I'm not sure if this has been covered, but what was Newman doing in the goal square anyway? Was he tagging a bombers forward who had gone into defence? Or was he improvising? Either way, I was happy he was there ...
I'm not sure if this has been covered, but what was Newman doing in the goal square anyway? Was he tagging a bombers forward who had gone into defence? Or was he improvising? Either way, I was happy he was there ...
Bachar Houli is currently in front of the tribunal. There has been some discussion about the grading of Houli's strike as intentional. Houli is clearly very upset about any implication that he intentionally hit Lamb to cause serious injury. However from the way the MRP guidelines are currently written, I think technically it is probably accurate to assess the strike as intentional.
It will be interesting to see what the tribunal has to say. I do feel for Houli who seems to be a very decent man. And as he has already said to the tribunal, every week he (and other players) has an opposing player hanging on to him to impede his run.
I really like watching the Houli chap play footy ... looks like he was just trying to break the tag just like Dusty does with his really vigorous fendoffs .
Houlis clearly guilty. He looks to see where Lamb is before he does it. I don't see how he could possibly argue that it wasn't intentional. As for his arguement that he gets hung onto every week, he's no different to every other player in the AFL, especially our midfielders.
Last edited by S.S. Bleeder; 27th June 2017 at 10:34 PM.
my understanding from skimming the coverage is that he acknowledges the strike was intentional.
I don't see how you can call the footage on the Franklin goal inconclusive. The pvr has defeated me (for now), but it was very clearly touched. There is no other possible explanation for the very clear finger movement.
Yes, and also from the Tribunal, Schofield has been cleared, because it was decided that the contact to the jaw was negligible. Does this now mean that Oliver should be charged with diving? Or are they satisfied, that a negligible blow could cause a player to drop to the ground?
No idea how this topic has ended up in this forum let alone this thread.
As far as Houli is claiming his strike was not intentional he has apparently either not received or not understood legal advice. He admits meaning to strike Lamb between his shoulder and elbow - there's the intention. The intention doesn't relate to where he intended to strike or what consequence he intended as a result. However, those things are relevant to the assessment of the penalty. If it is accepted (as seems likely) that he did only intend to strike Lamb on the arm and certainly not to hurt him/knock him out, then that goes some way to explaining the lenient sentence. I think combined with his exemplary record over a long playing career and topped up with his 'good bloke' record out of footy, that means the sentence may not be found to be manifestly inadequate. Conversely, it is fair to point out a two week ban is only a week longer than some much less serious offences and where is the consistency? It is also fair to point out that given Houli struck with enough force to knock Lamb out, there was obviously something a long way short of care for his opponent and he does deserve to be penalised accordingly. Just because you have never snapped before doesn't mean there can't be a first time.
- - - Updated - - -
Nice point!
My fault - but earlier in this thread we had a very brief discussion of the MRP use of the term 'intentional'. I said at the time that there is a lot of confusion about it. I also commented earlier re Parker being fined for a 'careless' act in the Essendon game (which might have been assessed as 'intentional').
Afl has appealed the Houli decision as being manifestly inadequate.
I'm glad they've done this. 2 weeks was way too lenient especially when you compare to Jones last week and Hawkins the other week.
But as Meg mentioned above, I thought Parker was very lucky. As a team we have to be careful that our aggression doesn't go over the top and cost the team.
Way to keep a media frenzy going (or is that the desired outcome?). I hope this doesn't descend into an islamophobic social media event to rival the racist hounding Goodesy received a few years ago. It's already getting ugly online.
I think the MRP process got it about right. We all should have just moved on.
Bookmarks