MRO Thread

[jeemak]

This act was a fine - let that sink in. AFL are a disgrace

And they perpetuate the myth that Toby Greene gets a rough deal.

[bornadog]

And they perpetuate the myth that Toby Greene gets a rough deal.

I would have given him a kick in the head to make him stop. Well at least fell on his head with a knee, not just pull his jumper

[Topdog]

I think if Brisbane want to go down that route Berry would get off on appeal.

Honestly what option does he have with a persons forearm on your head and throat? He couldnt even see what he was doing, just flailing about

[bornadog]

I think if Brisbane want to go down that route Berry would get off on appeal.

Honestly what option does he have with a persons forearm on your head and throat? He couldnt even see what he was doing, just flailing about

You would think with a prelim at stake they will fight this to the end.

[SonofScray]

I would have given him a kick in the head to make him stop. Well at least fell on his head with a knee, not just pull his jumper

The one time I'd make an exception of the idea that you don't kick. Would have punted his head for a field goal.


Re: Berry.

I am blind in one eye and very sensitive to this issue. You can't be too lenient on gouging. Its as low as it gets, to try and permanently disable an opponent. Anyone went near my good eye, I'm fighting for my life at that point. You will be bitten, kicked, punched, choked, whatever it takes.

That being said, Clayton is the aggressor there and is placing someone under physical duress. He has an opportunity to de-escalate the situation and remove the risk of being gouged by ending the grappling and removing his forearm from the face/throat of the opponent. Berry may have intentionally gone for a gouge, but there's an argument that he was grabbing for the jumper under duress or unable to know exactly where contact would be made as he looked for leverage to disengage from the situation.

[soupman]

Nah he gouged and should get done for gouging. If there are mitigating circumstances from Clolliver then punish him as well, i don't care if you gouge in self defence you shouldn't be doing it.

Also 1 week is not enough.

[MrMahatma]

https://www.afl.com.au/video/839330/...=1662724033001

I actually recon he's trying to grab the jumper, not the eye. They're appealing and I reckon he should get off. Oliver is the grub here. Arm across the throat.

BT needs to take his opinion out of the commentary. Did the same thing with a non-HTB call in the last couple of minutes when Berry (again I believe) had 0 prior but BT goes "How could that NOT be holding the ball?". He's there to call the play, not call the things that didn't happen.

[jazzadogs]

Berry gets off after character witness from Luke Hodge (lol).

Edit: to clarify, I think he should have gotten off and fully agreed with the Brisbane defence. Except for the bit where they used thug Hodge as a character witness.

[bornadog]

Berry gets off after character witness from Luke Hodge (lol).

Yeah so he should get off

[mjp]

I think if Brisbane want to go down that route Berry would get off on appeal.

Honestly what option does he have with a persons forearm on your head and throat? He couldnt even see what he was doing, just flailing about

Given your reasoning was the same given at the tribunal, does this now mean in the future players can simply 'flail about with clenched fists' if someone is on top of them?

He might not have meant to do it but he DID do it. I am so confused by the tribunal these days...if there is ever late contact/high contact, it is all about the 'outcome' (was he injured/concussed etc) rather than the intent. Apparently this one is all about the intent?

I simply don't understand.

[bornadog]

Given your reasoning was the same given at the tribunal, does this now mean in the future players can simply 'flail about with clenched fists' if someone is on top of them?

He might not have meant to do it but he DID do it. I am so confused by the tribunal these days...if there is ever late contact/high contact, it is all about the 'outcome' (was he injured/concussed etc) rather than the intent. Apparently this one is all about the intent?

I simply don't understand.

Intent depends on intentional or unintentional

[MrMahatma]

Given your reasoning was the same given at the tribunal, does this now mean in the future players can simply 'flail about with clenched fists' if someone is on top of them?

He might not have meant to do it but he DID do it. I am so confused by the tribunal these days...if there is ever late contact/high contact, it is all about the 'outcome' (was he injured/concussed etc) rather than the intent. Apparently this one is all about the intent?

I simply don't understand.

Should someone be allowed to be on top of them, holding them down (preventing them from being part of the play), with an arm across their neck (high contact)?

[Testekill]

Yeah this isn't like Selwood scraping his fingers across Duryea's face or Greene jumping in on top of an indisposed Bontempelli to scratch around his eyes. Berry's hand was out of there even quicker than it went it and he wasn't even looking at Oliver's face.

[Topdog]

Given your reasoning was the same given at the tribunal, does this now mean in the future players can simply 'flail about with clenched fists' if someone is on top of them?

He might not have meant to do it but he DID do it. I am so confused by the tribunal these days...if there is ever late contact/high contact, it is all about the 'outcome' (was he injured/concussed etc) rather than the intent. Apparently this one is all about the intent?

I simply don't understand.

so 100% agree that the tribunal is confusing as all hell. I thought he would get done on appeal due to impact over intent so was surprised he got off this early in the week. Maybe they are being cautious after the Cripps debacle.

With Berry I thought he was trying to grab at Olivers jumper but couldnt see as he had an arm across his eyes and on his throat.

[bornadog]

Picket 2 matches

Buddy 1 match