Why the AFL's case against Toby Greene is set to fall apart

Omg don’t ever umpire pls

The case did not fall apart, did it, justice was done. It mattered not what the detailed charge was, ‘ serious misconduct’ was absolutely enough. Enough because video imaging is so good and telling today. Why do you think the police appeal to the public in criminal cases to get video material. They get it because they can 1 too closely examine it and 2. because it the high majority of cases, it is damning. Your comments are a case of feeding a poor red herring into the mix, and a miscalculated assessment on what the core evidence demonstrated to us all

Conflation overload.

But the name Toby Greene appears way too often in these type of discussions. Some hard players go a whole career hard without attracting anywhere near the controversy.

Hard to see Giants accepting decision based on available evidence Have to think an appeal is coming

As below the charge is contact to the eyes

So above the neck is intentional eye gouging?

"And 3rd person in on a downed player. " No criticism of your position but you have just described a situation which occurs many times in every single game of footy where the ball goes to ground & is contested by multiple players who invariably fall on top of each other as they attack the ball. Not every such contest results in a hands contacting faces but I'm willing to wager that there are many that result in scuffed noses, banged jaws, foreheads, ears etc. etc. Cowardly or just hard at the footy & play on?

As I mentioned the eye is above the neck. The ruling intention is that the head is sacrosanct!

Still above the neck is out of bounds. And correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think there is any qualifiers on that rule. Above the neck is above the neck.

Anywhere near the eye anything slightly more specific an inch, a mile? What if the ball is near the eye?

"The Tribunal chairman, David Jones, says Greene's past record is "totally irrelevant" in relation to this case." Keeping in mind that last week resulted in the following: " TOBY Greene is free to take part in Greater Western Sydney's semi-final clash against Brisbane this weekend, with the Giants superstar fined $7500 for serious misconduct following his scuffle with Western Bulldogs midfielder Marcus Bontempelli."

Absolutely! But Toby isn't your son & you're not teaching him the morals of life you'd like him to have & even if you were he'd be well within his rights to think "well there's another set of rules that apply to everyone..." so in the end it's a moot point. We can debate all day about it & for one I agree, keep your hands away from another players face & everyone wins. But I don't believe Greene is eye-gouging anyone, ever & under the current rules he is unlikely to be in violation by way of his actions over the weekend.

Don't go ANYWHERE NEAR THE EYE and you won't get accused. Besides eyes are above the neck....unless you are Picasso!

I can go with he wasn't eye gouging, per se, but having hands in the face can lead to it. And whether anyone likes it or not Greene has an idiosyncratic style of play that opens himself to being accused of being a grub. And that is hard to argue against. If my son played this way I'd be up like a rat up a drainpipe.

Don, I'd happily see Dustin Martin - or anyone - suspended for it. Keep away from the face.

I don't think hands in the face is OK at all, but the suggestion that Greene is eye-gouging is IMO untrue. The rules stand as such that contact with the face etc has to be "Making Unreasonable or Unnecessary Contact to the Eye Region" to be deemed a violation & from the dialogue thus far at the AFL tribunal it seems the ball was locked up under Neale's head but still contestable, Greene tried to lock it in to gain a free for holding & may/or may not have impacted Neale's nose to which Neale has already testified was not of enough force to make him leave the ground or miss any play at all etc etc (I'm para-phrasing slightly there). Should we avoid all contact between hand & eyes/face where feasibly possible? Absolutely. Is that the wording o the rules currently? Seems not.

Interesting that the AFL have appointed 2 former Collingwood players to the tribunal tonight. Razor Ray will be umpiring Collingwood on the weekend too so the AFL get their blockbuster grand final if Richmond make it

Don’t you have to touch an eye to cause an injury

Now Greene has admitted he is a rogue bull elephant just stomping his way through highly skilled players regardless of affiliation in order to attack the eyes/ball (delete non-applicable).... Fresh from the AFL website's live coverage of the tribunal: "Pane puts it to Greene that he never sees his arm extend for the football. Greene replies: "I think it does ... and I think I actually hit Josh Kelly's face on the way down."