Patrick Cripps

Carlton's finals hopes have received a huge boost after captain Patrick Cripps had his two-match suspension overturned at the AFL Tribunal Appeals Board.

"A fair examination of the whole of the evidence could not support clear satisfaction that the player was doing something other than an incident where both players had eyes for the ball, and both players contested the ball, as found by the Tribunal. Cripps was unsuccessful in overturning a rough conduct charge at the AFL Tribunal on Tuesday night, and his hearing at the Appeals Board on Thursday night loomed as his final hope of having his two-match suspension squashed. Christopher Townshend QC, acting for Cripps, argued that there was a "denial of natural justice" because AFL Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson failed to give directions to the jury on Tuesday night before they retired to consider their verdict.

Welcome to the live blog of Patrick Cripps' Appeals Board hearing on Thursday night, August 11.

"Alternatively, they accepted the evidence of player Cripps that he had his eye on the ball and that he was contesting the ball. "The purpose of the rule dealing with high bumps is to reduce. "One we've drawn attention to also is to prevent injuries to play as participating in a match. - Pane reads from the AFL's guidelines. And so unreasonable rule that requires reverse." But they were of the view that his action in turning his body was such that it constituted an action of a bumping nature, sufficient to constitute the charge of rough conduct." "A player in the bumping of an opponent, can simultaneously contest for the ball." "This is where the tribunal goes on a bit of a frolic in the journey," Townshend said. Townshend has concluded that Cripps' description of why he turned his body (protecting the drop zone) explained his actions, as opposed to the chair's finding he was positioned in a "classic bump" position. The error is sure to aid Cripps' case, but may not be enough to constitute that "An error of law has occurred." Townshend has also raised the lack of the term "bump" from both Cripps and AFL Counsel Nicholas Pane from Tuesday's transcript, prior to Gleeson's use of the word following their submissions. Following on from Cripps on Tuesday night, Townshend has raised the term "football act" in regards to bumping an opponent while contesting for the ball.

CARLTON captain Patrick Cripps is free to play against Melbourne on Saturday night after success at an ultra-marathon AFL Appeals Board hearing on Thursday night. After more than four-and-a-half hours of submissions and deliberation, it was the best ...

"The findings the Tribunal came up with behind closed doors is they came up with two things at once (that it was a contest and that he chose to bump). It should have required some directions," Townshend said. He said the notion of a bump was a thesis thrown up by Gleeson, never explored, and never directed to his jury members. "The findings were unreasonable and did not comply with the requirements of procedural fairness."

Carlton fans were kept well past their bed time on Thursday night thanks to a marathon hearing at the AFL Appeals Board.

The decision is a huge boost to the Blues, who are seventh on the ladder but face the Demons and the high flying Magpies in the last two rounds of the season. Blues defence: Cripps can’t be suspended if the appeal is still going come game time— Oliver Caffrey (@ollycaffrey) pic.twitter.com/aUPTuAMhiK August 11, 2022 Richard Hinds said: “I’ve tried turning the AFL Appeals Board off and on but there’s still no Cripps decision.”

Carlton's finals hopes have received a huge boost after captain Patrick Cripps had his two-match suspension overturned at a marathon AFL Tribunal Appeals ...

“His (Cripps’) evidence was that at all times he had his eye on the ball and that his intention was to take possession of the ball in an aerial contest, and that he did not see Mr Ah Chee also launch for the ball. “The Tribunal nevertheless found that the acts by Mr Cripps fell within the phrase in the bumping of an opponent. “We are unable to conclude that the evidence before the Tribunal was sufficient to form this view. “A fair examination of the whole of the evidence could not support clear satisfaction that the player was doing something other than an incident where both players had eyes for the ball and both players contested the ball, as found by the Tribunal. “The Tribunal (on Tuesday night) found that both players had eyes for the ball and that both players had contested the ball,” Kellam said. After Cripps was unsuccessful in overturning a rough conduct charge at the AFL Tribunal on Tuesday night his hearing at the Appeals Board on Thursday night loomed as his final hope of having the two-match suspension squashed.

Carlton's finals hopes have received a huge boost after captain Patrick Cripps had his two-match suspension overturned on Thursday night.

“The tribunal nevertheless found that the acts by Mr Cripps fell within the phrase in the bumping of an opponent. “The tribunal (on Tuesday night) found that both players had eyes for the ball and that both players had contested the ball,” Kellam said. “A fair examination of the whole of the evidence could not support clear satisfaction that the player was doing something other than an incident where both players had eyes for the ball and both players contested the ball, as found by the Tribunal.

Patrick Cripps has learned his fate for his hit on Brisbane's Callum Ah Chee at the AFL's appeals board.

Carlton, which won eight of its first 10 games of the season before tumbling down the ladder, must win at least one of its last two matches to qualify for its first finals campaign since 2013. Cripps' hit at the Gabba on Sunday concussed Ah Chee and saw him substituted out of the game, with the 24-year-old missing five training days and expected to be sidelined for one to two matches. After Carlton failed to have Cripps' two-game suspension for a high shot on Brisbane's Callum Ah Chee scrapped at the tribunal on Tuesday night, the Blues attempted to free the gun midfielder for their games against Melbourne and Collingwood at the appeals board.

Carlton's legal representative, Christopher Townshend QC, wasn't arguing for Cripps' bump, but the way it was assessed in the original Tribunal hearing, with ...

Maybe that’s something we’re all being asked to accept. “I don‘t think it was a bump. “I still think it was incidental, he knew he was going to make contact, but yet what we’re asking players to do is not to commit to winning that ball.

'Never been more lost': Cripps decision blasted as great demands AFL to explain 'mess'

“Put your head up, come and tell us what’s going on with our game, because right now it’s a mess. It’s just not the time to make these sorts of adjustments. “Can we just make the decision if we are actually protecting the head or we’re not. “I think the game has never been more lost than was it is now. I think we’re mixing and matching in the middle ground. In my opinion this is not as line ball as what others think,” the dual premiership Kangaroo said.

Patrick Cripps has won the appeal of his suspension and is free to play in Round 22 against Melbourne. The Carlton captain was originally handed a two-game ...

The Blues took the decision to the AFL's appeals board on Thursday night in a last-ditch effort to get Cripps a part of their finals push, and in a surprise decision the bid was successful following a process that went for well over four hours. Carlton plays Melbourne and Collingwood in the final two rounds of the AFL season and needs to win one to guarantee a finals spot, meaning the Cripps decision could have a huge impact on the club's finals chances. Patrick Cripps has won the appeal of his suspension and is free to play in Round 22 against Melbourne.

The overruling of Patrick Cripps' two-match suspension by the AFL Appeals Board on Thursday night is the surest sign yet that a system supposedly…

In addition, the notion that under any circumstances, the notion that a player’s right to contest the ball must be upheld is silly. While we’re at it, also remove a player’s right to ‘brace for contact’ in an incident like this, which is part of what got Rioli off his precedent-setting suspension in Round 1. I also refuse to believe that Cripps had no other option but to attack the ball in this manner. Had he done that, then it wouldn’t have been Cripps’ bicep that collected Ah Chee in the head. Fundementally, I refuse to believe Cripps, unless he is remarkably shortsighted for an elite athlete, would not have been aware of Ah Chee also heading for the ball. The bottom line, though, has seemingly rested at this: if as a result of your actions, a player is concussed, then you are in trouble.