appeal.

But then if he plays it safe and says high/careless/low it is only a fine and doesn’t seem sufficient for incidents like this one.

They probably need a different or better criteria for intent, more than careless but less than intentional - then even with low impact they could still arrive at 1 week, it gets much harder to get downgraded, and be reasonable overall for scenarios where players are throwing back elbows or forearms.

In the NRL tribunal guidelines they have three categories, Careless, Reckless or Intentional. The 2 codes have similar systems but obviously there are slight differences.

- - - Updated - - -

You just beat me to Reckless Meg.

[Meg]

In the NRL tribunal guidelines they have three categories, Careless, Reckless or Intentional. The 2 codes have similar systems but obviously there are slight differences.

- - - Updated - - -

You just beat me to Reckless Meg.

I’m pleased you agree Oh Great One [emoji3].

It’s been a bugbear of mine ever since the AFL dropped the reckless category.

[Markwebbos]

Much as I hate Dermott, if he is correct that this would have been a 3-4 week ban in his day, what does it say about the AFLs commitment to protecting the head that this is only a fine?

[Kafka's Ghost]

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..

Agree. A bad precedent was set with the Astbury decision.

[707]

Agree. A bad precedent was set with the Astbury decision.

I don't agree or like the action but as soon as Astbury got off with a fine, which most people thought was the wrong decision, then it was set for the season.

Correct decision tonight, get stuffed VFL

[barry]

Much as I hate Dermott, if he is correct that this would have been a 3-4 week ban in his day, what does it say about the AFLs commitment to protecting the head that this is only a fine?

I can't remember a time when that was ever 4 weeks, and I've been around a while.

[Blood Fever]

I can't remember a time when that was ever 4 weeks, and I've been around a while.

Dermot lives in his own fantasy world

[0918330512]

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

Good way to potentially lower their taxable income.

I assume you’re joking?

Because if you’re not, it’s a rather silly way to lower your taxable income. Buddy gets no personal benefit from his $3000 expenditure, nor any return for his $3000 “investment”. So he’s essentially throwing away $3000 to reduce his income.

Conversely, his $3000 was about 8 minutes of actual game time for him.

[dejavoodoo44]

Much as I hate Dermott, if he is correct that this would have been a 3-4 week ban in his day, what does it say about the AFLs commitment to protecting the head that this is only a fine?

If suspect that Dermie thinks that, because he got whacked in the head a few too many times, in his day. I certainly think that there's a lot less sniping, cheap shots and casual violence, these days.

[goswannies]

If suspect that Dermie thinks that, because he got whacked in the head a few too many times, in his day. I certainly think that there's a lot less sniping, cheap shots and casual violence, these days.

If Dermie thinks he got whacked a bit, he should take a long, hard look in the mirror.

Brereton has missed more games through suspension than any of his fellow Hawthorn clubmen - 23 games after receiving 14 separate charges during career with the Hawks. Add another 16 games to that tally in the final two years of his career – 14 weeks from two separate incidents in his lone year at the Swans (that gutless incident with Rayden Tallis), and two weeks from a single incident at Collingwood.

Even Rhys-Jones only missed 22.