Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Tue Dec 06, 2022 9:26 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 318 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:41 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 9:58 pm
Posts: 3077
bluehammer wrote:
CK95 wrote:
I hear Shane Watson's going to appeal the decision
You don't hear as well as he does.

Those ears miss NOTHINGImage



Could be wrong but think he means the cricketer who was notorious for burning reviews by challenging (mostly unsuccessfully) each time he was out LBW.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:50 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:35 am
Posts: 18675
Location: 父 父 父 父 父 父
rhino27 wrote:
bluehammer wrote:
CK95 wrote:
I hear Shane Watson's going to appeal the decision
You don't hear as well as he does.

Those ears miss NOTHINGImage



Could be wrong but think he means the cricketer who was notorious for burning reviews by challenging (mostly unsuccessfully) each time he was out LBW.
Ya reckon?

:lol:

_________________
Congratulations CK95


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:26 pm 
Offline
Trevor Keogh

Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:40 pm
Posts: 721
DesEnglish wrote:
Paddycripps wrote:
I think ultimately it was line ball.
I mean who's to say what was going through Cripps' head?
AFL can't say for certain he was thinking BUMP.


I know what was going through AhChee’s head….Crippa’s @ss


:lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:45 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 19972
Location: Bondi Beach
Quote:
Cripps’ bump was initially graded carless conduct, high impact and high contact, justifying the initial two-week ban.

[Campbell] Brown disagrees, saying he saw it as a football action and that there was nothing illegal about it.

“I was really glad that he got off, I still saw it as a football action,” Brown told SEN’s Dwayne’s World.

“It was really unfortunate that Callum Ah Chee got hurt in that act, but he didn’t choose to bump, it’s not like the ball was on the ground and he had a decision whether he tackled or bumped, and he chose to bump and hurt him.

“It was in the air, it was a live ball, you’re allowed to run and jump at a player in a marking contest, and I associated it the same as the ball was there to be won and he used his body as a battering ram.

“There’s nothing illegal about that.”


https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/08/12/theres-nothing-illegal-about-that-brown-endorses-cripps-decision/

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:46 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 19972
Location: Bondi Beach
Quote:
“The AFL, the MRO and the Tribunal are always at loggerheads as to what decisions are deemed acceptable under the circumstance.

“It’s embarrassing for the AFL that the MRO can come up with a decision, it gets challenged and more often than not when you got to the Tribunal it gets thrown out.

“The number of cases that have gone to the Tribunal and they’ve thrown the case out means whatever is happening at AFL land with the MRO and then the rest of the football world and the Tribunal sits under that are thinking very differently.

“That needs to change


https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/08/12/theres-nothing-illegal-about-that-brown-endorses-cripps-decision/

Quote:
“I didn’t think it was a bump, I think it’s good technique to be honest, to me a bump is when you curl yourself right up into a ball and try and run through an opponent in a marking contest or a ground ball, this was very different.”


Gleeson argued that it was a "Classic Bump"

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:05 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:11 pm
Posts: 13096
bluechampion wrote:
Genuinely surprised by this result.

I was too when I heard the news this morning.
There are pretty salty people all over social media today saying what a disgrace it is.
The precedence was set when Willy Rioli got off earlier in year.
I have said it before the outcome of an incident should not be the reason for a player being suspended.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 10:58 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1179
Location: Melbourne
Lonny Mac wrote:
I don't know how the AFL think they are going to stop players getting concussed given that the game is a contact sport. Yes they can come down hard on blatant hits like Stewart on Prestia, as they should. But what Crippa's case shows is a player can act within the rules and intent of the game and incidental contacts can occur which result in a player being concussed. I understand that the AFL are probably worried about future litigation by players who suffer long term effects from concussions but the players know that each time they go out to play there is a risk they could get injured. Do the AFL want the game to be contact free? It appears to be the only way they can achieve their goal.

The AFL say long term player health and safety is paramount! But if that's their concern, it doesn't have to be just head injuries. I wonder how many players have suffered debilitating musculoskeletal injuries post their careers, resulting from what happened on the field. They have had to live with the pain and discomfort of these for rest of their life. I haven't heard the AFL say much about that.

The media and opposition supporters have been quick to call foul on Crippa being found not guilty. Even though it has been agreed that he was contesting the ball and only had eyes for the ball. Look at the outcome they say with Ah Chee's concussion. I haven't heard any outrage from these sources about Matthew Kennedy's concussion and broken jaw. In his case it was just one of those unfortunate things that happens sometimes. Fair enough. But what are the AFL going to do about concussions suffered this way? Is Kennedy's concussion somehow not as important as Ah Chee's? God forbid but whose to say Kennedy's concussion proves to have a greater impact on him in later years.
If the AFL want to take the moral high ground on player H & S then they can't be selective. But if they change the rules to stop for what are now just "football acts" then I'm not sure what sort of game we will be left with. It will certainly not been the same game that we have grown up to love.

Brilliant :clap:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Fri Aug 12, 2022 11:35 pm 
Offline
John Nicholls
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am
Posts: 9510
RickJ wrote:
Lonny Mac wrote:
I don't know how the AFL think they are going to stop players getting concussed given that the game is a contact sport. Yes they can come down hard on blatant hits like Stewart on Prestia, as they should. But what Crippa's case shows is a player can act within the rules and intent of the game and incidental contacts can occur which result in a player being concussed. I understand that the AFL are probably worried about future litigation by players who suffer long term effects from concussions but the players know that each time they go out to play there is a risk they could get injured. Do the AFL want the game to be contact free? It appears to be the only way they can achieve their goal.

The AFL say long term player health and safety is paramount! But if that's their concern, it doesn't have to be just head injuries. I wonder how many players have suffered debilitating musculoskeletal injuries post their careers, resulting from what happened on the field. They have had to live with the pain and discomfort of these for rest of their life. I haven't heard the AFL say much about that.

The media and opposition supporters have been quick to call foul on Crippa being found not guilty. Even though it has been agreed that he was contesting the ball and only had eyes for the ball. Look at the outcome they say with Ah Chee's concussion. I haven't heard any outrage from these sources about Matthew Kennedy's concussion and broken jaw. In his case it was just one of those unfortunate things that happens sometimes. Fair enough. But what are the AFL going to do about concussions suffered this way? Is Kennedy's concussion somehow not as important as Ah Chee's? God forbid but whose to say Kennedy's concussion proves to have a greater impact on him in later years.
If the AFL want to take the moral high ground on player H & S then they can't be selective. But if they change the rules to stop for what are now just "football acts" then I'm not sure what sort of game we will be left with. It will certainly not been the same game that we have grown up to love.

Brilliant :clap:


x 2


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2022 8:17 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:11 pm
Posts: 13096
RickJ wrote:
Lonny Mac wrote:
I don't know how the AFL think they are going to stop players getting concussed given that the game is a contact sport. Yes they can come down hard on blatant hits like Stewart on Prestia, as they should. But what Crippa's case shows is a player can act within the rules and intent of the game and incidental contacts can occur which result in a player being concussed. I understand that the AFL are probably worried about future litigation by players who suffer long term effects from concussions but the players know that each time they go out to play there is a risk they could get injured. Do the AFL want the game to be contact free? It appears to be the only way they can achieve their goal.

The AFL say long term player health and safety is paramount! But if that's their concern, it doesn't have to be just head injuries. I wonder how many players have suffered debilitating musculoskeletal injuries post their careers, resulting from what happened on the field. They have had to live with the pain and discomfort of these for rest of their life. I haven't heard the AFL say much about that.

The media and opposition supporters have been quick to call foul on Crippa being found not guilty. Even though it has been agreed that he was contesting the ball and only had eyes for the ball. Look at the outcome they say with Ah Chee's concussion. I haven't heard any outrage from these sources about Matthew Kennedy's concussion and broken jaw. In his case it was just one of those unfortunate things that happens sometimes. Fair enough. But what are the AFL going to do about concussions suffered this way? Is Kennedy's concussion somehow not as important as Ah Chee's? God forbid but whose to say Kennedy's concussion proves to have a greater impact on him in later years.
If the AFL want to take the moral high ground on player H & S then they can't be selective. But if they change the rules to stop for what are now just "football acts" then I'm not sure what sort of game we will be left with. It will certainly not been the same game that we have grown up to love.

Brilliant :clap:

Great post.
I have been wondering how Kennedy was concussed. Has anyone seen the incident? It certainly has been overlooked as if no one cared.
AFL is an impact sport, it always has been. It has been cleaned up compared to how it was decades ago but there will always be injuries.
What annoys me the most about this is it has become a anti Carlton thing. Rioli got off a similar incident but there was no massive outrage over that at the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2022 4:55 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:10 am
Posts: 572
Lonny Mac wrote:
I don't know how the AFL think they are going to stop players getting concussed given that the game is a contact sport. Yes they can come down hard on blatant hits like Stewart on Prestia, as they should. But what Crippa's case shows is a player can act within the rules and intent of the game and incidental contacts can occur which result in a player being concussed. I understand that the AFL are probably worried about future litigation by players who suffer long term effects from concussions but the players know that each time they go out to play there is a risk they could get injured. Do the AFL want the game to be contact free? It appears to be the only way they can achieve their goal.

The AFL say long term player health and safety is paramount! But if that's their concern, it doesn't have to be just head injuries. I wonder how many players have suffered debilitating musculoskeletal injuries post their careers, resulting from what happened on the field. They have had to live with the pain and discomfort of these for rest of their life. I haven't heard the AFL say much about that.

The media and opposition supporters have been quick to call foul on Crippa being found not guilty. Even though it has been agreed that he was contesting the ball and only had eyes for the ball. Look at the outcome they say with Ah Chee's concussion. I haven't heard any outrage from these sources about Matthew Kennedy's concussion and broken jaw. In his case it was just one of those unfortunate things that happens sometimes. Fair enough. But what are the AFL going to do about concussions suffered this way? Is Kennedy's concussion somehow not as important as Ah Chee's? God forbid but whose to say Kennedy's concussion proves to have a greater impact on him in later years.
If the AFL want to take the moral high ground on player H & S then they can't be selective. But if they change the rules to stop for what are now just "football acts" then I'm not sure what sort of game we will be left with. It will certainly not been the same game that we have grown up to love.


What a well thought out and written post. Well done :clap:

What concerned me is the following on post of the Lions website from Ah Chee's father.

"I usually try to post positive comments on this platform but due to recent events I feel compelled to highlight something that still plagues this country - Racism. It has been a turbulent 24 hrs where our family first learned, to our dismay, that the Carlton captain had his 2 weeks suspension thrown out after concussing our son in last weeks AFL match and then we wake up this morning to learn that, because of this incident, and through no fault of his own, our son has been racially vilified. Our son is hurting along with his family and we are disgusted that this continues to happen. We take another step backwards. Racism should not be tolerated in any aspect of life whether it be in school, at work or in the sporting arena and we have to gather the courage to have a voice and stand up to these people. We are proud of you son for making a stand and I hope that if there is a positive that this makes you a stronger young Aboriginal man and that your son will not have to experience the same pain if he decides in the future to pursue this great game of AFL."

IMO Cripps is a very fair player. It was a football incident/accident. The Racism that was directed at Ah Chee is WRONG but to also then indirectly blame Cripps and the decision is IMO very poor and disappointing


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2022 5:11 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:11 pm
Posts: 13096
FarmerBlue wrote:
Lonny Mac wrote:
I don't know how the AFL think they are going to stop players getting concussed given that the game is a contact sport. Yes they can come down hard on blatant hits like Stewart on Prestia, as they should. But what Crippa's case shows is a player can act within the rules and intent of the game and incidental contacts can occur which result in a player being concussed. I understand that the AFL are probably worried about future litigation by players who suffer long term effects from concussions but the players know that each time they go out to play there is a risk they could get injured. Do the AFL want the game to be contact free? It appears to be the only way they can achieve their goal.

The AFL say long term player health and safety is paramount! But if that's their concern, it doesn't have to be just head injuries. I wonder how many players have suffered debilitating musculoskeletal injuries post their careers, resulting from what happened on the field. They have had to live with the pain and discomfort of these for rest of their life. I haven't heard the AFL say much about that.

The media and opposition supporters have been quick to call foul on Crippa being found not guilty. Even though it has been agreed that he was contesting the ball and only had eyes for the ball. Look at the outcome they say with Ah Chee's concussion. I haven't heard any outrage from these sources about Matthew Kennedy's concussion and broken jaw. In his case it was just one of those unfortunate things that happens sometimes. Fair enough. But what are the AFL going to do about concussions suffered this way? Is Kennedy's concussion somehow not as important as Ah Chee's? God forbid but whose to say Kennedy's concussion proves to have a greater impact on him in later years.
If the AFL want to take the moral high ground on player H & S then they can't be selective. But if they change the rules to stop for what are now just "football acts" then I'm not sure what sort of game we will be left with. It will certainly not been the same game that we have grown up to love.


What a well thought out and written post. Well done :clap:

What concerned me is the following on post of the Lions website from Ah Chee's father.

"I usually try to post positive comments on this platform but due to recent events I feel compelled to highlight something that still plagues this country - Racism. It has been a turbulent 24 hrs where our family first learned, to our dismay, that the Carlton captain had his 2 weeks suspension thrown out after concussing our son in last weeks AFL match and then we wake up this morning to learn that, because of this incident, and through no fault of his own, our son has been racially vilified. Our son is hurting along with his family and we are disgusted that this continues to happen. We take another step backwards. Racism should not be tolerated in any aspect of life whether it be in school, at work or in the sporting arena and we have to gather the courage to have a voice and stand up to these people. We are proud of you son for making a stand and I hope that if there is a positive that this makes you a stronger young Aboriginal man and that your son will not have to experience the same pain if he decides in the future to pursue this great game of AFL."

IMO Cripps is a very fair player. It was a football incident/accident. The Racism that was directed at Ah Chee is WRONG but to also then indirectly blame Cripps and the decision is IMO very poor and disappointing

You would think that Cripps king hit him behind play going by the crap being written on social media. While we understand his father being upset by racist comments directed at him to blame Cripps in the statement was not necessary.
Cripps is going to be the target of opposition supporters now, watch him get booed tonight and next week.
It was the first time in his career he had been reported and the comments about him are so over the top.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2022 6:53 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1179
Location: Melbourne
Driving home tonight listening on 3AW football to commentary about Cripps. Obviously they haven’t read the Appeals Board transcripts some of which we have had access to here. Simplistic he hit him in the head should have got 2 weeks. The Appeals Board reversed the tribunal decision on on a procedural fairness legal matter because the Chairman of the Tribunal a lawyer had made an error in law in directing the other members of the tribunal (the jurors) about the decision. This was unfair to Cripps. Tribunals have to follow the law. The Tribunal didn’t follow the law. The Appeals board is only there to appeal an error in law, not about whether Cripps hit him in the head or whether he bumped him or hit him incidentally. Crippa got off on a technicality because the Tribunal didn’t follow the law.

The expert commentators just don’t understand how the process works


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2022 6:57 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1179
Location: Melbourne
PS. That Carlton QC Townshend is one smart flower


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2022 6:58 pm 
Offline
John Nicholls
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:16 pm
Posts: 9906
Location: Sydney
Yeah but it's the vibe, Rick. It's just... the vibe.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2022 7:24 pm 
Offline
John Nicholls
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 9:02 pm
Posts: 9906
Location: Melbourne
FarmerBlue wrote:
Lonny Mac wrote:
I don't know how the AFL think they are going to stop players getting concussed given that the game is a contact sport. Yes they can come down hard on blatant hits like Stewart on Prestia, as they should. But what Crippa's case shows is a player can act within the rules and intent of the game and incidental contacts can occur which result in a player being concussed. I understand that the AFL are probably worried about future litigation by players who suffer long term effects from concussions but the players know that each time they go out to play there is a risk they could get injured. Do the AFL want the game to be contact free? It appears to be the only way they can achieve their goal.

The AFL say long term player health and safety is paramount! But if that's their concern, it doesn't have to be just head injuries. I wonder how many players have suffered debilitating musculoskeletal injuries post their careers, resulting from what happened on the field. They have had to live with the pain and discomfort of these for rest of their life. I haven't heard the AFL say much about that.

The media and opposition supporters have been quick to call foul on Crippa being found not guilty. Even though it has been agreed that he was contesting the ball and only had eyes for the ball. Look at the outcome they say with Ah Chee's concussion. I haven't heard any outrage from these sources about Matthew Kennedy's concussion and broken jaw. In his case it was just one of those unfortunate things that happens sometimes. Fair enough. But what are the AFL going to do about concussions suffered this way? Is Kennedy's concussion somehow not as important as Ah Chee's? God forbid but whose to say Kennedy's concussion proves to have a greater impact on him in later years.
If the AFL want to take the moral high ground on player H & S then they can't be selective. But if they change the rules to stop for what are now just "football acts" then I'm not sure what sort of game we will be left with. It will certainly not been the same game that we have grown up to love.


What a well thought out and written post. Well done :clap:

What concerned me is the following on post of the Lions website from Ah Chee's father.

"I usually try to post positive comments on this platform but due to recent events I feel compelled to highlight something that still plagues this country - Racism. It has been a turbulent 24 hrs where our family first learned, to our dismay, that the Carlton captain had his 2 weeks suspension thrown out after concussing our son in last weeks AFL match and then we wake up this morning to learn that, because of this incident, and through no fault of his own, our son has been racially vilified. Our son is hurting along with his family and we are disgusted that this continues to happen. We take another step backwards. Racism should not be tolerated in any aspect of life whether it be in school, at work or in the sporting arena and we have to gather the courage to have a voice and stand up to these people. We are proud of you son for making a stand and I hope that if there is a positive that this makes you a stronger young Aboriginal man and that your son will not have to experience the same pain if he decides in the future to pursue this great game of AFL."

IMO Cripps is a very fair player. It was a football incident/accident. The Racism that was directed at Ah Chee is WRONG but to also then indirectly blame Cripps and the decision is IMO very poor and disappointing
Jeez mate. Your son plays AFL he's gonna get KO'd every once in a while.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Sat Aug 13, 2022 7:43 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1179
Location: Melbourne
GreatEx wrote:
Yeah but it's the vibe, Rick. It's just... the vibe.

Hey media. Suffer in yer jocks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2022 6:41 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 19972
Location: Bondi Beach
missnaut wrote:
FarmerBlue wrote:
Lonny Mac wrote:
I don't know how the AFL think they are going to stop players getting concussed given that the game is a contact sport. Yes they can come down hard on blatant hits like Stewart on Prestia, as they should. But what Crippa's case shows is a player can act within the rules and intent of the game and incidental contacts can occur which result in a player being concussed. I understand that the AFL are probably worried about future litigation by players who suffer long term effects from concussions but the players know that each time they go out to play there is a risk they could get injured. Do the AFL want the game to be contact free? It appears to be the only way they can achieve their goal.

The AFL say long term player health and safety is paramount! But if that's their concern, it doesn't have to be just head injuries. I wonder how many players have suffered debilitating musculoskeletal injuries post their careers, resulting from what happened on the field. They have had to live with the pain and discomfort of these for rest of their life. I haven't heard the AFL say much about that.

The media and opposition supporters have been quick to call foul on Crippa being found not guilty. Even though it has been agreed that he was contesting the ball and only had eyes for the ball. Look at the outcome they say with Ah Chee's concussion. I haven't heard any outrage from these sources about Matthew Kennedy's concussion and broken jaw. In his case it was just one of those unfortunate things that happens sometimes. Fair enough. But what are the AFL going to do about concussions suffered this way? Is Kennedy's concussion somehow not as important as Ah Chee's? God forbid but whose to say Kennedy's concussion proves to have a greater impact on him in later years.
If the AFL want to take the moral high ground on player H & S then they can't be selective. But if they change the rules to stop for what are now just "football acts" then I'm not sure what sort of game we will be left with. It will certainly not been the same game that we have grown up to love.


What a well thought out and written post. Well done :clap:

What concerned me is the following on post of the Lions website from Ah Chee's father.

"I usually try to post positive comments on this platform but due to recent events I feel compelled to highlight something that still plagues this country - Racism. It has been a turbulent 24 hrs where our family first learned, to our dismay, that the Carlton captain had his 2 weeks suspension thrown out after concussing our son in last weeks AFL match and then we wake up this morning to learn that, because of this incident, and through no fault of his own, our son has been racially vilified. Our son is hurting along with his family and we are disgusted that this continues to happen. We take another step backwards. Racism should not be tolerated in any aspect of life whether it be in school, at work or in the sporting arena and we have to gather the courage to have a voice and stand up to these people. We are proud of you son for making a stand and I hope that if there is a positive that this makes you a stronger young Aboriginal man and that your son will not have to experience the same pain if he decides in the future to pursue this great game of AFL."

IMO Cripps is a very fair player. It was a football incident/accident. The Racism that was directed at Ah Chee is WRONG but to also then indirectly blame Cripps and the decision is IMO very poor and disappointing
Jeez mate. Your son plays AFL he's gonna get KO'd every once in a while.


:clap: :clap: :clap:

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Cripps FREE TO PLAY
PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2022 10:51 pm 
Offline
Horrie Clover

Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 7:59 pm
Posts: 359
RickJ wrote:
Driving home tonight listening on 3AW football to commentary about Cripps. Obviously they haven’t read the Appeals Board transcripts some of which we have had access to here. Simplistic he hit him in the head should have got 2 weeks. The Appeals Board reversed the tribunal decision on on a procedural fairness legal matter because the Chairman of the Tribunal a lawyer had made an error in law in directing the other members of the tribunal (the jurors) about the decision. This was unfair to Cripps. Tribunals have to follow the law. The Tribunal didn’t follow the law. The Appeals board is only there to appeal an error in law, not about whether Cripps hit him in the head or whether he bumped him or hit him incidentally. Crippa got off on a technicality because the Tribunal didn’t follow the law.

The expert commentators just don’t understand how the process works


Damian Barrett did a full ten minutes on his podcast with Nat about how wrong the system
is because he wanted a message sent that “the head is sacrosanct” and to his mind all these reviews and appeals just redid the same process over and over once and twice removed from the umpires who actually saw it on the field. idiotic comments.

if he thinks the process is bazaar and pointless, then maybe he wants to study law and reform hundreds of years of legal precedent and tradition… in India under a British colonialist inherited system similar to ours it can take 30 years for a case who work its way through all the higher courts to the highest court possible.

does he understand that these are highly paid professionals and if there was no “procedural fairness” then players would appeal decisions with heavy implications (like a player missing a GF or Brownlow for example) in the civil courts? or in the case of on field punches thrown, even in the criminal courts!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 318 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group