Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 31

Thread: Bevo Contesting MRP charges

  1. #1
    Human CJK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Why
    Posts
    2,170

    Bevo Contesting MRP charges

    According to the AFL and SEN Twitter.

    Good on the club
    -

  2. #2
    RWOs Black Sheep AnnieH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    At Goodesy's Place
    Posts
    11,332
    What charges???
    Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
    Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

  3. #3
    Human CJK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Why
    Posts
    2,170
    Quote Originally Posted by AnnieH View Post
    What charges???
    R21, AFL 2010 Swans V Bulldogs: Gameday & Autopsy

    2nd post
    -

  4. #4
    Senior Player Plugger46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,674
    Given what Josh Hunt got over the weekend (and Mummy earlier in the year), I thought Bevo was pretty lucky.
    Last edited by Plugger46; 24th August 2010 at 01:09 PM.
    Bloods

    "Lockett is the best of all time" - Robert Harvey, Darrel Baldock, Nathan Burke, Kevin Bartlett, Bob Skilton

  5. #5
    RWOs Black Sheep AnnieH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    At Goodesy's Place
    Posts
    11,332
    The bastards.

    Bevo's finally come good!!!
    Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
    Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Plugger46 View Post
    Given what Josh Hunt over the weekend (and Mummy earlier in the year), I thought Bevo was pretty lucky.
    As I said in another thread, Hunt's was a spear tackle. Mummy's was what they call a "sling" (and a soft-as one at that). I haven't seen footgae of Bevo's one and must have missed it on the night.
    Last edited by laughingnome; 24th August 2010 at 01:06 PM.
    10100111001 ;-)

  7. #7
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,394
    Quote Originally Posted by Plugger46 View Post
    Given what Josh Hunt got over the weekend (and Mummy earlier in the year), I thought Bevo was pretty lucky.
    How so?

    All the other tackles that have deemed to be reportable offences have had the "high" classification. Although the contact to the player from the offender wasn't high, the fact that the tackle resulted in the tacklee's head hitting the ground is deemed to create high contact. Whether or not one agrees with this (and whether or not one wonders why this appears to matter for some tackles but not others), Bevan's tackle wasn't deemed to be high contact so presumably Griffen's head didn't hit the ground.

    So Bevan appears to be the first player charged where, by the MRP's own assessment, the tackle was low impact and body contact and yet is against the rules. Given that tackling is not against the rules, Griffen should have expected contact as he was in possession, and there was no head high contact, it is very hard to understand what offence Bevan has supposedly committed that players don't commit every time they lay a tackle.

  8. #8
    Human CJK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Why
    Posts
    2,170
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    it is very hard to understand what offence Bevan has supposedly committed that players don't commit every time they lay a tackle.
    The audacity to play for the Sydney Swans?
    -

  9. #9
    Senior Player Plugger46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,674
    Quote Originally Posted by liz View Post
    How so?

    All the other tackles that have deemed to be reportable offences have had the "high" classification. Although the contact to the player from the offender wasn't high, the fact that the tackle resulted in the tacklee's head hitting the ground is deemed to create high contact. Whether or not one agrees with this (and whether or not one wonders why this appears to matter for some tackles but not others), Bevan's tackle wasn't deemed to be high contact so presumably Griffen's head didn't hit the ground.

    So Bevan appears to be the first player charged where, by the MRP's own assessment, the tackle was low impact and body contact and yet is against the rules. Given that tackling is not against the rules, Griffen should have expected contact as he was in possession, and there was no head high contact, it is very hard to understand what offence Bevan has supposedly committed that players don't commit every time they lay a tackle.
    Looked just as bad to me but I suspect the club have a better idea than I do.

    Maybe I need to look at it again but it looked like Griffen's head hit the ground to me.
    Bloods

    "Lockett is the best of all time" - Robert Harvey, Darrel Baldock, Nathan Burke, Kevin Bartlett, Bob Skilton

  10. #10
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,394
    Quote Originally Posted by Plugger46 View Post
    Looked just as bad to me but I suspect the club have a better idea than I do.

    Maybe I need to look at it again but it looked like Griffen's head hit the ground to me.
    But the MRP's own assessment says it didn't.

  11. #11
    What a bad joke they are at the MRP. Absolutely bloody hopeless. Fingers crossed on a good outcome but I'm not holding my breath.
    Superman still wears Brett Kirk Pyjamas

  12. #12
    On the Rookie List
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    827
    Why bother? He can take a reprimand and still play this week.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO