Bachar Houli - بشار حولي, | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Bachar Houli - بشار حولي,

Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

Really the only relevant questions to ask imo are:
Did he hit the guy in the head and knock him out? Yes, penalty required.
Did he intend to hit the guy in the head and knock him out, i.e. intent? Yes he intended to hit him but no one knows if he intended to hit him in the head and knock him out.
Therefore there was intent to hit and he knocked him out so it was reckless or careless or whatever they classify it as, so with the noggin sacrosanct he should have been given 4 weeks (which is the afl guideline apparently) with a week off for a good on field record. The extra week off for being a good bloke off field is irrelevant in this scenario but you can see how it could have influenced peoples thinking as it means the intent to knock him out may not have been there but with the above guidelines it should not have been considered. Should only have been on field record. Hence I can see why the AFL have appealed but knowing that regime they will increase Bachar's suspension to 5 or 6 to make a point.
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

Am i right that the AFL are asking for a base sanction of 4 weeks, which would be reduced to 3 weeks with his good record? How is that manifestly inadequate?
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

Just give him 3 and get over it. Gee the amount of sooking going on
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

So the AFL only went into the tribunal asking for 4 weeks, now their counsel says "It should be 4 weeks or more". ???
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

Exactly.

You think the way media,radio and AFL have been carrying that they are wanting 5/6 weeks.

The longer this is going on I reckon the AFL may look stupid. ?
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

Where's Gill the Dill in all of this? I thought he was a good man.
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

jb03 said:
Am i right that the AFL are asking for a base sanction of 4 weeks, which would be reduced to 3 weeks with his good record? How is that manifestly inadequate?
Don't know for sure, but I read that there is no discount at Tribunal level. They start with the base, in this case 4 weeks, and a good record can only stop it from being increased, not lead to a decrease, but it's the AFL, so who the hell knows?
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

W behaviour matters?
AFL legal counsel Andrew Woods says exemplary behaviour refers to on-field behaviour, rather than off-field behaviour. Therefore, Houli's work in the community shouldn't be relevant.

His on field record prior to this incident is exemplary too. :spin
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

wammo said:
Don't know for sure, but I read that there is no discount at Tribunal level. They start with the base, in this case 4 weeks, and a good record can only stop it from being increased, not lead to a decrease, but it's the AFL, so who the hell knows?

Not even sure 2 from 4 is manifestly inadequate.
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

But, but ,but didn't he get 4 weeks reduced down to 2 because of his exemplary record.
 
Re: Bachar "The Nice Guy" Houli

mrposhman said:
So the AFL only went into the tribunal asking for 4 weeks, now their counsel says "It should be 4 weeks or more". ???

the whole thing is a joke. They've realised that logically, everything points to three weeks, but if that happens, they will look like dicks for doing an unprecedented appeal for 1 week, so they're making it up as they go along, as we all knew they would do.