Thanks for your brilliant insights there anon. Mature on every level.

Is that you Trevor ?

I'm a little surprised at the outcome but am glad it was heard.

Now, onto the next game right?

I dont think there was any Malice there. Im just not impressed for the player for not even helping the guy up. Speaks a lot for his moral centre.

I long for the day there's a controversy that doesn't involve the wildcats.

As a wildcats fan I find this decision to be very disappointing.

Yes, I don't believe that Conklin intended to hurt Damo- like others have already said, only he will know if that's true or not. However, regardless if intentional or not, that was a nasty blow and Damo is now out for minimum 11 games- we're now at a disadvantage, and so should Townsville.

In the AFL, that hit would have been deemed reckless and negligent and the player would be spending at least 2 weeks on the sidelines (if not more) for failing to uphold a duty of care towards the injured player. If that punishment was fit for a contact sport- why should a non-contact sport not punish the player who elbowed someone in the face? Head high contact is unacceptable in ANY sport.

This further fuels my disappointment towards the NBL tribunal and unfortunately makes them look to be a joke. While I'm disappointed with the outcome, tonights game should be a great atmosphere and hopefully the Wildcats get up and beat Townsville. And hopefully after we win, Trevor keeps a lid on his immature comments!

I'm somewhat surprised by the outcome too, but I think they backed themselves into a corner by charging him with striking.
A one-match ban would have been appropriate imo for a reckless action.

Wow Damo- what a class act.
"Brian Conklin got in contact with me yesterday- Sorry for head butting your elbow mate and I hope your elbow looks as bad as my head does, but there are no hard feelings as far as I'm concerned."

As a wildcats fan I find this decision to be very GOOD.

Yes, I don't believe that Conklin intended to hurt Damo- like others have already said, he was reckless. However, regardless if intentional or not, that was a nasty blow and Damo is now out for minimum 11 games- we're now at a disadvantage, and so should Townsville.

This isn't the AFL.

This further fuels my happiness towards the NBL tribunal and fortunately makes them look to be actually using common sense.

While I'm happy with the outcome, tonights game should be a great atmosphere and hopefully the Wildcats get up and beat Townsville. And hopefully after we win, Trevor keeps a lid on his immature comments!

Anon I wouldn't put any type of name or alias to a post like that... keyboard warrior.

It will be interesting to see how the refs take this game on. They let the game be quite physical in Townsville on Wednesday. I wonder what pressure they are on to keep this game in check and if this match will turn into a whistle-fest.

I'm somewhat surprised by the outcome too, but I think they backed themselves into a corner by charging him with striking.
A one-match ban would have been appropriate imo for a reckless action.

I'd say it'll be called pretty tightly early.

If it is it is probably to the Crocs advantage.

If your balance of probabilities can't find that action to be reckless or negligent, then the process is flawed. Does anyone from the NBL actually argue that what he did was striking or otherwise?

Perth fans are livid

Many fans are left shaking their heads, not just Perth fans.

It is hard to comment with any authority when we don't know how he came to that decision, or anything else about how the case was heard - were their witness statements etc? I wouldn't even have a clue as to what the NBL tribunal process is.

That's what I am wondering snooch. Does anyone from the NBL argue why they think he should be found guilty?

Yeah, I don't know and it's frustrating that the NBL only puts out a three line statement about an incident that has had so much attention. They needed to say more imo

It's just between tweeted that they are revising their tribunals rules and guidelines!

The refs will kill this game.

It's just between tweeted that they are revising their tribunals rules and guidelines!

*facepalm*

If there is one thing us westeez can do it's booo.

Booooo Conklin and to a larger extent the NBL tribunal guidelines and rules Boooo. It's like Jobe Watson all over again.

Common sense decision.

What happened? A player with the ball was fouled and as a result of that play there was contact that couldn't be proven to be intentional. Hard to warrant any suspension on that basis.

Might be sensible for the NBL to issue a statement re flailing arms etc but I'm glad the tribunal put the emotion of Damo's injuries aside and made a decision based on the act itself.

Paul, in addition to not being found intentional, it was also found not to be reckless or negligent. On that basis, why would the NBL put out a statement on flailing arms?

It was a massive cheap shot, hard to break someones jaw when your arms are flailing. If he was trying to play it up for the refs there is no way he would of had enough force to break marto's jaw.

Perth fans need to CHILL! Especially Jessie Wagstaff.

I agree that a suspension was unwarranted given that it was accidental.

But a fine or a suspended one game would have been appropriate for I do believe it was a reckless act.

Let's boo wildcats let's boo

Actually I take that back. I think if you re watch it at full speed (instead of obsessing over a slow mo as some Cats fans have done) it's not really deserving of any penalty.

Slightly reckless yes but it's still a basketball player holding on and trying to keep the ball.

Okay RMQ, you're allowed your own opinion but obviously can't formulate your own response.

Yes, it's not AFL, but that adds to my argument. If a contact sport doesn't accept an action like that, why would a non-contact sport? It just doesn't make sense in my head.

At the end of the day, hopefully Damo has a successful and quick recovery and i'm hoping (wishfully) that his absence doesn't impact the Wildcats too much :)

I just want to know how they came to the decision. How did he get here: he was not satisfied that the contact was intentional, reckless or negligent.

Firstly, I have to say, that ultimately the NBL did well to get their act together, review, lay a charge, and have the matter dealt with expeditiously.

At the end of the day, the only think that concerns me about this decision, stems from the language chosen.
According to the report yesterday he was charged with "striking" that implies a level of intent, as was never going to stand up. had Conklin been found "not guilty of striking" I would have agreed.

The Tribunal Chairman Tony Nolan QC found that while there was heavy contact made by Brian Conklin with his elbow to the head of Perth Wildcats player Damian Martin, on the balance of probabilities he was not satisfied that the contact was intentional, reckless or negligent.

Some simple facts.

1. Conklin has the ball.

2. He is allowed to stop other players from getting the ball, including by flailing and gesticulating wildly if he wants

3. If he does so in a manner which illegally makes contact with a defender, there is a penalty for that - an offensive foul.

4. You cannot be reckless or negligent in performing something you are within your rights to do.

5. Therefore if it is not intentional, and everyone agrees that, then no suspension is warranted.

If every time a player gets injured due to contact we are going to suspend players, then there wont be any players left playing.

Does that mean if a player steps on another players ankle who is trying to defend them they are negligent and should be suspended???

If was accidental and even Damien Martin thinks so.

Damien Martin admitted that he ran into his flailing arm.

Which was caused by the foul.

So should the person who caused to contact, Greg Hire be sited for negligent behaviour causing injury too???

Time to move on. The NBL has cleared him, no point arguing about it any more.
I was glad he played, definitely put some spice into the game last night and made the victory all that much sweeter :P

Like some others, I thought Conklins's actions were, at worst, reckless, with no apparent intent. It just had an awful consequence. If Damo's jaw hadn't been broken and everything else was the same, there would be no discussion about this. A foul would've (maybe) been called, and play on.

What the NBL should crack down is flailing arms. I don't think Conklin's actions would constitute "flailing". He wasn't waving his arms about. It was a single action. But you know the action I'm talking about: a player gets a rebound and starts swinging or is even only contesting the ball and starts swinging. Perth have a couple of fine exponents of this themselves (and Damo isn't one). But it seems that players may only get called if the other player is silly/brave enough to leave their head in the strike zone. The flailer is rewarded for failing to make contact, despite their efforts.

It's like in ruggby league. You swing high and make contact: 6 - 12 weeks. You swing high, miss: nothing. You get rewarded for your incompetence!

And I've read that Conklin has been criticsed for walking off. I wasn't at the game and couldn't see in any replay whether he had a smirk on his face. But maybe he walked away because he realised that he had made significant contact and took himself away to avoid any argy-bargy or chesting up? Just a thought.

An interesting post-script, with Conklin speaking about the incident.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/11/07/martin-forgives-conklin-crude-elbow