N Riewoldt can accept 1 game rough conduct

[savatage]

If he really does have a broken cheekbone, then the charge probably seems right to me.

Perfectly legal shepherd, no malice, and in play...the opposition player gets injured during the act, how is it a reportable offense? Surely you have to commit an act outside of the rules first? Only the Saints could participate in a perfectly normal and uneventful 100 point drubbing and still get a report out of it.

Gwilt was taken in a perfectly legal shephard! He's gone for the year. Contact is inevitable on a football field - injuries happen, like you said no malice & in play...this is definitely the wrong call.

[plugger66]

If he really does have a broken cheekbone, then the charge probably seems right to me.

Perfectly legal shepherd, no malice, and in play...the opposition player gets injured during the act, how is it a reportable offense? Surely you have to commit an act outside of the rules first? Only the Saints could participate in a perfectly normal and uneventful 100 point drubbing and still get a report out of it.

Gwilt was taken in a perfectly legal shephard! He's gone for the year. Contact is inevitable on a football field - injuries happen, like you said no malice & in play...this is definitely the wrong call.

That is not the rule.

[Jacks Back]

IN: Lynch

Captain - Nicky Dal (he's had a great 5-6 weeks, if not all year)

Appeal and lose and Roo should only be given 2 weeks as the 25% good behavior bond would not be affected (only the 25% guilty plea).

[ando051]

Got the week because head contact was made, and he had an option to tackle. In saying that taking a players injury into account is the wrong path to take. What is saying Symes head is not as hard as the next player. Like a boxer having a glass jaw. Look at Tapscotts bump that was looked at by the MRP but no penalty given,exactly the same as Rooey's but the player was not injured.

[mordi]

the video is on the MRP site, very stiff.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

[St Chris]

If he really does have a broken cheekbone, then the charge probably seems right to me.

Perfectly legal shepherd, no malice, and in play...the opposition player gets injured during the act, how is it a reportable offense? Surely you have to commit an act outside of the rules first? Only the Saints could participate in a perfectly normal and uneventful 100 point drubbing and still get a report out of it.

Gwilt was taken in a perfectly legal shephard! He's gone for the year. Contact is inevitable on a football field - injuries happen, like you said no malice & in play...this is definitely the wrong call.

Not a perfectly legal shepherd if he makes high contact. Whether it's right or wrong, the rule has been in place for the last couple of seasons. If you get the head, you're in trouble.

Cheekbones dont just break on their own.

[Mr Magic]

They could maybe argue that the late tackle on Symes 'lifted' his head into Roo's shoulder?

[savatage]

Not arguing the rule. Incidental contact should still be applicable though IMHO.

[To the top]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Riewoldt STATIONERY and the Adelaide player ran into him, probably assisted by Gamble who was directly behind the Adelaide player?

On this basis, thanks to Demitriou, I could make a come back and get kicks willy nilly by running into taller players and copping head high contact.

The AFL has lost the plot with their rules.

[gringo]

I think the problem is that it is unfairly administered, how many walk away without a charge let alone get off. It is a lottery system and if the benevolent masters of the MRP feel angry you will pay.

[saintbrat]

Roo ( from vision on Ch Ten) was eye's on the Ball Kamikaze style toward the contest...

never even 'looked at the player' but proabably aware he was there.

[Solar]

My problem with this sums up the problems with the MRP.

First, the impact being based on the injury is a disgrace. What it's suggesting is that injury only comes about because of force, which is untrue. You can hit certain spots on the body and cause more damage no matter what the force.

Second, the idea that a player who does not cause the impact should be punished with high impact is stupid. He did not line him up, did not lift off the ground etc.

Thirdly the idea that a player should open himself up to tackle a player who has got rid of the ball (thus infringing) and thus get injured himself is stupid. If the player see's the opposition player coming towards them it needs to be within their rights to brace their body into the bump position. Opening yourself to tackle a player at pace means you will get injured.

It's a lottery and has no sense at all.

[Thinline]

If he really does have a broken cheekbone, then the charge probably seems right to me.

Perfectly legal shepherd, no malice, and in play...the opposition player gets injured during the act, how is it a reportable offense? Surely you have to commit an act outside of the rules first? Only the Saints could participate in a perfectly normal and uneventful 100 point drubbing and still get a report out of it.

That isnt the rule though. He is unlucky because he broke his cheekbone. He could have done other things so if he injures the person he is in trouble. Lets face it if it was the other way around we would say only one week is a joke.

No solace in that when you live on the Goldie and get one Saints game every blue moon.

Even less so when lesser incidents get F*** all relatively.

Ottens?

One week for a snipe a mile off the ball.

Riewoldt for an inch out bump at the contest.

My selfishness aside, something stinks about the way this system works sometimes.

[dragit]

We've paid for making contact with an injured player a couple of time s now, yet I can't remember any other team being suspended for this even though it has happened plenty of times.
I'm not a conspiracist but we really are pretty unlucky with the MRP.

Hope he rests up well and comes back with a flurry of goals.

[plugger66]

If he really does have a broken cheekbone, then the charge probably seems right to me.

Perfectly legal shepherd, no malice, and in play...the opposition player gets injured during the act, how is it a reportable offense? Surely you have to commit an act outside of the rules first? Only the Saints could participate in a perfectly normal and uneventful 100 point drubbing and still get a report out of it.

That isnt the rule though. He is unlucky because he broke his cheekbone. He could have done other things so if he injures the person he is in trouble. Lets face it if it was the other way around we would say only one week is a joke.

No solace in that when you live on the Goldie and get one Saints game every blue moon.

Even less so when lesser incidents get F*** all relatively.

Ottens?

One week for a snipe a mile off the ball.

Riewoldt for an inch out bump at the contest.

My selfishness aside, something stinks about the way this system works sometimes.

Yep thats a bummer but he at least isnt in his best form. You can still see Dal, BJ, Fish, Joey and others and hopefully a big win. Im going up so I will see you there. I will be the one arguing with other saints supporters about the Tribunal and umpiring.

[Cairnsman]

Not that Roo was setting the world on fire but it certainly evens the contest up a little now. Hopefully this can be a breakout game for Lynchy.

I'm going down. Can't wait. I've got my hoody and hand gun packed already.

[saintbrat]

I'd put BJ as Capt and Dal as vice..

[saintspremiers]

BJ should captain IMO. No brainer, he's a natural
Captain and will be an excellent coach in the future.

[Old Mate]

I'd put BJ as Capt and Dal as vice..

I reckon Fisher although I would be happy with your selections as well.

I don't think a week off will hurt Riewoldt. Good timing with the GC game.

[plugger66]

I'd put BJ as Capt and Dal as vice..

I reckon Fisher although I would be happy with your selections as well.

I don't think a week off will hurt Riewoldt. Good timing with the GC game.

Dal's the man for me but BJ will probably get it. When was the last time when both our true leaders missed a game together?

[Cairnsman]

BJ should captain IMO. No brainer, he's a natural
Captain and will be an excellent coach in the future.

I'd pick Fisher everyday of the week.

and Milne should be vice captain.

[Old Mate]

I'd put BJ as Capt and Dal as vice..

I reckon Fisher although I would be happy with your selections as well.

I don't think a week off will hurt Riewoldt. Good timing with the GC game.

Dal's the man for me but BJ will probably get it. When was the last time when both our true leaders missed a game together?

My guess would be sometime in 2006 when Lenny did his knee the first time. Not sure if Riewoldt missed any games that year though.

[Old Mate]

BJ should captain IMO. No brainer, he's a natural
Captain and will be an excellent coach in the future.

I'd pick Fisher everyday of the week.

and Milne should be vice captain.

I'd love to see Milne get the VC gig.

[AP Erebus]

the video is on the MRP site, very stiff.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

I really couldn't believe it when I saw that footage.

I would not be surprised if they took this one to the tribunal.

[Junction Oval]

It must be BJ as captain, with Fisher running things on the backline.