<blockquote>Quote from fidelsfinger on July 3, 2012, 00:11 I understand what you're saying, have watched the replays from both incidents a dozen times each, my issue is with the intent, something every court in the nation takes into consideration. Look at Guerra, where is he looking?, not at Eddie, but at the ball, Eddie wasn't even in his line of sight when contact was made, he had eyes only for the ball. I agree potential for serious injury was greater with the Guerra incident, but there was no intent to cause harm. Even though the Hunt incident had lesser potential for injury, it was a blatant attempt to injure. In a court of law, &/or morally, If defendant "A" with determination, chases down a pedestrian, runs him over & only breaks his arm, & defendant "B" accidently hits a pedestrian, breaking both arms and a leg, despite the end result, taking into account intent, who has committed the more heinous act?</blockquote> I've had a problem with the intent for a while as well. To me that should be the first and major thing they look at in the MRP. Especially with things like striking charges. There is no other reason to throw a punch or elbow but to hurt someone and they should be judged very harshly from the start. I understand that Guerra should be in trouble for what he did but I can't understand how this is viewed as worse than many of the deliberate striking charges we see that get nothing.
I wish all of you guys could have heard 5AA last night. It was comedy at it's finest with the all the Crows supporters calling up to whinge about Walker's suspension. And to top it off, Walker's grandma from Broken Hill calls into the show to stick up for her grandson, lol. Things got even better when Robbo on AFL360 said that Stephen Rowe was an imbercile. He is 100% correct.