#AFL Finals Week 1 weekly discussion thread

[Auntie.Gerald]

Is GWS the real deal for this year ?

I haven’t thought so to date this season but they made the bulldogs look pretty aweful

[Bloods05]

Bont wasn't hurt, so hard to mount a case for a suspension, which seems to be the way these days that the punishment matches the victim.

But really, why was bont allowed to play anyway. That's the real issue with the tribunal.

Seriously.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, who can forget the famed "love tap" which left Matt Maguire writhing on the ground 80M behind the play.

Then of course, there was James Hird's face after the 1996 Prelim. Some kind of mix up involving Andrew Dunkley's
fingers. Jeez, I wonder what happened?

Who lined up for us at FB in the 96 GF? None other than Dunks.

The high horse. It's really slippery up there.

The drug dealer's defence. Other people do it, so it's OK for me.

[Blood Fever]

Bont wasn't hurt, so hard to mount a case for a suspension, which seems to be the way these days that the punishment matches the victim.

But really, why was bont allowed to play anyway. That's the real issue with the tribunal.

Piss weak nature of match review and tribunal plus inconsistencies in treatment of certain players is a huge problem. No doubt Bontempelli should have been rubbed out..Non decision caused a lot of angst among GWS players.

[dejavoodoo44]

Toby Greene & the tribunal are disgraceful

Greene has had 16 tribunal appearances for a paltry 6 matches in suspensions & $18850 in fines (a drop in the proverbial bucket of his salary over that time).

David Rhys-Jones was reported 25 times and suspended for a total of 22 matches.

So statistically averaged, Toby is suspended just over a third of the times he’s reported. On average Rhys-Jones missed a match almost every time.

Worse still, Greene committed multiple offences on the weekend for essentially one report. And all he got was a fine - for multiple offences.

“Ultimately, his remorse – and a favourable medical report from the Bulldogs that revealed Bontempelli suffered no injury as a result of the incident – saved Greene from a suspension, with the talented forward instead handed a significant fine as a penalty for his actions.” - afl.com.au

His “remorse”?! The guy pleaded guilty. Again. How remorseful can you be when you repeatedly offend?! If Al Capone had expressed remorse, would he have been slapped with a fine? And a “favourable medical report”?! What about his significantly unfavourable record?!

Yes, I noticed this bit, in the AFL site article on the subject:

When asked if he would continue playing on the edge, following the 17th charge of his career, Greene smiled and said: "I don't know, we'll wait and see what happens."

To me, that doesn't seem like a huge amount of remorse.

[barry]

As they said on AFL 360, the fine way exceeds the charge, and GWS should appeal.
No mention whatsoever of eye gauging, so obviously a few got sucked into the media beat up... Including me.

[goswannies]

Great to see former Swans amongst the vote pollers at the Magarey Medal count tonight (Jordan Foot, Abe Davis, Lewis Johnston - all finished in the top 8 vote getters).

[0918330512]

As they said on AFL 360, the fine way exceeds the charge, and GWS should appeal.
No mention whatsoever of eye gauging, so obviously a few got sucked into the media beat up... Including me.

With conspiracy theories regularly being thrown around about AFL bias against the Swans, umpiring bias against the Swans, AFL bias for the Dogs and then the Tigers, I find it just as easy to believe that it’s in GW$’s (& thus the AFL’s - so that their underperforming, manufactured little golden child) best interest to have one of their best players playing in the finals. The vaguely ambiguous charge of “serious misconduct” (whatever that means) that was supposed to encompass multiple indiscretions must have been difficult to define and adjudicate.

His “massive” $7500 fine for “serious misconduct” pales to Brad Scott’s $50K fine for claiming the umpires had been biased in 2016 (imagine if the AFL could fine supporters for that, RWO would be a cash cow!); Jaidyn Stephenson was banned for 22 matches — with 12 suspended — and fined $20K for a $36 bet; in 2011 players were threatened with $5K fines each, for threatening to cover a logos on their jumpers. In light of the magnitude of those previous fines for comparatively trivial matters, the AFL should appeal to have Green’s fine for such serious (and physical) misconduct considerably increased.

I’d say that Green was lucky that he wasn’t charged separately for each of his dirty indiscretions. Some might not have stuck. Others might have given him weeks. The ambiguity of the charge meant that there was little precedent for a match ban sanction, potentially making a fine (and a ridiculously tame one at that) easier to apply without compromising GW$’s lineup.

[Bloods05]

With conspiracy theories regularly being thrown around about AFL bias against the Swans, umpiring bias against the Swans, AFL bias for the Dogs and then the Tigers, I find it just as easy to believe that it’s in GW$’s (& thus the AFL’s - so that their underperforming, manufactured little golden child) best interest to have one of their best players playing in the finals. The vaguely ambiguous charge of “serious misconduct” (whatever that means) that was supposed to encompass multiple indiscretions must have been difficult to define and adjudicate.

His “massive” $7500 fine for “serious misconduct” pales to Brad Scott’s $50K fine for claiming the umpires had been biased in 2016 (imagine if the AFL could fine supporters for that, RWO would be a cash cow!); Jaidyn Stephenson was banned for 22 matches — with 12 suspended — and fined $20K for a $36 bet; in 2011 players were threatened with $5K fines each, for threatening to cover a logos on their jumpers. In light of the magnitude of those previous fines for comparatively trivial matters, the AFL should appeal to have Green’s fine for such serious (and physical) misconduct considerably increased.

I’d say that Green was lucky that he wasn’t charged separately for each of his dirty indiscretions. Some might not have stuck. Others might have given him weeks. The ambiguity of the charge meant that there was little precedent for a match ban sanction, potentially making a fine (and a ridiculously tame one at that) easier to apply without compromising GW$’s lineup.

Excellent post. Fines for this kind of conduct are utterly meaningless. They are no deterrent to a player earning hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

[Auntie.Gerald]

My sense of the situation is that if this happened in round 10 then Greene would have missed a round at least

Because it’s finals all players not matter what team they are from tend to get a green light

[barry]

With conspiracy theories regularly being thrown around about AFL bias against the Swans, umpiring bias against the Swans, AFL bias for the Dogs and then the Tigers, I find it just as easy to believe that it’s in GW$’s (& thus the AFL’s - so that their underperforming, manufactured little golden child) best interest to have one of their best players playing in the finals. The vaguely ambiguous charge of “serious misconduct” (whatever that means) that was supposed to encompass multiple indiscretions must have been difficult to define and adjudicate.

His “massive” $7500 fine for “serious misconduct” pales to Brad Scott’s $50K fine for claiming the umpires had been biased in 2016 (imagine if the AFL could fine supporters for that, RWO would be a cash cow!); Jaidyn Stephenson was banned for 22 matches — with 12 suspended — and fined $20K for a $36 bet; in 2011 players were threatened with $5K fines each, for threatening to cover a logos on their jumpers. In light of the magnitude of those previous fines for comparatively trivial matters, the AFL should appeal to have Green’s fine for such serious (and physical) misconduct considerably increased.

I’d say that Green was lucky that he wasn’t charged separately for each of his dirty indiscretions. Some might not have stuck. Others might have given him weeks. The ambiguity of the charge meant that there was little precedent for a match ban sanction, potentially making a fine (and a ridiculously tame one at that) easier to apply without compromising GW$’s lineup.

Sounds like you are still sucked into the media anti-GWS bandwagon.

[0918330512]

Bont wasn't hurt, so hard to mount a case for a suspension, which seems to be the way these days that the punishment matches the victim.

AFL: Toby Greene sent to Tribunal for alleged eye goug on Marcus Bontempelli, GWS Giants

Look at the photo further down the article

But really, why was bont allowed to play anyway. That's the real issue with the tribunal.

Silly reasoning. They are mutually exclusive incidents.

That’s like saying that hypothetically if Glen Archer had king hit Andrew Dunkley in the 1996 grand final, they absolve Archer of his indiscretion because Dunks should have missed the Grand Final.

[Bloods05]

AFL: Toby Greene sent to Tribunal for alleged eye goug on Marcus Bontempelli, GWS Giants

Look at the photo further down the article



Silly reasoning. They are mutually exclusive incidents.

That’s like saying that hypothetically if Glen Archer had king hit Andrew Dunkley in the 1996 grand final, they absolve Archer of his indiscretion because Dunks should have missed the Grand Final.

Yep.