MRP Findings - SJ offered 2 weeks

fever · June 25, 2013, 07:07:19 PM

cmon guys. get real. i'm a big cats fan and have SJ in SC, but even i thought it was obvious he wasn't going to get off.

plus there is a huuuuge difference between his and hodges.

Big Mac · June 25, 2013, 07:28:45 PM

Lindsay Thomas gets off for a similar bump and his was off the ball...

Slammer · June 25, 2013, 08:06:26 PM

Just watched AFL 360 from last night (recorded). As much as I am not a massive fan of Robbo. I thought his comments regarding the MRP and SJ was 100% correct. I totally agree.
Embley gets 1 week for dropping the knees off the ball incident where as SJ gets 2 weeks for tucking in his arm and catching Hanley with a solid hip and shoulder. Yes he hit caught Hanley high but there was no intention at all to hurt the guy. In Embleys case there was every intention to hurt Stratton.

Vinny · June 25, 2013, 08:11:05 PM

If I was part of the MRP..

Embely sentenced to life.
Stevie J to walk a free man.

It is becoming a joke the decisions they are making. Not a good sign for future footy. :-\

poolboybob · June 25, 2013, 08:36:51 PM

Maybe they went easy on Embley because, at this point in his career, it's actually a greater penalty for the Eagles to have him on the field. ;D

Justin Bieber · June 25, 2013, 10:35:00 PM

Quote from: vinny on June 25, 2013, 08:11:05 PM
If I was part of the MRP..

Embely sentenced to life.
Stevie J to walk a free man.

It is becoming a joke the decisions they are making. Not a good sign for future footy. :-\

+1

Jimmykidd · June 25, 2013, 11:19:59 PM

What Embley did was REALLY ugly. I can't believe they can justify just 1 week. Is that the image they want to have in the game? At least SJ's was in play, Embley was off the ball and had EVERY intention to hurt. Makes absolutely no sense.

fever · June 26, 2013, 11:06:39 AM

isn't that partially why the MRP came in in the first place though, to take the emotion out of these sort of decisions? idk if you guys just dont remember what the old tribunal system was like, but it was a damn chook lotto from case to case, which is where the overriding sense of frustration that led to the change brewed from.

Ringo · June 26, 2013, 11:54:18 AM

It was Fever but we have seen so many inconsistencies in the charges laid and this causes the problem. We have the MRP deciding on the level of the charge and unfortunately they have not been consistent with some of their charges and hence more angst,

Take the Embley incident and this is the one that is really causing the emotion. Whilst the charge is correct with what happened there could have been additional charges laid but were not.

Strawbsss · June 26, 2013, 12:40:06 PM

Quote from: fever on June 24, 2013, 03:49:30 PM
i'm always surprised at any team with mid/fwd dpp links this year. i just cant get my head around them.

I keep forgetting the complexities too! Read this thread and then realised instead of having to use Macaffer for Stevie, I can swing Stevie to the mids using Dusty, and play T.Mitchell in the mids instead of Macaffer in the forwards. Thanks!

fever · June 26, 2013, 05:44:16 PM

Quote from: Strawbsss on June 26, 2013, 12:40:06 PM
Quote from: fever on June 24, 2013, 03:49:30 PM
i'm always surprised at any team with mid/fwd dpp links this year. i just cant get my head around them.
I keep forgetting the complexities too! Read this thread and then realised instead of having to use Macaffer for Stevie, I can swing Stevie to the mids using Dusty, and play T.Mitchell in the mids instead of Macaffer in the forwards. Thanks!

::)
no worries. i'm suring having dusty in one of your midfield spots instead of [insert one of infinite number of mids out-averaging dusty here] has worked out swimmingly for you. it only took more than half the season to bear fruit, but the 30points mitchell gets over mcaff will be worth it!

fever · June 26, 2013, 05:49:24 PM

Quote from: Ringo on June 26, 2013, 11:54:18 AM
It was Fever but we have seen so many inconsistencies in the charges laid and this causes the problem. We have the MRP deciding on the level of the charge and unfortunately they have not been consistent with some of their charges and hence more angst,

Take the Embley incident and this is the one that is really causing the emotion. Whilst the charge is correct with what happened there could have been additional charges laid but were not.

which additional charges out of interest? i agree that embly got off way light, but for a much more consistent system i think having the odd one like that slip through the cracks is an acceptable outcome.

that said, i still dont love the MRP, especially with instances like james kelly getting weeks for bumping and then jolly does the exact same to stokes the next week and gets off, gee bias aside, that was bullshower, they were the same (and both shouldve gotten off). i wish more players would take their cases to the tribunal so we can get a better handle on correct/incorrect interpretations.