Barry Hall nil charge to answer

[Moods]

Just in from MRP - Can't believe it. No point bleating on about Bakes but fair dinkum, if that punch wasn't at least as hard as the fairy taps that Baker gave SJ then I'm going blind.

Would have been nice for him to miss a couple in case the dogs play us in the prelim.

[Thinline]

Laughable, but what can do...

[saint1974]

MRP joke
The only consistent thing about this group of......... is the inconsistency.
Unreal I thought he would be gone for a week,mind you they should look at Im going to save the world Harry, because he is becoming a pest and insighting trouble.

[plugger66]

Didnt look much in it at all to me. Glad people dont go for those things but it doesnt help Bakes.

[Superboot]

They are consistent in failing to suspend Hall during a final series.

All depends on your take

[matrix]

yup
crazy
already in the barry hall punch thread

bakes wouldve copped 9 years for that hit........

[Badlands]

Will never happen, but the AFL hierarchy owes Bakes an unreserved apology for a the gross miscarriage of justice that has been dealt to him in the twilight of his career.

For what it's worth i didn't think Hall's strike really warranted missing a final. But in the context of Bakes' suspension... just makes me infuriated and actually really sad for Bakes.

[markp]

I'd rather play the dogs than the swans... so not a bad result, for mine.

[Thinline]

Surely a clenched fist jab to the throat warrants points. And in his case - like in Bakers - that warrants WEEKS.

The whole thing is so silly I just laugh now.

[Mr Magic]

If Chapman was let off for hitting Picken, then how was Hall supposed to be cited for this one?
Hall was never going to go, especially during finals.

[Grimfang]

Chapman got a week, reduced by good behaviour and guilty plea to a reprimand.

[Mr Magic]

Chapman got a week, reduced by good behaviour and guilty plea to a reprimand.

Well compare that one to this one.
IMO, not in the same ballpark.
SO if CHapman's was woth only a week, then Hall's was insufficient to warrant a charge.

BUT
If you believe that Chapman's was worth more than 1 week (personally I do) then I also believe that Hall's was worth at least a week (maybe 2 as it was more forceful than Gehrig's love tap on Jason Cloke that got him 2 - reduced to 1).

[kosifantutti23]

and taking into account a medical report received on player O’Brien was determined that the force was below that required to constitute a reportable offence

I can't remember seeing any references to a medical report on Steve Johnson. Or did they use a medical report on his hand to give Bakes an extra week or two.

I also can't recall a medical report on Pavlich after Judd opened his eye up with an elbow which was also determined to not have enough force to constitute a reportable offence.

[St Fidelius]

I'd rather play the dogs than the swans... so not a bad result, for mine.

agreed and I was amazed at the odds for next week.

According to the odds in the newspaper this morning...

Bulldogs @ $1.90

Sydney @ $1.80

I would have thought that Sydney would have been firmer that that.

[Moods]

and taking into account a medical report received on player O’Brien was determined that the force was below that required to constitute a reportable offence

I can't remember seeing any references to a medical report on Steve Johnson. Or did they use a medical report on his hand to give Bakes an extra week or two.

I also can't recall a medical report on Pavlich after Judd opened his eye up with an elbow which was also determined to not have enough force to constitute a reportable offence.

It's an absolute farce. They make it up with what they think suits. They decide the penalty THEN fit the parameters around that penalty to justify it. It's as big a joke as what it was prior to the new system being brought in. Hasn't improved it at all, other than to have less tribunal cases.

[plugger66]

and taking into account a medical report received on player O’Brien was determined that the force was below that required to constitute a reportable offence

I can't remember seeing any references to a medical report on Steve Johnson. Or did they use a medical report on his hand to give Bakes an extra week or two.

I also can't recall a medical report on Pavlich after Judd opened his eye up with an elbow which was also determined to not have enough force to constitute a reportable offence.

It's an absolute farce. They make it up with what they think suits. They decide the penalty THEN fit the parameters around that penalty to justify it. It's as big a joke as what it was prior to the new system being brought in. Hasn't improved it at all, other than to have less tribunal cases.

Forgetting what happened to Bakes, do you really want people suspended for those little things that wouldnt hurt my grandmother.

[Thinline]

and taking into account a medical report received on player O’Brien was determined that the force was below that required to constitute a reportable offence

I can't remember seeing any references to a medical report on Steve Johnson. Or did they use a medical report on his hand to give Bakes an extra week or two.

I also can't recall a medical report on Pavlich after Judd opened his eye up with an elbow which was also determined to not have enough force to constitute a reportable offence.

It's an absolute farce. They make it up with what they think suits. They decide the penalty THEN fit the parameters around that penalty to justify it. It's as big a joke as what it was prior to the new system being brought in. Hasn't improved it at all, other than to have less tribunal cases.

Forgetting what happened to Bakes, do you really want people suspended for those little things that wouldnt hurt my grandmother.

I simply see a strike as a strike and Halls shot to the throat was something above and beyond a jumper punch.

Fact is even a low grade offence would have 'activated' a stint on the sidelines so whether you use Baker as an example or not, Hall has dodged a bullet.

[plugger66]

and taking into account a medical report received on player O’Brien was determined that the force was below that required to constitute a reportable offence

I can't remember seeing any references to a medical report on Steve Johnson. Or did they use a medical report on his hand to give Bakes an extra week or two.

I also can't recall a medical report on Pavlich after Judd opened his eye up with an elbow which was also determined to not have enough force to constitute a reportable offence.

It's an absolute farce. They make it up with what they think suits. They decide the penalty THEN fit the parameters around that penalty to justify it. It's as big a joke as what it was prior to the new system being brought in. Hasn't improved it at all, other than to have less tribunal cases.

Forgetting what happened to Bakes, do you really want people suspended for those little things that wouldnt hurt my grandmother.

I simply see a strike as a strike and Halls shot to the throat was something above and beyond a jumper punch.

Fact is even a low grade offence would have 'activated' a stint on the sidelines so whether you use Baker as an example or not, Hall has dodged a bullet.

There have been plenty of examples over the last few years where people have got off for the same reason Hall has and no one really cares because they werent players with a record like Hall. I would rather players get off for things like that where as you obviously wouldnt. Thats fine.

[Thinline]

I'm not picking an argument. Simply saying that perhaps subconsciously or not (or perhaps in the wake of the Baker f*** up) the muppets who run the MRP show now think about the ramifications of their decision-making and let their thoughts cloud what should - excepting the rarest of circumstances - be a simple and very black and white process.

Did Barry strike above the shoulder?

YEP

How many points?

X

What's his record say?

Y POINTS ACCUMULATED

X plus Y equals Z weeks or ZZ dollars then

NEXT.

Instead there seems to be an unwritten code in play where they go 'look, technically he got him in the neck, and yeah his fist was clenched and yeah it was definitely a punch, but s*** the Dogs are struggling and it is finals and you know it is a physical game and geez people'll be pissed if we do this one by the book because when you add everything up he's gonna get 4 weeks for not much impact...f*** it, too hard, let this one through...'

Silliness.

[plugger66]

I'm not picking an argument. Simply saying that perhaps subconsciously or not (or perhaps in the wake of the Baker f*** up) the muppets who run the MRP show now think about the ramifications of their decision-making and let their thoughts cloud what should - excepting the rarest of circumstances - be a simple and very black and white process.

Did Barry strike above the shoulder?

YEP

How many points?

X

What's his record say?

Y POINTS ACCUMULATED

X plus Y equals Z weeks or ZZ dollars then

NEXT.

Instead there seems to be an unwritten code in play where they go 'look, technically he got him in the neck, and yeah his fist was clenched and yeah it was definitely a punch, but s*** the Dogs are struggling and it is finals and you know it is a physical game and geez people'll be pissed if we do this one by the book because when you add everything up he's gonna get 4 weeks for not much impact...f*** it, too hard, let this one through...'

Silliness.

So you obviously agreed with the MRP on Baker.

[Thinline]

I didn't agree at all. But why should the whole shambles shift week to week. If you are simply meant to add up the numbers, why not just f****** well do it every time and not just when it's Baker?

[plugger66]

I didn't agree at all. But why should the whole shambles shift week to week. If you are simply meant to add up the numbers, why not just f****** well do it every time and not just when it's Baker?

But you said a hit is a hit so why should have Baker not been rubbed out?

[Thinline]

I didn't agree at all. But why should the whole shambles shift week to week. If you are simply meant to add up the numbers, why not just f****** well do it every time and not just when it's Baker?

But you said a hit is a hit so why should have Baker not been rubbed out?

I also differentiated between a jumper punch and clenched fist to the throat.

And I never said Baker SHOULDN'T have been rubbed out. I think his sentence was disproportionate but to the letter of the law of the system set in place it was (horribly and mercilessly) justifiable.

But since then - and before - there's been a raft of similarly iffy incidents to which an MRP bat has been raised as they whistle silently through to Brad Haddin...

One system applied one way every time.

How can that be so complicated?

[Cairnsman]

Wasn't attempting to punch once a crime?

[Badlands]

Forgetting what happened to Bakes, do you really want people suspended for those little things that wouldnt hurt my grandmother.

Due respect Plug, this is a saints forum, appreciate what you're trying to say (and like i said earlier, i actually agree re Hall's incident not deserving to miss a final), but none of us are going to forget what happened to Bakes when we assess these incidents. How could we? Bear in mind that as a result of being hung, drawn and quartered by the MRP he may not get back into the team and could potentially miss playing in a grand final. Where is the justice?

The MRP is a laughing stock and an embarrassment to the game, and quite simply cannot continue in its present form beyond this season.