#7 Zerrett in the beginning

The look of the game, children all over the world were appaulled at the sight of Zach viciously attacking that man. What about the rights of the people!

They are dumb rules, and the now we get to hear Francis Leach and others chomp on about how Zach is selfish because he didn’t think about his teammates, the club, the supporters and every rights group and SJW out there. The game is a joke…

1 Like

I am amazed he got away with one week.

By the time the MRP panel had finished with us, I thought he could be in line for 4 weeks.

Compulsory Essendon 200% match penalty loading.

1 Like

No doubt the tribunal would have asked for the report. There is only one person to blame here and that’s Zerrett.
If It was Zerrett that was hit like that we’d be expecting 2 weeks - well I would be.

He should appeal it. This weekend is too important for us to be without him. 1 or 2 weeks doesn’t matter in the grand scene of things.

Yep I’d be appealing and arguing it was low force

3 Likes

There’s is no way they’ll appeal and risk another week.
It was a stupid act. We move on.

1 Like

Surprise, surprise we get bent over and farked in the ■■■■ again. In anycase I recon he needs a rest, has not been at bit fatigued in the past couple of weeks. Parish to spend more time in the middle. I have confidence Parish can step up for us. Has been in very good form.

1 Like

Medium impact. ■■■■ that. Can’t respect an opinion that defends the mrp when they’ve clearly manipulated their findings to achieve a desired result. And if that contact caused Plowman any ill effects, then it’s time for her to find a non-contact sport.

3 Likes

All medical reports for the AFL tribunal should be done by an independent party to the club. Its that simple.

9 Likes

Zerrett was elbowed in the neck/head with twice the force by Greenwood and spent 20 mins off the ground.

Same penalty.

7 Likes

In grading, the MRP gives ‘strong consideration to the potential to cause injury’’.

Reckon there was something in that medical report to push up the grading to medium

Absolute potato quality for some reason, but here you go

2 Likes

From the EFC page

“Based on the available video evidence and a medical report from the Carlton Football Club, the incident was assessed as an intentional conduct with medium impact to the body. The incident was classified as a two-match sanction. The player has no applicable record which impacts the penalty. An early plea enables the player to accept a one-match sanction.”

Seriously, FARK Carlton.

6 Likes

you’re 100% correct, but how does Cotchin punch twice over 3 weeks for no suspension??
all we want is consistency.

No issue with the suspension because that’s what the AFL are trying to stop.

What I have a problem with is that Cotchin does the same thing 3 or 4 ■■■■■■■ times and doesnt get done

5 Likes

Yep, the difference is the fark Carlton medical report. Fark Carlton

2 Likes

Can the twiterati go crazy retweeting that Giff please. I don’t do Twitter any more

Load of crap. I don’t defend the MRP ever but you seriously cannot believe he wasn’t gone the moment he did it. If you go back tp the match thread and the after thread most people actually expected him to be gone a week.

But that’s beside the point, Zach deliberately hit a guy, scream all you want but that’s disappointing.

Yeah they let Cotchin off, not sure why that upsets people, it is what I expect from the MRP on decisions, one week nothing, next week 5 weeks for the same thing. They weren’t screwing us over in as much as they let higher profile players off all the time and go after the ones they don’t think mean much to anyone.

AFL payrollee

Zac did get hit a few minutes before by Casboult. You might say it wasn’t as hard a hit, but it was to the kidneys, versus Zac hitting Plowman to the upper chest, where you are pretty well protected. The effect of the two hits was roughly the same. One got two weeks reduced to one, and the other got a 50m penalty.

1 Like