Stopping Fraser Gehrig

[alwaysadog]

Re: Stopping Fraser Gehrig

Harris would have definitely copped a few more games for that incident if he had done it, what amazes me is Gehrig is a serial offender for those little punches he does and almost always cops some sort of reprimand or a week whenever he gets sighted, anybody else would get at least 3-4 weeks.

Doesn't amaze me at all. It doesn't matter what they do with the tribunal it keeps producing amazingly inconsistent results. Fraser, 'orrible character that he is, for some reason is a protected species.

[Raw Toast]

Re: Stopping Fraser Gehrig

Agree with many of these comments and think he deserved two weeks for it myself. The committee has become weak as dishwater since McKay took over as chair and I think there are too many former players on the tribunal as well (which if anything is even more lenient).

That said, I don't think Fraser is a protected species. IIRC Last year (or perhaps the year before) he got two weeks for the tummy tap when Weagles players were getting let off because intentional punches missed their target. Him getting only one week this time might be an attempt at delayed justice.

[alwaysadog]

Re: Stopping Fraser Gehrig

Agree with many of these comments and think he deserved two weeks for it myself. The committee has become weak as dishwater since McKay took over as chair and I think there are too many former players on the tribunal as well (which if anything is even more lenient).

That said, I don't think Fraser is a protected species. IIRC Last year (or perhaps the year before) he got two weeks for the tummy tap when Weagles players were getting let off because intentional punches missed their target. Him getting only one week this time might be an attempt at delayed justice.

Agree with most of what you say Raw Toast but one week is a joke... and if the tribunal are squaring off it's even worse. If the recent strike on Harris was a more full blooded blow then he should have got more not less than last time... but he's not a protected specie.

It was his ex-coach who coined the phrase "tummy tap". It is impossible to know the force of the blow, a fist doesn't have to move very far in that region to do damage, and at other times the same ex-coach had trumpetted about how strong the Razor was. It was just a blatant exercise in persuasion and special pleading, which the media were only too happy to chorus parrot like as it worked at their low level of intellect and the alliteration was worthy of the second rate advertising agency, where most of them belong.

The tribunal for once weren't as easily presuaded. He deserved what he got, given his record he could have expected more. How many years does it take for the message to get through?

Mind you he gets mixed messages and gets away with it. That the tribunal is inconsistent is the main problem. It is subject to so many whims that deny it credibilty. In search of an explanation for this extreme variability I'm thinking about correlating its decisions with the phases of the moon, or any other possible explanation you or others may have.

Perhaps we should draw up a list of possible causes for this phenomenon and send them to Andy, he has got nothing much on his plate now that Cousins is out of sight and the reaches of the media.

[Bornadog]

Re: Stopping Fraser Gehrig

The whole tribunal system is a big joke, one week and with his record, can't believe it. Surely penalties have to be split up into several categories. I would have the categories split as follows:

1. Deliberate hit, punch etc where the action has nothing to do with the football, such as what Gehrig did. These penalties should be tough, no less than Four weeks depending on the action and forget good behaviour, first time etc discounts and just get this sort of thing completely stamped out. There aren't too many of these incidences any more, not like pre 1990's. I would alos include in this category, illegal shephards, where a player whacks another playere off the ball across the face.
2. Careless actions would be the other category, where a duty of care is required.
This can then be further broken down, such as full frontal charge when a playere is over the ball, or careless action during a marking contest etc.

The main point I am trying to get across is to stamp out the Gehrig type, where a player tries to deliberately hit someone off the play.

[alwaysadog]

Re: Stopping Fraser Gehrig

The whole tribunal system is a big joke, one week and with his record, can't believe it. Surely penalties have to be split up into several categories. I would have the categories split as follows:

1. Deliberate hit, punch etc where the action has nothing to do with the football, such as what Gehrig did. These penalties should be tough, no less than Four weeks depending on the action and forget good behaviour, first time etc discounts and just get this sort of thing completely stamped out. There aren't too many of these incidences any more, not like pre 1990's. I would alos include in this category, illegal shephards, where a player whacks another playere off the ball across the face.
2. Careless actions would be the other category, where a duty of care is required.
This can then be further broken down, such as full frontal charge when a playere is over the ball, or careless action during a marking contest etc.

The main point I am trying to get across is to stamp out the Gehrig type, where a player tries to deliberately hit someone off the play.

While it would have a great deal of merit your scheme could never be implemented. It would prevent media and big clubs influencing results and so might have the basis of a just system based on fairness. The AFL would never want that. Far too rational an approach bornadog.

Think instead about about the year of the pig and its influence on onfield violence... and the need to bring the system into cordination with the phases of the moon... Ah... the phases of the moon. Put aside all this rational nonsense.