Lynch !! | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Lynch !!

“It was raised on the broadcast” Hah hah hah hah…seriously. “It was raised on the broadcast.” Good grief.

Idiot would have been better off saying Marge from Maidstone rang in and raised that there was an incident in the first quarter.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 16 users
If there is a 3 week difference in opinion between Christian and the Tribunal, wouldn't this makes Christians position untenable? Same with the McKay incident.
Too many cobwebs on him. Get someone with brains and not ex-AFL player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Definitely according to the tribunal, no problems there.
There is no way this prosecution should have succeeded, if players are still entitled to go all out to take possession.
A successful prosecution up held on appeal, would have meant the game has evolved to a game which doesn’t allow for full flight physical contact in any circumstances with the penalty, (including possible suspension), to be imposed on the player of two involved in the resulting collision who suffered the least physical damage.
Disaster averted!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Interesting decision.

Keath was concussed so it is a question over whether it should have been cited. But the issue there is whether there were grounds to cite this. Clearly rough conduct was the only charge they could have brought, and, given it was Keath who initiated the contact, it was very very tenuous.

When we compare to the Vlastuin incident, that was a much clearer case to be cited. As I also said back then, it would be up to the tribunal to decide whether it was careless or not and proceed from there. The fact the Dangerfield case wasn't sent to the tribunal, when this case was, is a testament to the ridiculous inconsistencies in the way they treat these incidents.

There are clear differences here between the 2 incidents. Dangerfield did not take evasive action, he raised his elbow. Lynch was taking evasive action. In the Vlastuin incident both players were going for the ball, in this case Keath clearly wasn't. I think Dangerfield had more of a case to answer, whether he would have been able to answer that case we will never know. One thing is for certain, there were more grounds to cite Dangerfield's hit on Vlastuin than there were to cite Lynch's collision with Keath.

A few things come out of this.

Firstly, the football media need to take a very long hard look at themselves. The tribunal decides guilt, players are not deemed to be guilty just because they have been sent to the tribunal. The trial by media has to stop, it's a f**cken circus.

The AFL need to sort out what they will and won't send to the tribunal. They need to grow a backbone and consistently apply their own rules. If they did this more consistently, and more cases went to the tribunal, where some charges are upheld and other charges dismissed, it would make this process far better.

I suspect there may have been some legal advice taken here too. If this went to court, for example Keath later tries to sue the AFL or Footscray over this incident, I suspect he would lose. He would lose because he initiated the contact. There was simply no reason for Keath to be running towards that marking contest, unless he wanted to block Lynch. So, Keath's actions led to the collision, and his actions were in contravention of the rules of the game, therefore, it was his fault. I hope he is ok but it was his actions which led to the collision.

I have a tiny bit more faith in the tribunal and hopefully this can be a catalyst for at least parts of the AFL to stop pandering to the whims of the powers that be and the f**ckwits in the football media.

I have no faith the football media will change their spots, they are just after more clicks, we all need to stop going anywhere near them. Cancel Foxtel, don't listen to SEN, don't watch their idiotic shows. If they want us to watch their shows they need to get a hell of a lot better at their jobs, in fact, it would be even better if most of them just resigned and made way for some journos who actually deserve the name journalist.

DS
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 29 users
So your position is when Hardwick was asked that question he legitimately had no idea what incident they were referring to? You're focussing on the content of what he said which I have no issue with.

Even if I didn't know that coaches are briefed by the media team before they walk into a post game press conference as to what the media might ask about the game, I'd still be happy to wager as many dollars as you like that you were wrong.

For one, they are sitting in a box with a feed of the game coming through and the incident was mentioned and replayed several times. The chances no-one mentioned it in the box are zero.

Secondly a key player in the opposition was ruled out of the game. That creates all sorts of interest in the opposition box, and they will have been immediately looking at what the Bulldogs would do to cover him and looking to predict whether the player would be back or not.

Having been in that environment many times and heard the discussions over the radio in those situations, there is no chance at all he wasn't aware of exactly what happened.
I’m not saying he didn’t know there was an incident and that A.K was ruled out.
I’m saying he had no idea of a report, because there wasn’t one.
So when some idiot asks a stupid question about Lynch being in trouble because a commentator said he should be, Hardwick had to clearly explain to him in a way that said moron could understand, that he has an obligation to deal in facts not hypotheticals.
And every single week at least one coach has a go at stupid reporters with mind numbingly moronic questions but you choose to lambast your own coach for a very mild exchange.
It’s fair to wonder what your agenda actually is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users
Gil's not far away from pulling the plug so when he does can just take Christian with him. As an aside how long before Clarko & Fagan's racism investigation is resolved. . The media ain't saying anything so wonder if they have been gagged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Gil's not far away from pulling the plug so when he does can just take Christian with him. As an aside how long before Clarko & Fagan's racism investigation is resolved. . The media ain't saying anything so wonder if they have been gagged.
Media only report what AFL allows
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Interesting decision.

Keath was concussed so it is a question over whether it should have been cited. But the issue there is whether there were grounds to cite this. Clearly rough conduct was the only charge they could have brought, and, given it was Keath who initiated the contact, it was very very tenuous.

When we compare to the Vlastuin incident, that was a much clearer case to be cited. As I also said back then, it would be up to the tribunal to decide whether it was careless or not and proceed from there. The fact the Dangerfield case wasn't sent to the tribunal, when this case was, is a testament to the ridiculous inconsistencies in the way they treat these incidents.

There are clear differences here between the 2 incidents. Dangerfield did not take evasive action, he raised his elbow. Lynch was taking evasive action. In the Vlastuin incident both players were going for the ball, in this case Keath clearly wasn't. I think Dangerfield had more of a case to answer, whether he would have been able to answer that case we will never know. One thing is for certain, there were more grounds to cite Dangerfield's hit on Vlastuin than there were to cite Lynch's collision with Keath.

A few things come out of this.

Firstly, the football media need to take a very long hard look at themselves. The tribunal decides guilt, players are not deemed to be guilty just because they have been sent to the tribunal. The trial by media has to stop, it's a f**cken circus.

The AFL need to sort out what they will and won't send to the tribunal. They need to grow a backbone and consistently apply their own rules. If they did this more consistently, and more cases went to the tribunal, where some charges are upheld and other charges dismissed, it would make this process far better.

I suspect there may have been some legal advice taken here too. If this went to court, for example Keath later tries to sue the AFL or Footscray over this incident, I suspect he would lose. He would lose because he initiated the contact. There was simply no reason for Keath to be running towards that marking contest, unless he wanted to block Lynch. So, Keath's actions led to the collision, and his actions were in contravention of the rules of the game, therefore, it was his fault. I hope he is ok but it was his actions which led to the collision.

I have a tiny bit more faith in the tribunal and hopefully this can be a catalyst for at least parts of the AFL to stop pandering to the whims of the powers that be and the f**ckwits in the football media.

I have no faith the football media will change their spots, they are just after more clicks, we all need to stop going anywhere near them. Cancel Foxtel, don't listen to SEN, don't watch their idiotic shows. If they want us to watch their shows they need to get a hell of a lot better at their jobs, in fact, it would be even better if most of them just resigned and made way for some journos who actually deserve the name journalist.

DS
Great post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
It takes a big man to admit he was wrong TSR

Hardwick wasn’t playing games.
He was right to question what they were talking about.
There was no report. There was no free kick awarded. There was no remonstration by any opposition players.
There was only trial by media which he wouldn’t have been privy to as he was probably preoccupied coaching a game of football.
It’s only you who surmises that he would have been pre briefed about a potential post game report.
And in the end, he was proven correct. He objected to the inference that it was reportable and rebuked the incident as a tough marking contest and the tribunal concurred when they delivered a verdict of nothing to see here.
It’s only you, Cornes, Wheatley and the Geelong membership base left to ponder where you went so wrong.
I think it takes a big man to admit when they are wrrrr....wrroowoo.....wrooonnooo....woowoowoorrrroonnn...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
At least you say it to my face unlike all the pathetic cowards having anonymous cheap shots on the other pages. My personal favourite is the poster who called Dustin Martin a drug user questioning my loyalty.

He's done well to get off, thought it was a week live, 2 weeks when I saw it again. Just a pity he's missing three months regardless.

What I said wasn't a cheap shot, I just thought you were wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Interesting decision.

Keath was concussed so it is a question over whether it should have been cited. But the issue there is whether there were grounds to cite this. Clearly rough conduct was the only charge they could have brought, and, given it was Keath who initiated the contact, it was very very tenuous.

When we compare to the Vlastuin incident, that was a much clearer case to be cited. As I also said back then, it would be up to the tribunal to decide whether it was careless or not and proceed from there. The fact the Dangerfield case wasn't sent to the tribunal, when this case was, is a testament to the ridiculous inconsistencies in the way they treat these incidents.

There are clear differences here between the 2 incidents. Dangerfield did not take evasive action, he raised his elbow. Lynch was taking evasive action. In the Vlastuin incident both players were going for the ball, in this case Keath clearly wasn't. I think Dangerfield had more of a case to answer, whether he would have been able to answer that case we will never know. One thing is for certain, there were more grounds to cite Dangerfield's hit on Vlastuin than there were to cite Lynch's collision with Keath.

A few things come out of this.

Firstly, the football media need to take a very long hard look at themselves. The tribunal decides guilt, players are not deemed to be guilty just because they have been sent to the tribunal. The trial by media has to stop, it's a f**cken circus.

The AFL need to sort out what they will and won't send to the tribunal. They need to grow a backbone and consistently apply their own rules. If they did this more consistently, and more cases went to the tribunal, where some charges are upheld and other charges dismissed, it would make this process far better.

I suspect there may have been some legal advice taken here too. If this went to court, for example Keath later tries to sue the AFL or Footscray over this incident, I suspect he would lose. He would lose because he initiated the contact. There was simply no reason for Keath to be running towards that marking contest, unless he wanted to block Lynch. So, Keath's actions led to the collision, and his actions were in contravention of the rules of the game, therefore, it was his fault. I hope he is ok but it was his actions which led to the collision.

I have a tiny bit more faith in the tribunal and hopefully this can be a catalyst for at least parts of the AFL to stop pandering to the whims of the powers that be and the f**ckwits in the football media.

I have no faith the football media will change their spots, they are just after more clicks, we all need to stop going anywhere near them. Cancel Foxtel, don't listen to SEN, don't watch their idiotic shows. If they want us to watch their shows they need to get a hell of a lot better at their jobs, in fact, it would be even better if most of them just resigned and made way for some journos who actually deserve the name journalist.

DS
Let me simplify for ya.
The MRO literally tunes in to SEN and FOX to work out what they should do. They actually have no fkn idea! Sometimes, sooometimes they think they've read the tea leaves or the room or the zeitgeist and think theyve gotten out ahead of the opinion makers. Like in this case. But they're so stupid they effed it up again. This is a MULTI ZILLION $ operation we are talking about. Lolz.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 5 users
Just wait until someone knees someone in the head and concusses them while taking a specky. That's the elephant in the room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
At least you say it to my face unlike all the pathetic cowards having anonymous cheap shots on the other pages. My personal favourite is the poster who called Dustin Martin a drug user questioning my loyalty.

He's done well to get off, thought it was a week live, 2 weeks when I saw it again. Just a pity he's missing three months regardless.
You are entitled to your view TBR, just think you are wrong on this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
6.49am
Still nothing on Sen1116 site.
McKay is there but little Lynchy has yet to receive his apology.
Cowards
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users