No. Lachie Neale' s very vague evidence mentioned the nose. Poor fella. He must have been terrified because he covered his eyes while on the ground, wiped his right eye when he stood and stooped over with his hands over his eyes buy only remembered a sore nose.BarryGrogan wrote: ↑Sun 22 Sep 2019 7:59pm?CQ SAINT wrote: ↑Sun 22 Sep 2019 7:44pm
No no, that was someone else and a different argument. Neale had a saw nose, couldnt remember contact with the eyes and stated it all happened pretty quick. The nose is clearly in the eyes region. I stand by the video of poor victimised Toby's left hand and the MRO.
So you think he was found guilty because the tribunal determined that contact was to the nose, and that constitutes the eye region?
And I don't think he's victimised. He is some of the public, such as yourself. And some in the media. But I don't think the AFL victimise him at all.
The umpire obviously didn't see it, because of the lack of a free kick because last time I looked his nose was on his head between his eyes, or in that region and thats a free kick.
On all that evidence, I think I'd ignore Lachie and suggest the umpire saw nothing and proceed with the MRO's great decision.
I'm not victimising him. I didn't give evidence and I've never met him. I'm just just having a dialogue with myself and responding to your confusion.
Video evidence, MRO's decision, spot on.
