Lindsay Thomas offered 2 week suspension

[Holz]

What do you guys think, I personally don't think he should get anything for that it looked like a complete accident in wet weather, its unfortunate a player got injured as a result, but if Rohan was fine there wouldnt be any talk about it.

IM thinking the MRP should look at the action not the result, I have seen players do much more dangerous thinks that could cause injury but dont and they get nothing. 

[Justin Bieber]

Yeah I don't think e should get suspended. He was just unlucky...,

[roo boys!]

Absolute joke really. It was a horrific injury and I wish Rohan a speedy recovery, but Thomas did not go in with the intent of hurting him, there was no malice involved he was simply sliding for the ball in the wet and Rohans foot just happened to get caught and then we all know what happened next. The breakdown of the points was: Negligent conduct (1 activation point), severe impact (4 points) and contact to the body (1 point). So it was all to do with the injury resulting. I don't understand how you can punch someone in the face (Lake) and get one week, while all Thomas did was go for the ball and he gets offered 3 weeks...North Melbourne is rightfully challenging the decision and I believe Thomas will, and should, get off.

[Ziplock]

precedent was set with goodes last week- I think its bs as well, and neither of them should have been given suspension, but goodes got 1 week, which means that logically thomas, going in feet first, was going to get more. The fact he injured rohan so badly just helped.

[Holz]

precedent was set with goodes last week- I think its bs as well, and neither of them should have been given suspension, but goodes got 1 week, which means that logically thomas, going in feet first, was going to get more. The fact he injured rohan so badly just helped.

goodes should have got the week you cant slide into a tackle knee first I 100% agreed with that ruling.

[Capper]

ok this is hard for me to comment as he took out one of my boys, but i dont believe he did it on purpose. If Thomas had done that tackle on a soccer field he would have been red carded and suspended for weeks as he slid in with his studs out looking for traction and found Rohan's foot. It was reckless as players have been warned after Goodes got suspended, and the impact was severe as the leg did break. Rohan was following the flight of the ball, unlike Thomas so looking at it that way and the AFL are now cracking down on reckless tackles he will unfortunately be suspended now for 3 games as he wont get either the Reckless or impact downgraded.

[Ziplock]

precedent was set with goodes last week- I think its bs as well, and neither of them should have been given suspension, but goodes got 1 week, which means that logically thomas, going in feet first, was going to get more. The fact he injured rohan so badly just helped.

goodes should have got the week you cant slide into a tackle knee first I 100% agreed with that ruling.

he slid into a contest the same as thomas. Sliding in feel first is substantially more dangerous than knees first..

you're just being a one eyes supporter atm.

[Capper]

precedent was set with goodes last week- I think its bs as well, and neither of them should have been given suspension, but goodes got 1 week, which means that logically thomas, going in feet first, was going to get more. The fact he injured rohan so badly just helped.

goodes should have got the week you cant slide into a tackle knee first I 100% agreed with that ruling.

he slid into a contest the same as thomas. Sliding in feel first is substantially more dangerous than knees first..

you're just being a one eyes supporter atm.

Goodes slide cause Surjan a bruise and some abrasions whilst Thomas broke the guys leg.

[Cruiseon]

I am unbiased on this one and really feel for Thomas. The AFL want to stamp this out of the game but I feel Thomas has been made an example of. Had this occurred last year or the year before, the tribunal would not have been involved.

It is a bit like the sling tackles a couple of years, a few guys made example off then it all settled down.

[Justin Bieber]

He's just hitting form and now losing it to some showerty suspension.

[Holz]

precedent was set with goodes last week- I think its bs as well, and neither of them should have been given suspension, but goodes got 1 week, which means that logically thomas, going in feet first, was going to get more. The fact he injured rohan so badly just helped.

goodes should have got the week you cant slide into a tackle knee first I 100% agreed with that ruling.

he slid into a contest the same as thomas. Sliding in feel first is substantially more dangerous than knees first..

you're just being a one eyes supporter atm.

If rohan wasnt injured than there wouldnt have even been looked at, i might be wrong but i think he actually got a free kick for it, or at least the roos did. You should get suspended on your actions not the result. Im not a fan of thomas actually and i dont really care if he gets suspseneded or not, i just hope for the sake of the AFL he gets off. The same incident probably happend 10 times this weekend and they probably didnt even give away free kicks.

To me he broke no rules so who care the result, Grant thomas made a good comment should Judd get weeks for dodging the luke ball tackle than caused Ball to go down injured?

The AFl may want to look into sliding, but you cant ban someone for playing within the rules of the game.

[Capper]

precedent was set with goodes last week- I think its bs as well, and neither of them should have been given suspension, but goodes got 1 week, which means that logically thomas, going in feet first, was going to get more. The fact he injured rohan so badly just helped.

goodes should have got the week you cant slide into a tackle knee first I 100% agreed with that ruling.

he slid into a contest the same as thomas. Sliding in feel first is substantially more dangerous than knees first..

you're just being a one eyes supporter atm.

If rohan wasnt injured than there wouldnt have even been looked at, i might be wrong but i think he actually got a free kick for it, or at least the roos did. You should get suspended on your actions not the result. Im not a fan of thomas actually and i dont really care if he gets suspseneded or not, i just hope for the sake of the AFL he gets off. The same incident probably happend 10 times this weekend and they probably didnt even give away free kicks.

To me he broke no rules so who care the result, Grant thomas made a good comment should Judd get weeks for dodging the luke ball tackle than caused Ball to go down injured?

The AFl may want to look into sliding, but you cant ban someone for playing within the rules of the game.

+1 The AFL need to look into the slide as its going to end up if you go hard for the ball you could cop a 3 week ban plus 4 fantasy point for the hard ball get. To me there is a very fine line between reckless and hard at the ball and the AFL are reacting to injuries rather than what was happening at the time of the incident. I cant see the afl downgrading the reckless  or the impact part of the charge though.

GARY Rohan's father Jim last night said North Melbourne's Lindsay Thomas had no case to answer despite causing his son's badly broken leg.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams/three-game-ban-for-ending-swans-year/story-e6frf9nf-1226336585448 i agree shower happens and if the ground was dry he would have got his footing ok and both players would have challenged for the ball.

[Capper]

good outcome not guilty.

[Holz]

The review panel finally made the correct decision, Not Guilty. Bit late should have been thrown out when it went to them the first time.

[Justin Bieber]

lol you guys were following it to?