TOPIC: Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP

guy smiley Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #43

guy smiley
Login to reply,
rogerrocks, slammen said You Beaut

Drubbing Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #44

Drubbing
Which fools do you pity in this particular jibber jabber?

So many to choose from...
Login to reply,

rogerrocks Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #45

rogerrocks
So are there any definitions of "careless", "reckless" and "intentional"? Or are we expected to rely on the dictionary definitions?

Say you are going through a crowd of people. You accidentally walk into someone because you are texting. This seems careless to me. You did not take adequate steps to ensure it did not happen. You did not want it to happen and it didn't have to happen, but it did.

But if you run through the crowd at speed, dodging this way and that, hoping that there will always be a clear path, and all of a sudden there is nowhere to go and you run into someone - that seems reckless. There was always a chance it would happen, you could reasonably have expected it to happen, and sure enough it did.

Lastly, if you just decide to run into someone, and you do it - that seems intentional. It was what you wanted to happen, and it did.

So Buddy's hit was intentional. He did not suddenly find there was no way to avoid a collision. Rather, he suddenly decided that faced with the option of chasing the ball or laying a bump, he'd lay a bump.
Login to reply,
lavo, The_Yeti, DazzElle, slammen, Raglan Matt said You Beaut

Fre_DOh Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #46

Fre_DOh
Roger, the 'reckless' grading no longer applies.

'Intentional' and 'careless' are defined at point 4.2 of the AFL tribunal handbook (page 9).

www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/A...5TribunalBooklet.pdf
Login to reply,

shane Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #47

shane
The bump was intentional but the resulting rough conduct was careless. His intent was to deliver a fair bump, not to give away a free kick.
Login to reply,

Drubbing Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #48

Drubbing
WE can't know his actual intention. His intention could have been to just clean him up. Which he achieved.

If we go around guessing what players are thinking, and believing what they say to the MRP, next thing you know a bloke will get pinged for 300 invisible pinches
Login to reply,
Raglan Matt said You Beaut

CrankyB Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #49

CrankyB
Leaked MRP sentencing spreadsheet

Login to reply,
zorro, purple kit, Dockerplus, rogerrocks, slammen, Corporal Agarn said You Beaut

rogerrocks Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #50

rogerrocks
But I think you'll find Shane, that if you elect to bump, the onus is on you not to make contact to the head. So that makes it intentional?
Login to reply,
Raglan Matt said You Beaut

shane Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #51

shane
Careless conduct
A Player’s conduct will be regarded as Careless where his conduct is not intentional, but constitutes a breach of the duty of care owed by the Player to all other Players. Each Player owes a duty of care to all other Players, Umpires and other persons (as applicable) not to engage in conduct which will constitute a Reportable Offence being committed against that other Player, Umpire or other person (as applicable). In order to constitute such a breach of that duty of care, the conduct must be such that a reasonable Player would not regard it as prudent in all the circumstances. Further, a Player will be careless if they breach of their duty to take reasonable care to avoid acts which can be reasonably foreseen to result in a Reportable Offence.

An example of careless conduct would be where a Player collides with another player who has taken a mark and where contact occurs just after the mark has been taken. The offending Player has a duty of care to avoid any contact which would constitute a Reportable Offence by slowing his momentum as much as he reasonably can and a failure to do so constitutes carelessness.


Intentional conduct
A Player intentionally commits a Classifiable Offence if the Player engages in the conduct constituting the Reportable Offence with the intention of committing that offence. An intention is a state of mind. Intention may be formed on the spur of the moment. The issue is whether it existed at the time at which the Player engaged in the conduct.

Whether or not a Player intentionally commits a Reportable Offence depends upon the state of mind of the Player when he does the act with which he is charged. What the Player did is often the best evidence of the purpose he had in mind. In some cases, the evidence that the act provides may be so strong as to compel an inference of what his intent was, no matter what he may say about it afterwards. If the immediate consequence of an act is obvious and inevitable, the deliberate doing of the act carries with it evidence of an intention to produce the consequence. For example, a strike will be regarded as Intentional where a Player delivers a blow to an opponent with the intention of striking him.The state of a Player’s mind is an objective fact and has to be proved in the same way as other objective facts. The whole of the relevant evidence has to be considered. If the matter is heard by the Tribunal, the Tribunal Jury will weigh the evidence of the Player as to what his intentions were along with whatever inference as to his intentions can be drawn from his conduct or other relevant facts. The Player may or may not be believed by the Tribunal Jury. Notwithstanding what the Player says, the Tribunal Jury may be able to conclude from the whole of the evidence that he intentionally committed the act constituting the Reportable Offence.
Login to reply,

The_Yeti Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #52

The_Yeti
So, according to that definition of careless, the bulldog who took out Pav's head TWO paces after Pav completed the mark should have been cited by the MRP. Careless, high, medium impact (at least) but that never happened.

All you've done Shane is demonstrate that the rules are not interpreted according to standard English meanings. Now if you can translate those rules into standard English we might be able to see what your argument is.

Right now, it looks to me that as far as Fremantle heads are concerned, its open season and Sydney players are protected species.

But thats just going by demonstrated behaviour not the rules.

Edit:

Going by those rules again, I'd still classify Franklin's conduct as intentional.
Egurls Suck!
Login to reply,

shane Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #53

shane
So you must think Fyfe got off lightly.
Login to reply,

The_Yeti Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #54

The_Yeti
No, I think he got what the 'rules' dictated he should have.

I also think that the rule that places the entire responsibility without any flexibility on the player that chooses to bump is utterly ridiculous. Particularly when that rule that has no flexibility is suddenly interpreted incredibly flexibly when it suits the AFL.
Egurls Suck!
Login to reply,
rogerrocks said You Beaut

shane Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #55

shane
The only difference can be that you think Franklin decided that he wanted to injure someone with an intentional head high bump, cleverly disguised as secondary contact, knowingly giving away a free kick rather than try and kick a goal. Yet he is so incompetent that he couldn't even manage to inflict a mild concussion on someone 22kg lighter and half a foot shorter than him.
Login to reply,

The_Yeti Franklin & Tippett 1 Week MRP 4 years 4 months ago #56

The_Yeti
No. Not at all.

What I saw was Franklin choose to bump, make no effort to go low, hit his opponent high and raise his shoulder higher in the act of bumping. To me, its very hard to justify classifying that as careless.

Its not even close to Fyfe's situation where it wasn't a shoulder to the head but an accidental head to head clash.

Paint it any way you like but Franklin's conduct was significantly worse than either Fyfe's or Ballantyne's and should have been classified that way.
Egurls Suck!
Login to reply,
Placekick, rogerrocks, jezzaargh, Macca4, DazzElle, Duges66 said You Beaut