TOPIC:

Fyfe had an alternative, Merrett didn't. Merrett had eyes on the ball Fyfe didn't.

In a court of law Fyfe would win hands down. Only have to show the Franklin bump and countless others in comparison and Merrits hit to the head was no less accidental head high contact than Fyfe's. Merritt knew from the angle he came in he was going to make head high contact. Accidental head high contact does not and should not deem a player to have been "unfair". It was clear Fyfe's intention was not to make head high contact.

Where have you been. You are correct.

thefalconstrike wrote: Fyfe had an alternative, Merrett didn't. Merrett had eyes on the ball Fyfe didn't.

Merrett is a dirty prick, always has been, and I have no doubt whatsoever that he deliberately "accidentally" connected with his head.

And what about that Ziebell incident a couple of years back where he had nothing but eyes for the ball but because he made head contact and knocked the player out (might have been from Carlton, cant quite remember) he got 4 weeks?

yolo swaggins wrote:

thefalconstrike wrote: Fyfe had an alternative, Merrett didn't. Merrett had eyes on the ball Fyfe didn't.

Merrett is a dirty prick, always has been, and I have no doubt whatsoever that he deliberately "accidentally" connected with his head.

And what about that Ziebell incident a couple of years back where he had nothing but eyes for the ball but because he made head contact and knocked the player out (might have been from Carlton, cant quite remember) he got 4 weeks?

+1

The point is not whether Fyfe should have been suspended, it is whether there were others who also should have been suspended.

And they got it right again (against Hawks)

Leather Stops wrote: And they got it right again (against Hawks)

Kangaroo Court decision with same integrity and quality. An absolute disgusting and disgraceful decision. Completely and unambiguously railroaded. Done, unequivocally, to attempt to remove the embarassment which may have occurred at the end of next month.

The MRP has lost the last shred of credibility.

Fyfe should have kneed Lewis in the head. That is legal..... apparently! How come Puopolo's knee to the head of Suttcliffe wasn't cited? And since Fyfe wasn't offered a reduction for an early plea doesn't that mean he would not cop any further penalty if he appeals and fails?

swan42 wrote:

Leather Stops wrote: And they got it right again (against Hawks)

Kangaroo Court decision with same integrity and quality. An absolute disgusting and disgraceful decision. Completely and unambiguously railroaded. Done, unequivocally, to attempt to remove the embarassment which may have occurred at the end of next month.

The MRP has lost the last shred of credibility.

For Gods sake swannie, give it a rest. ANOTHER anti dockers conspiracy theory. Something tells me that if it had been an Eagles, Magpie or some other team, it would have been justice in your eyes.