MRP

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Defended by Adrian Anderson.

There's something a bit perverse about Anderson attempting to worm through the cracks in his own flawed system.

 

[TigerMasochist]

There's something a bit perverse about Anderson.

Fixed it for ya ;D. Slimy little git should never have been allowed anywhere near any of the AFL rules n structures. He meddled with the tribunal system n it's never worked right since. Every year they try n tweak his *smile* pile into something functional n every year it fails.

 

[K3]

Absolutely agree with this. It happened right in front of me at the ground and I genuinely feared for Lids safety.
I felt like jumping the fence at the time. Firstly because I was so worried for Lids when he didn't move and secondly out of anger at Dempsey.
That Don scumbag is very lucky that he only got 4 weeks and Lids is very lucky that the injury wasn't far worse.
Absolutely disgusting act. Hope it spells the end of his career.

While Dempsey did look remorseful this act was probably the worst I have seen on a footy field in a VERY long time!

Disappointed he got off with, what I consider to be, a light penalty.

 

[Tigerfan]

Interesting, thanks for that. How come that happens? Would it be due to the MRP wanting to follow legal processes in the belief it's the most effective way of dealing with AFL reports? If so, it isn't clear to me why it applies in a sporting context. Sure, a murderer should have that opportunity to explain his upbringing etc, and it should count when deciding his penalty, but citing Dempsey's lack of media work and a racist tweet in order to reduce his penalty from 4-5 weeks to 2-3 weeks in Round 22 doesn't make sense to me.

Yes the AFLs judiciary model, albeit a tribunal, would be consistent with the Australian legal model.

You can always speak for your own actions.

"I did steal the bread. My children were hungry. My employer went broke and we are starving. I'm the children's only carer".

Admit guilt, explain why. Hope for leniency.

BECAUSE a penalty has to fit the crime.

The statue of justice shows 'her' holding scales of fairness, and wearing a blindfold (everyone is equal, even my mother).

You don't shoot people for stealing bread. Even if they are fat.

In dempseys, case. He did the wrong thing. He knew it. He apologised immediately. they don't have much excuse.
He can only plead that he had a brain explosion.
If he hated deledio and posted on Twitter the night before that kids has a head first spear tackle coming his way --- that would be big trouble. That's a premeditated act.

His legal team had almost nothing to work with.
Their best bet was to cite the angry fans on Twitter, (Dempsey has already suffered from his actions) and that he's at risk of unemployment (It's all to try to get his suspension reduced. They are arguing "he did it. Yes he did. But what's a fair penalty? He's already been punished, on Twitter, and too many weeks suspended could render him unemployable, and he has no other job ready if he's not put under contract to play footy".

It's like haggling at a market.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Fixed it for ya ;D. Slimy little git should never have been allowed anywhere near any of the AFL rules n structures. He meddled with the tribunal system n it's never worked right since. Every year they try n tweak his sh!t pile into something functional n every year it fails.

The thing about this that will be glossed over is that the system failed to deal with it adequately. They had to grade the impact as "severe" to have it sent to the tribunal. Yet they assessed Schulz's tackle on Richards as "low impact", despite Richards being KO'd with his eyes rolling about, and stretchered from the field.

It's time to drop the charade and stop trying to stuff things into boxes, and return to simply assessing each incident on its merits. There will still be difficult ones, but most supporters have a fair idea of what's worth a week, two weeks or whatever. Happy to keep the appeal system, and fines for lesser offences.

Have posted before that I admired Anderson's attempt to apply rigidity to a facet of the game that is frequently difficult to quantify. It's just that in practice, it doesn't work. Semantics and different interpretations make it impossible. A flawed assessment in one category magnifies the inaccuracies.

 

[poppa x]

This is evidenced by the comparison of the Hodge and Vickery suspensions.
Vickery gets 3 weeks for standing still to block for Jack and allowing an opponent to run into him.
Hodge gets 2 weeks for a deliberate act of ramming an opponents head into the goal post.

It's a crazy system.

 

[Tigerfan]

It's because they are trying to turn it into a system.
Go back to the old tribunal days when Greg Williams and David Rhys jones were frequent flyers

 

[Rancey18]

Absolutely agree with this. It happened right in front of me at the ground and I genuinely feared for Lids safety.
I felt like jumping the fence at the time. Firstly because I was so worried for Lids when he didn't move and secondly out of anger at Dempsey.
That Don scumbag is very lucky that he only got 4 weeks and Lids is very lucky that the injury wasn't far worse.
Absolutely disgusting act. Hope it spells the end of his career.

My thoughts exactly. My heart was in my mouth when it happened, Lids is very lucky.

 

[Tigerfan]

My thoughts exactly. My heart was in my mouth when it happened, Lids is very lucky.

Yes he is. It was a terribly dangerous action