MRO Thread

[bornadog]

I don't see the point of arguing 'that if Brennan was playing in the men's competition, her two rough conduct charges would result only in a fine.'

Its not the men's competition - there have been different rules set in place for the women's competition at this point in time.

Everyone involved knew the rules, 2 reprimands equals a suspension. The rules may or may not be to everyone or anyones liking - but that's what they have been working with this season. They can't retrospectively change the rules to let KB play in the grand final.

If we are going to argue that the tackle wasn't a sling tackle and didn't warrant a reprimand - then fair enough. But the 'extenuating circumstances' type defence put up so far, sounds pathetic - as was the concession we/KB has made that it was careless and that KB had apologised to the Demons player.

sex-based discrimination is against the law

[Sedat]

sex-based discrimination is against the law

This is true but then so is restraint of trade, thus the draft is also technically against the law. If we win at the tribunal based on this then some fundamental competition rules will need to be ripped up and re-written - I'm not necessarily against this by the way

[bornadog]

This is true but then so is restraint of trade, thus the draft is also technically against the law. If we win at the tribunal based on this then some fundamental competition rules will need to be ripped up and re-written - I'm not necessarily against this by the way

Another of the many rules the AFL make up without any foresight or thinking ahead.

The women don't get paid enough to fine them so let's reprimand them, however two repreminds = 1 match suspension. However, they didn't think about the consequences of missing a GF, plus the penalty is too harsh for the crime. Now we have the total farsical situation that a strong tackle has resulted in 2 match suspension.

[Twodogs]

Who was the last male player to be suspended from playing in a Grand Final as a result of a transgression in a prelim?

It was Anthony Rocca and to be fair it was only 15 years ago.

This is true but then so is restraint of trade, thus the draft is also technically against the law. If we win at the tribunal based on this then some fundamental competition rules will need to be ripped up and re-written - I'm not necessarily against this by the way

Other rules apply to the AFl like OH&S so it's not right to say all of society's laws don't apply to football. the restraint of trade issue has always been there but outside of getting a run by a club or individual that is unhappy with a recruiting outcome it's never really been an issue. All the parties realise that the system we have helps provide the most money for everyone.

An Equal Opportunities defense might apply. After all if they can then proving it wasn't followed shouldn't be hard when Cotchin played in the Grand Final. And they have to prove the finding was wrong in law before the appeal can be successful, maybe this is a way they can do that.

[LostDoggy]

As BAD said the situation is a farce, are basketball players on the tribunal? The appeal should be based on the physics of the tackle itself, there was no malice or intent, just a spur of the moment tackle in which the Melbourne player could of protected her fall more. THis is footy everyday of the week, don’t make a mockery of AFLW. Case closed, go and win the GF, sorry for being jerks Katie.

The pay equality argument is worthy too but which clown went the ‘but she’s a star’ argument? That just puts people offside.

Redpath and Wood suspensions last year should really have prepared me for this. What will Ratface Greene get away with this week?
Farcical.