Hoops

Greg Hire charged by NBL Game review Panel

It doesn't have to be either Mr Anonytroll.

The tribunal got it wrong AND ROFLcopter is a flog!

The tribunal downgraded the charge to careless conduct so either they got it wrong, or ROFLcopter is a flog.

He obviously swung his arm to get Mitchell off him, and he obviously made contact, but to say it was intentional is a stretch.

There was no reason for his elbow to be that high in the air. He knew what he was doing. He was clearly frustrated and retaliating to being denied his cuts.

Prove that it was intentional.

Nope.

He should have gotten a week off for that. To my reckoning it was intentional and low/medium impact.

It's all very strange. I don't know the details, but how did the NBL ever come up with the original finding of "intentional"?
End of the day, I think its a reasonable outcome.

I don't understand why this wasn't handed down in the first place.

Great news for the Cats. We need all hands on deck this weekend.

(I reckon he's lucky though)

That's from the Cats twitter account

Greg Hire has had his penalty reduced to a 1-game suspended sentence till the end of next season.

This means, he's free to play tonight!

This is set to be bigger than the OJ case. Accidental, please.

This hasn't been handled well by the league. Has dragged out far too long with a hearing five days after the incident.

My problem is that I don't know exactly what the criteria are.

As I've said all along, my biggest beef is with the inconsistency.

Now, if what I read is true and "The NBL has stated that Hire made intentional, medium-impact high contact with the Taipans forward", and by arguing it down to something less than intentional he can avoid suspension, then that's potentially a good move. I'd still be nervous because I don't trust the NBL to be rational. How did they look at it to begin with and decide "intentional"?

Yeah, if they'd charged him with low/negligent, he'd be up for a fine with a guilty plea but a 1-week suspension if an appeal failed. So if they manage to get it brought down...do they get the fine option? Or is it still a week anyway? If the latter, it's utterly pointless challenging it given that the best case changes nothing.

Live, I thought even the USF was a bit stiff. Looks entirely accidental to me.

Perth no longer favoured and the East coast rules... Joey on notice, Hire suspended, next up will be ????

"Seems risky."

By definition it is risky because he could have taken the known outcome but he's opted for the unknown one.
I thought you'd be all for this appeal given your comments about the incident in question.

What I'm wondering is whether a 1 game suspension is still a possibility. Hire undoubtedly whacked Mitchell with a raised elbow, so all we can argue is severity & intent. I could see them arguing it down from a 2 week punishment to 1 week. I'll be surprised if they can get it to the point where he doesn't miss a game, but if the reckon they've got a solid case then why not.
Perth really do need to win this Kings game and as much as some people take the piss, Hire has been an important part of our rotation this season. With an ageing and beaten-up team, and one that has to play in Melbourne 2 days after this crucial clash here in Perth, having those extra minutes to distribute could be a significant factor in both games.

According to Gleeson's presser, they are going to challenge it. Seems risky.
Unless maybe Knight won't be up for tomorrow night, but they think he can make Melbourne?
Just seems the smart money would have been to face Sydney without Hire, and be certain of having him back for Melbourne.

The only thing I can think of, is that according to the Cats' article, the NBL assessed the contact as "INTENTIONAL." Say what you want, but that's a difficult assertion to prove.
"Careless"? Sure. Negligent or even Reckless maybe, but I can't see how they could possibly argue it was intentional.

Hire was careless. Fine him but not suspend him.

It is not ethical at this stage to suspend if it is not intentional. I guess that is what Wildcats' appeal will be.

"+/- is a flog!"

LOL!

"+/- is a useless statistic when used in isolation."

It's not being used in isolation, it's being compared against the rest of his teammates across almost a full season.

I'd say they would be appealing that it was intentional, and the medium impact part. I would call it was negligent and low impact.

What could they possibly be appealing? He swung his elbow in retaliation to being held up on the cut got the guy in the head. This is such a Perth thing to appeal, but surely to no avail, head high contact was made. Just need to swallow the pill this time. Unless they plan on saying he didn't make contact... ask Terrence Ferguson how that worked out.

If the NBL can't get their shit together to give the players a fair hearing then they shouldn't be charging them in the first place.

+/- is a flog!

+/- is a useless statistic when used in isolation.

Appeal will be heard tomorrow at noon.
That's really poor!

Putting aside the incident itself, there's no way the process should be still occurring on game day of the following round.

He's like the guy at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark, with his skin appealing off his face.

I just get shivers when i see the words 'appealing' and 'Gleeson' in the same sentence, regardless of the context...

Bad idea. No one knows how the tribunal will determine an appeal. This isnt the right time to be testing the waters, even though I dont think it was intentional.

Does that mean if the appeal is dismissed it is a 2 game ban?

"@PerthWildcats
Trevor Gleeson has told media that the club will be appealing Greg Hire's striking charge."

I would be more surprised if Gleeson didn't appeal a decision....

Does that mean if the appeal is dismissed it is a 2 game ban?

‏@PerthWildcats
Trevor Gleeson has told media that the club will be appealing Greg Hire's striking charge.

Weeks elbowed Cotton top the throat and face and Cotton was called for the foul. The refs and so called review panel are a joke.

ROFLcopter doesn't follow the NBL

"Surely he won't be wearing Red next season. Horrible year."

Seriously? He leads them in 3P% at 41%, leads them in +/- (Perth are 118 points better off with him on the floor) and has been rock solid on the defensive end.

He'll get a pay rise if he's out of contract.

"dilerbating"

prolaby

Seemed a little long but perhaps they were dilerbating? End of the day the right decision was made the wrong 'play' was made by hire and this game doesn't need thuggery. The product is great, hire doesn't like being bumped as the cutter... retire.

I like the way the new match committee operates, in assessing the contact base don the impact, where it landed, the intent, and then giving every incident a one match ban.

Also, the game was on Sunday, and the charge was laid late Wednesday. Get it together.

^^^ LOL

+1

Surely he won't be wearing Red next season. Horrible year.

Sounds rigged.

Sitting Greg Hire out for 1 or 2 games will help the Wildcats

No issue with suspension for this type of conduct.....but how about we start next season.....too late in the year to save the shit show our officials have put on thus far.....just keep it as is and then have an off season review which will see the introduction of graded flagrant fouls

"Conklin's behaviour was far worse, as was the impact, and he got nothing."

The tribunal system was changed after the Conklin incident, so that isn't considered as a precedent.

Dazz at this point you are literally the only reason I dilieks Perth. You are the most em irrational of fans. Greg hire struck Mitchell to the head because he was being bumped as many cutters are. He was reckless with that elbow, and like Terrence Ferguson earlier in the year deserved the suspension. Deal wth it ol mate.

I don't mind Dazz, many of its posts just remind me of the old joke about " if you are amazed about how pig-ignorant the average person can be, then think about the fact that as they are the average , then by definition, 50% of the population is even more cringe worthy."

Yeah, bit cheeky but you see similar or worse in most games. It's not the call as much as the inconsistency that's the problem. I'd love to see the refs come down harder on the grubby niggly stuff that a lot of teams (and certain players in particular) have made a big part of their game but it has to be applied consistently.

Can't we just simply get rid of Dazz? When the owner of this site is bagging him out, then please solve the problem. The only problem with that statement is that Dazz wouldn't even know.

Unfortunately most people don't understand the concussion situation. There is no such thing as a "mild concussion".
If in doubt about head trauma they should be out for 1 week minimum. Nuff said.
The severity of multiple means longer put times. It isn't a linear thing and someone like D Martin should look at his case for future reference.

"Luuuc as you learned tonight you must be concussed for it to be suspension worthy. Thanks Dazz for clearing that up."

I think what he means is in things like the AFL the injuries suffered as a result of the offence thats been reported is largely taken into consideration. In this case there seems to be no injury, where as others that have resulted in an injury have gotten off fairly lightly considering.

Doesn't look like much and I think Wildcats fans have a right to be annoyed that it started off as a two game suspension to start with, especially considering what has been both let go and had lesser charges in the past...