Rockliff OUT

[Sydney14]

Tom Rockliff can accept a one match ban for rough conduct on Sam Mitchell

>:(

[j959]

Tom Rockliff can accept a one match ban for rough conduct on Sam Mitchell

>:(

off the ball - was always goin to cop at least one, esp against SMitch ...  ;)

[Sydney14]

Tom Rockliff can accept a one match ban for rough conduct on Sam Mitchell

>:(

off the ball - was always goin to cop at least one, esp against SMitch ...  ;)

I'm not surprised, I'm just annoyed.

[Bully]

Interesting dilemma for Rocky holders, I'd just tough it out and use him for loophole purposes, otherwise it's a precious trade down the gurgler.

[LF]

Very annoyed

[Ringo]

As I have said previously the MRP does not like Brisbane we always seem to get the wrong end of the stick.  There were a few similar instances not reported either so because it is God Sammy Rocky gets reported.

Great to see the MRP being consistent for Brisbane if nothing else.  If Rocky played for Collingwood he would not have even been cited

eg Walker gets a week for pushing someone into the fence Rich got 2 weeks for the same offence. so being consistent for Brisbane.

[kilbluff1985]

there goes my brownlow bets FML

[j959]

As I have said previously the MRP does not like Brisbane we always seem to get the wrong end of the stick.  There were a few similar instances not reported either so because it is God Sammy Rocky gets reported.

Great to see the MRP being consistent for Brisbane if nothing else.  If Rocky playerd for Collingwood he would not have even been cited

or if he had hit a player like Crowley ...  ;)

[North Melbournes Finest]

My trade of Rockliff to Watson looks like a good one at the moment!

[tor01doc]

As I have said previously the MRP does not like Brisbane we always seem to get the wrong end of the stick.  There were a few similar instances not reported either so because it is God Sammy Rocky gets reported.

Great to see the MRP being consistent for Brisbane if nothing else.  If Rocky playerd for Collingwood he would not have even been cited

Really think so?

Or did JFK tell you whilst you were having a drink with Elvis at the studio in Texas where they shot the moon landing?

[shaker]

Really wanted to see how and where they played him this week but think I will keep him for now

[Ringo]

No Doc I believe the MRP have a vendetta against Brisbane as do umpires and I hate to say it but maybe a directive to really umpire Brisbane after our three peat.  Since the three peat we have not won many free kick counts.

To prove my point and I modified post - Rich got two weeks for pushing a player into the fence and Walker gets one week for the same thing.

And the BS excuse for Gibson getting off of the Close incident further adds to the belief.

Angry yes when we see the number of incidents similar in a game not cited but when it it is Brisbane every little act seems to get reported, I believe the MRP have Rose coloured glasses on when it comes to examining incidents involving the top teams.

[Hippo]

there goes my brownlow bets FML

O no! not the big $10 you had on him. i'm sure you can save for another week and re-invest   ;)

[enzedder]

fxvying brilliant.

[Toga]

To prove my point and I modified post - Rich got two weeks for pushing a player into the fence and Walker gets one week for the same thing.

Bit of a difference between the two IMO Ringo.

Watch at 3:29 in the following video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhGhet6taV4

Daniel Rich is running full on towards the fence and forcibly shoves Clint Jones (who is off balance) head on into the fence. Walker's incident wasn't using as much force I don't think (which I believe is a significant factor in findings), and he didn't put him into the fence head first either.

I reckon the MRP got those two incidents about right in comparison to one another!