Butler 1 week

[Brunswicksainter]

Great result, now I hope Sicily gets off also

[perfectionist]

Great result, now I hope Sicily gets off also

3 weeks, but Mansell will get off.

[SaintWiki]

According to Fox News Report:

DAN BUTLER HEARING (from 4pm EST)

St Kilda successfully argued Butler’s tackle on Sydney young gun Nick Blakey was not dangerous, with the Tribunal finding he released Blakey’s arm “as early as he reasonably could”.

The Saints forward’s momentum saw him tackle Blakey heavily on Thursday night, with Blakey’s head crashing into the SCG surface.

Butler, represented by Jack Rush, pled not guilty to rough conduct.


The Swans’ medical report noted Blakey passed his Head Impact Assessment and will not miss any training or any matches.

Asked by the Saints whether he had any alternative than to tackle Blakey, Butler told the Tribunal: “No. I’d be dropped.”

Sally Flynn, for the AFL, asked: “You did not let Blakey’s arms go with enough time for him to sufficiently brace himself. Do you agree?”

Butler responded: “No.”

Flynn continued: “The force you used was excessive force. Do you agree?”

Butler responded: “No.”

The Saints pointed to the Tribunal’s explanation for freeing Rory Laird of his dangerous tackle charge against Lachie Neale as a reason to free Butler.

Those reasons included: ‘“Every situation is different, but if a player slows instead of slinging, if he releases or doesn’t pin a defensive arm, all things being equal he may be demonstrating a reasonable attempt to avoid or minimise harm to his fellow player.

“The question in these circumstances will always be whether the tackler has done enough to convert a potentially dangerous tackle into a tackle that’s not dangerous.”

Flynn argued “this tackle falls far below what a reasonable player would consider as prudent in all of the circumstances”, given his arms were initially pinned, and not released with enough time for a safe landing.

She also argued there was a second motion driving Blakey into the ground, which the Saints objected to.

“To release the arm was quite a remarkable performance and applying the education that is received in relation to making this sort of tackle,” Rush said for the Saints.

Rush also made the bold suggestion Butler’s clean record made for “exceptional and compelling circumstances” which mean they should overturn the charge even if they find the tackle was dangerous.

Simply, Rush put it, “there was nothing else that could’ve been done by this player.”

Flynn said the comparison to Laird tackle was not applicable given “all the momentum is this tackle is coming from Butler.”

In the Tribunal’s findings, Jeff Gleeson said: “We find that given the speed at which Butler was traveling and the angle from which he approached the tackle, it was inevitable that he would tackle Blakey to the ground.

“The question is how did he execute the tackle? Was the method reasonable in all the circumstances? We’re not persuaded that this was a two-action tackle.

“We consider that Butler did not drive Blakey into the ground with his legs. We note he had dropped to the side and had no real power from the commencement of the tackle.

“We also find that he did not drive Blakey to the ground with his arms. Butler fell to the ground with Blakey as a result of the momentum of the tackle.

“Butler released Blakey’s defensive arm towards the end of the tackling motion.

“Butler made a conscious decision to release Blakey’s arm so that he might brace for impact.

The question is not whether he released it in time for it to be effective - thought we find that it did slightly help Blakey to brace for contact - the question is whether he did so as early as he reasonably could.

“We find that he did.

“Releasing an arm or not pinning an arm will not always be enough to avoid breaching the duty of care.

“Here, the fact that the tackled player will be brought to ground was inevitable and unavoidable was an important consideration. We find that this was not a careless act and the charge is dismissed.”

[Trev from the Bush]

Sanity prevails.

[casey scorp]

Umpire - wrong
MRO - wrong
Tribunal - correct

Butler earned a free kick, and was not only denied but penalized. He should be able to take his free kick as a carryover to commence our next game

[saynta]

Great result, now I hope Sicily gets off also

Why?

[cwrcyn]

Sicily is a foul-mouthed, aggravating, dirty filth bag

Just sayin'

[saynta]

Sicily is a foul-mouthed, aggravating, dirty filth bag

Just sayin'

I have a friend who sits on the VFL tribunal. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

[cwrcyn]

No surprised

[saynta]

Butler's clearance is some good news for a change.

[Sainter_Dad]

Sicily is a foul-mouthed, aggravating, dirty filth bag

Just sayin'

I have a friend who sits on the VFL tribunal. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

I have a friend who is just a regular bloke. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

[saynta]

Sicily is a foul-mouthed, aggravating, dirty filth bag

Just sayin'

I have a friend who sits on the VFL tribunal. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

I have a friend who is just a regular bloke. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

[Sainter_Dad]

Sicily is a foul-mouthed, aggravating, dirty filth bag

Just sayin'

I have a friend who sits on the VFL tribunal. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

I have a friend who is just a regular bloke. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

Really Saynta with the rolly eyes???

I thought the /s was implied.

[saynta]

Sicily is a foul-mouthed, aggravating, dirty filth bag

Just sayin'

I have a friend who sits on the VFL tribunal. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

I have a friend who is just a regular bloke. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

Really Saynta with the rolly eyes???

I thought the /s was implied.

I was tossing up between the wink and the rolly eyes but the reasons behind your post were unknown to me. Guess the rolly eyes won out .

Don't know what /s means either.

[perfectionist]

Mansell got three weeks, which is a bit surprising. But it reinforces that it's not the act but the outcome.

[Teflon]

Daisy Pearce should get a week for stupidity

[meher baba]

The transcript of the Butler hearing illustrates a fundamental problem with the way AFL is umpired at the moment.

If the AFL is so focused on avoiding players having their arms pinned in tackles, then umps should start calling a tackle once the player is held and no longer allow them to stand in it for 10 seconds looking for someone to pass it to, drop the ball or even hand it to a team mate.

Tackling was a terrific part of our game until a few seasons back. Now it’s a muddle.

[Sainter_Dad]

Sicily is a foul-mouthed, aggravating, dirty filth bag

Just sayin'

I have a friend who sits on the VFL tribunal. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

I have a friend who is just a regular bloke. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

Really Saynta with the rolly eyes???

I thought the /s was implied.

I was tossing up between the wink and the rolly eyes but the reasons behind your post were unknown to me. Guess the rolly eyes won out .

Don't know what /s means either.

/s = sarcasm

As in - I know a bloke, who knows a bloke, who heard at the pub that ......

[Sainter_Dad]

Mansell got three weeks, which is a bit surprising. But it reinforces that it's not the act but the outcome.

Make no mistake - if Blakey was ruled out from MIA Butler's ban would not have been overturned.

[Sainter_Dad]

The transcript of the Butler hearing illustrates a fundamental problem with the way AFL is umpired at the moment.

If the AFL is so focused on avoiding players having their arms pinned in tackles, then umps should start calling a tackle once the player is held and no longer allow them to stand in it for 10 seconds looking for someone to pass it to, drop the ball or even hand it to a team mate.

Tackling was a terrific part of our game until a few seasons back. Now it’s a muddle.

First a tackle was rewarded if the player did not dispose of the ball correctly
Then players started 'taking' the tackle but raising their arms and then waiting for a 'good' alternative and handballing
We then see pinning the arms - but yet the umpires wait to see if the ball is 'knocked clear in the tackle'.
If you want to stop a player disposing of the ball you now need to:

- Pin the arms
- Hold them
- Dump them to the ground.

The whistle should be blown at the 2nd action - if the player has 'prior' ie had taken a few steps, already evaded one tackle, a player should just need to grab him and pin the arms - instant whistle - no dumping, no risk of injury.

Pay the f@rken frees that are there instead of making up sh!t like oops he touched my shoulder as he ran past.

[Ghost Like]

The transcript of the Butler hearing illustrates a fundamental problem with the way AFL is umpired at the moment.

If the AFL is so focused on avoiding players having their arms pinned in tackles, then umps should start calling a tackle once the player is held and no longer allow them to stand in it for 10 seconds looking for someone to pass it to, drop the ball or even hand it to a team mate.

Tackling was a terrific part of our game until a few seasons back. Now it’s a muddle.

The only true solution is to get rid of prior opportunity. Players then will take that split second to knock the ball on or grab it to attempt a legitimate disposal.

This is as fair as a player having the ball held under him by the opposition and then getting pinned for HTB.

Players adapt and they adapt quickly. As we have seen though they cannot adapt to the current tackling / bump crack down, both intrinsic parts of the game. Players do not get dumped if they don't have the ball.

Too much grey in the rules of our game. Umpiires being asked to read minds and now brain surgeons, determining on the spot what is a dangerous tackle. In Butler's case, missing the correct decision & guessing Blakey had been harmed (nearly harmed) by how it looked & not how it was.

[CQ SAINT]

Blakey flopped and didn't try to defend or protect himself.
That is what the evidence shows.
You need to go through the process.
Pin the player, don't sling and release as he hits the ground. Simple really. Butler is elite at this s***.

[The Fireman]

common sense prevailed .. a guilty verdict would have caused massive ramifications .

[Ghost Like]

common sense prevailed .. a guilty verdict would have caused massive ramifications .

C'mon Firey, set the example. You're better than this. Please use a capital.

Otherwise I 100% agree with your post.

[saynta]

Sicily is a foul-mouthed, aggravating, dirty filth bag

Just sayin'

I have a friend who sits on the VFL tribunal. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

I have a friend who is just a regular bloke. He has a bit to say about Sicily, and none of it is complimentary.

Really Saynta with the rolly eyes???

I thought the /s was implied.

I was tossing up between the wink and the rolly eyes but the reasons behind your post were unknown to me. Guess the rolly eyes won out .

Don't know what /s means either.

/s = sarcasm

As in - I know a bloke, who knows a bloke, who heard at the pub that ......