Technically it’s got nothing to do with the Club. It is the player who has been sanctioned and thus ultimately the player’s decision as to whether they accept or challenge.
However, I’m sure the player and the club discuss it and come to a mutual decision on how proceed.
We don’t know is if:
The Club did review the incident and the MRP findings, had a conversation with Francis and suggested they could challenge it but he said “Nah, just accept it. Just pay it”
The Club did review the incident and the MRP findings, had a conversation with Francis and decided together that it wasn’t worth the hassle of challenging (either due to the cost or the desire to keep things low key for Francis)
Not sure we should be having a crack at the Club without knowing what discussions were had internally.
We can have a crack on the club for not having explained why the sanction was accepted. Come out and tell us why something was done almost no one else in the footy world would have done. Fans and members deserve an explanation.
If the AFL updated the documents on their AFL Policies page then we might be able to find the answer to that question. Some of the documents on there are 5 years old FFS.
I’m pretty sure the player must pay.
I would hazard a guess (and it is just a guess), that 1 of 2 things happen.
Player payments (and I think they get paid monthly) are siphoned via the AFL. If a player gets fined then the AFL takes that money out.
or
The AFL garnishees the player’s monthly payment and the amount of the fine gets redirected to them. The AFL can see that the payment comes from the player.
In both of those methods you may have the problem of what happens if the fine is a sizable proportion of the players salary (especially in the case of a rookie)
Because the club claims that member and fan engagement is important. A large percentage of supporters can’t understand the decision not to challenge. Plus you have the coach in his press conference saying it doesn’t feel right and we will probably challenge.
But no it’s all good just accept a ridiculous fine that almost without fail everyone connected with the game believes was the wrong decision without stating why.
He also said he hadn’t seen all the footage available. So once they saw all that they may have changed their minds. They don’t really owe us much of an explanation imo.
First paragraph is subjective. Everyone seems to be an expert on whiplash all of a sudden, is it not possible that contact was made to the head first and then to the body second, thus explaining how contact to the head could have been made but the head being in the direction it is? Personally i find it very hard to believe that with the force Francis hit him with and the proximity of Jaegers head to Francis’s shoulder that there was no head contact at all. And if I am even more frank I think it’s probably fair enough that he copped a fine becuase it could have ended much worse.
Second paragraph… I’m not sure why the club has to justify accepting the fine to anyone… do they ever? The last sentence in that paragraph is just hyperbolic nonsense. Are you seriously telling me that accepting a 50/50 fine and not explaining why makes you question whether you want to handover cash as a member? Fark I’m surprised you lasted the SAGA with all the rolling over and reaming that took place there.
Really, mountain out of molehill, this whole discussion
Can the AFL come out and say what movement experts they consult with before stinging a player 2k for a bump that all and sundry seem to think was ok.
Also does one angle of the so called 8 or 9 provide enough evidence to meet the required standard of a civil tribunal? Especally given the one that has been released as the so called proof seems inconclusive and no better or worse than the others on offer.
while were at it lets just get a few QCs together and see whether the MRP has any jurisdiction within Australia. I call for a royal comission. Absolute rort.