Chook Lotto
3 Likes
Ivan tipped this.
That’s the correct call. Fox was so careless going into that contest. Similar to the way Spargo went into the contest with Redman. Redman didn’t brace for the contact though because Spargo was a lot lower.
1 Like
Ivan thinks like Michael Christian? Oh…dear.
Is there any evidence that CHristian “thinks”. But @Ivan does:
2 Likes
LOL
Potential Injury: SUSPENDED
Actually Injured WITH CONCUSSION: Nah you’re good
5 Likes
Fox basically headbutted Duncans shoulder. Its a good thing that the action and intent is being judged instead of the outcome. Thats how it should be for every tribunal/MRO decision.
1 Like
if it was purely on action/intent, Oliver would have been cited - but he wasn’t, because it’s not
2 Likes
But they are suspending people on potential “Outcomes” this is an actual “Outcome” Fox has concussion and won’t play
2 Likes
Sucks that Duncan won’t miss against us but was the right call. Fox put himself into the position and contributed to the hit. He is lucky it wasn’t far worse
2 Likes
It may be the right call, but it is not the call that would have been made had it been one of our players.
3 Likes
He should have been, thats the point, they are inconsistent but this is one they got right.
Its an actual outcome but its also Foxs fault. They shouldn’t be banning people based on outcomes regardless, its the action that the player can control, so its the action that should be punished.
I don’t subscribe to the anti Essendon agenda as far the tribunal goes.
Umpiring however…………. 
2 Likes
You mean like Redman not being cited for Spargo’s concussion?
It was rightly decided to be Spargo’s fault.
But they have to blow the whistle earlier and not force the tackler to have to bring the tacklee to ground. Sparrow should have been pinged for HTB. Arms not pinned, just plain old-fashioned HTB.
Thought Fox ran past the footy and Duncan dropped his shoulder and stepped in changing his line to brace for contact.
Dont know where that leaves the incident though.
I thought some of the tackles blokes have been rubbed out for have been legitimate too.
Reckon the tribunal and the game is absolutely all over the shop right now.
1 Like
It was Foxs fault so Duncans not punished. Accidents happen, we dont have to ban someone everytime they do.
I dont mind players getting banned when they actually sling tackle someone. Like Olivers tackle, but Merrett, Day, Adams should have got off. Ward on Neales a bit of a weird one, it looks like 2 actions but Neale seems to flop.
Its actually a bad incentive if the umpires are looking for the head hitting the ground to determine dangerous tackles. Its incentivising the player with the ball to put themselves in a dangerous position to win a free. If its always the action that is punished instead of the outcome or whether or not the head hits the ground then players will be more incentivised to protect themselves.
1 Like
Ward shoulda gone for sure with Neale.(and did i think) if being consistent
That was a bad one imo
Just with how Ward uses his legs and wraps/spins him around and dumps him. Neale looked super vunerable
To stop the players flopping for a dangerous tackle free just take away the onfield free kick and just cite the incident post match with double the penalty at the MRO add a week for concussion or excessive grading. Stamp out both actions pretty quickly.
I dont mind that idea.
I dont agree with this, whether the player gets concussed can just be chance, punish the action not the outcome.
1 Like