MRP

Booney · Post by **Booney** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:09 am

Makes the "independent" tribunal pretty toothless now, doesn't it?

The AFL MRP hand the case over to the independent tribunal, the tribunal find a 2 game suspension is in order, the AFL appeal and suggest that 4 is appropriate, the tribunal changes it's suspension from 2 games to 4 exactly as the AFL wished.

So, what does the tribunal stand for?

HH3 · Post by **HH3** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:06 am

Booney wrote:Makes the "independent" tribunal pretty toothless now, doesn't it?

The AFL MRP hand the case over to the independent tribunal, the tribunal find a 2 game suspension is in order, the AFL appeal and suggest that 4 is appropriate, the tribunal changes it's suspension from 2 games to 4 exactly as the AFL wished.

So, what does the tribunal stand for?

On the other hand, there'd be no point having an appeals process for the AFL if they can't win it.

The MRP might look redundant because the AFL won the appeal on their first ever shot, but in three appeals time the AFL might be 1-3.

Booney · Post by **Booney** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:27 am

HH3 wrote:
Booney wrote:Makes the "independent" tribunal pretty toothless now, doesn't it?

The AFL MRP hand the case over to the independent tribunal, the tribunal find a 2 game suspension is in order, the AFL appeal and suggest that 4 is appropriate, the tribunal changes it's suspension from 2 games to 4 exactly as the AFL wished.

So, what does the tribunal stand for?

On the other hand, there'd be no point having an appeals process for the AFL if they can't win it.

The MRP might look redundant because the AFL won the appeal on their first ever shot, but in three appeals time the AFL might be 1-3.

The MRP isn't looking redundant at all, the "independent" nature of the tribunal is. The outcome was exactly what the AFL wanted, how independent is that?

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:44 am

Booney wrote:Makes the "independent" tribunal pretty toothless now, doesn't it?

The AFL MRP hand the case over to the independent tribunal, the tribunal find a 2 game suspension is in order, the AFL appeal and suggest that 4 is appropriate, the tribunal changes it's suspension from 2 games to 4 exactly as the AFL wished.

So, what does the tribunal stand for?

I'll have a crack!

The
Right
Intelligent
Bureaucracy
Usually
Not
Applied
Laterally

tigerpie · Post by **tigerpie** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:45 pm

And here we go again.
I wonder if the get buggs penalty correct.
Very Barry Hallish for mine.

MW · Post by MW » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:05 pm

Jim05 · Post by **Jim05** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:18 pm

woodublieve12 · Post by **woodublieve12** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:25 pm

Houli - "surely no one can do something as stupid as me"
Bugg - "Hold my drink"

Feenix · Post by **Feenix** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:11 pm

Jimmy_041 · Post by **Jimmy_041** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:32 pm

Just to show how stupid last week was, Melbourne should be able to roll in the who's who of character witnesses
I watched the interview with him after the game and he seems like a good bloke
Only thing going against him is he's a WASP

stan · Post by **stan** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:34 pm

Needs to go bigger than the PM for character references. He needs to get one from the governor general.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

woodublieve12 · Post by **woodublieve12** » Sat Jul 01, 2017 7:49 am

6 minimum for Bugg.

Spargo · Post by **Spargo** » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:30 am

woodublieve12 wrote:6 minimum for Bugg.

Yep, I agree.

MW · Post by MW » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:59 am

Spargo wrote:
woodublieve12 wrote:6 minimum for Bugg.

Yep, I agree.

yeah i'm starting to come around to six..has to be i think

tigerpie · Post by **tigerpie** » Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:54 am

Yep 6. Like I said very similar to Halls.
Sydney and the recent hawthorn sides are 2 teams where you are a complete idiot to belt someone.
They go hard enough at the ball,/man as it is. No need to motivate them any further.
He should get an extra 2 by goody for being dumb!

bennymacca · Post by **bennymacca** » Sat Jul 01, 2017 4:19 pm

gets at least 5 i reckon. Has previous form so wouldnt surprise me if it was 6

Booney · Post by **Booney** » Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:10 am

Gill "Hi, independent tribunal is it?"

"Yes"

"6"

"Ok"

PatowalongaPirate · Post by **PatowalongaPirate** » Mon Jul 03, 2017 9:52 am

Cam McCarthy's "tackle" on Gilbert yesterday was disgusting. The ball had well and truly been disposed of and the weak prick pins Sam's arms and throws his head into the turf. Knocked out and stretchered off.

The gutless swine can have a month off.

Spargo · Post by **Spargo** » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:22 am

PatowalongaPirate wrote:Cam McCarthy's "tackle" on Gilbert yesterday was disgusting. The ball had well and truly been disposed of and the weak prick pins Sam's arms and throws his head into the turf. Knocked out and stretchered off.

The gutless swine can have a month off.

If Waite gets one for his tackle on Lynch in round 7 then McCarthy has to get at least two.
But this is the MRP, he may get sighted and if so, will probably be let off...

Post by **Dutchy** » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:38 am

Would have been funny if Houli's "good bloke" remission to 2 weeks stood, then they gave Bugg 6 up to 8 for being a "shit bloke"

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Re: MRP

Who is online