TOPIC:

swan42 wrote: 8 matches: not enough.

Yep, should have put on the black cap, and then taken him straight out the back to be hanged.

Eages advocate mentioned the starting point is 3 weeks.

You edited that pretty quickly.

jackspratt wrote:

swan42 wrote: 8 matches: not enough.

Yep, should have put on the black cap, and then taken him straight out the back to be hanged.

Eages advocate mentioned the starting point is 3 weeks.

You edited that pretty quickly.

I edited it because on AFL360 the initial report was clarified afterwards. Hence, the editing.

I don't believe in capital punishment.

What I will say is that notwithstanding what he did Andrew Gaff has shown far more class than Nisbett.

It would have looked better for him if they had not asked for only three weeks.

ArkRoyal wrote: It would have looked better for him if they had not asked for only three weeks.

Supposedly they didn't specifically ask for 3 weeks; but if that wasn't am ambit bid why mention it?

swan42 wrote:

jackspratt wrote:

swan42 wrote: 8 matches: not enough.

Yep, should have put on the black cap, and then taken him straight out the back to be hanged.

Eages advocate mentioned the starting point is 3 weeks.

You edited that pretty quickly.

I edited it because on AFL360 the initial report was clarified afterwards. Hence, the editing.

I don't believe in capital punishment.

What I will say is that notwithstanding what he did Andrew Gaff has shown far more class than Nisbett.

Andrew Gaff has shown a lot more class than a lot of people on this forum.
I hope that maybe we can now move on to some more sensible discussion.

It is a rotten bit of luck — and personally I am absolutely convinced he meant to give him a good whack in the chest.

8 weeks is a fair penalty for me. Hopefully Brayshaw manages to make a full recovery and suffers no long term complications and I hope Gaff can put it behind him and I wish him all the best for the rest of his career.

8 weeks , a fair result and pretty much what I expected.

8 is fair for mine, as there will be a few finals in that too and quite possibly a Grand Final.

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

BC wrote: That's a bloody shame....I feel really sorry for the young fella and hope that type of medical evidence is tabled at the tribunal this afternoon as the decision makers need to hear it.

From Tribunal Rules:
E)
INJURY
The MRP and the Tribunal can inquire and receive information as to the nature
and extent of any injury suffered by a Player in relation to a Reportable Offence
�
The nature and extent of injury may be a relevant factor in determining the level
of Impact, Contact and in some instances, the nature of the Conduct
� Clubs must
provide a medical report within three hours of a request to do so
�

Interesting the last point. I would think that it could be only done with the explicit permission of the player who was injured. Patient confidentiality is not at the beck and call of the AFL.

You cant be a registered player unless you agree to abide by the AFL Tribunal rules and in the same way a clyb must also agree to abide by the AFL Tribunal rules.

And in this case the club docker gave evidence and provided all the medical reports, including the fact that the victims teeth are unlikely to re root , meaning false teeth in future and that they were pushed back 2 cm by the blow.