Nat Fyfe Report?

[me]

there's no way anyone could know whether it was truely intentional or not (from that angle) - the video doesn't show his eyes, and although his head slightly moves as if looking at jackson, his eyes could have been on the contest the whole time (as he claims)  -  it's all guesswork from the mrp

some force... there was hardly any - boyds hit on selwood and helbig stepping on pearce carried far more force than fyfe's little push with his boot

flower this is lol, just following it on afl chat makes me feel like i'm dying inside

[jamfrank]

there's no way anyone could know whether it was truely intentional or not (from that angle) - the video doesn't show his eyes, and although his head slightly moves as if looking at jackson, his eyes could have been on the contest the whole time (as he claims)  -  it's all guesswork from the mrp

some force... there was hardly any - boyds hit on selwood and helbig stepping on pearce carried far more force than fyfe's little push with his boot

flower this is lol, just following it on afl chat makes me feel like i'm dying inside

Totally agree, +1

[Grazz]

Still going just waiting for the jury to deliberate, any minute now.

[jamfrank]

Any bets? Reckon he'll get off.

[Toga]

"Jury is satisfied it was intentional"


Doesn't sound good.

[redevilfc]

may the footy gods be with the fyfe!!

[jamfrank]

Jury is satisfied it was intentional.

what.

[Toga]

I think there's no doubting it was intentional, thought they might be looking at challenging it based on circumstances/lack of force..

Sounds like they're now challenging that 250 points is too excessive (which I think it is)..

[jamfrank]

I still don't think there is sufficient evidence to say that it was intentional

[jamfrank]

It's not looking good for Fyfe

[me]

should have hired me as the qc, not this "prior" fellow - i could have mounted a much stronger and more convincing case that there is no way you could prove it was intentional

he's goneski (from my team as well)

[Toga]

I still don't think there is sufficient evidence to say that it was intentional

Seriously?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdfXzzq3y_Y


I mean I agree that force wasn't too high so the penalty seems a bit harsh but the intention is definitely there.

[me]

how can you prove that he was actually looking at jackson? (which is what the whole "intentional" thing is based upon)

[Jroo]

flower out for two  ::)

[jamfrank]

I still don't think there is sufficient evidence to say that it was intentional

Seriously?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdfXzzq3y_Y


I mean I agree that force wasn't too high so the penalty seems a bit harsh but the intention is definitely there.

I don't think it is conclusive. Fyfe argues he was watching the ball, without seeing his eyes (which you can't) there's no way to know if his head turned to follow the ball or to look at jackson.