A Tribunal review...

[Dis Believer]

your implication is that justice is a goal of the AFL?

the AFL is about revenue and markets, it hasn't been about justice for sometime.

Sorry to disagree here Dan, but didn't the AFL overturn the result of a drawn game and award it to Freo, despite no such precedent, and in direct contravention of their own rules (a game ends when the umpire hears the siren and signals the end of the game)?

Their reasoning and justification as I recall was to ensure that "natural justice" was seen to be the outcome!

Bit like being equal really, it's just that some teams are more equal than others!

[Oh When the Saints]

Yipper - surely our Counsel should have stated what you stated in his submissions?

Who is the turkey who represents us? We seem to have real trouble with getting half decent counsel.

Phillip Priest QC.

Was only retained by the Saints earlier this year, and has only represented us in one case (the Baker one earlier in the year).

Has an outstanding record as a criminal silk, and is regarded as one of the better criminal and tribunal defence barristers in Victoria.

Has had nothing to do with the club's previous record at the tribunal.

[Mr X from the West]

OWTS - didn't mean to cast dispersions, I'm sure Mr Priest is a fine barrister; must be difficult for anyone appearing with a wig in the kangaroo court that masquerades as the AFL tribunal.

[GRAMophone]

Can anyone enlighten me?? Do the three past players making up the tribunal acutally have adequate backgrounds/analytical skills to get their heads around the intricacies of a complex case like this. Are they really qualified to do this type of stuff? Is there some sort of legal expertise at all in the tribunal composition??