- Moderator
- #1
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
MRP / Trib. 2023 - MRO Chook Lotto - Carlton Tribunal News & Reports
- Thread starter Aphrodite
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
- Apr 23, 2017
- 13,326
- 32,855
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Does he have the good bloke card ??
Jvr should be classed as intentional, medium and high.
We’ll see!
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
We’ll see!
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Needs to be considered a “classifiable offence” first.
I hope he gets off. May as we’ll make it a non contact sport if he gets weeks. At worst it’s a clumsy free kick.
thylacine60
Post-Human
- Banned
- #1,929
so you don't see anything between non-contact and knocking a bloke unconscious?
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #1,930
Chrisso
I think JVR should get a week for that stray elbow to the head.
Honestly think Maynard will/should get suspended...it doesn't really matter that it wasn't his intention like the commentators were trying to argue, that's why there are grades like 'careless' underneath 'intentional' in sentencing.
Jumped at Brayshaw to smother and ended up knocking him out cold...
Maynard chose an interesting path to try and smother the ball. He ran in a line that made it impossible for him to smother the ball. The kick was always getting through with that effort. He then realised his ‘mistake’ and smashed Brayshaw high which was his intention. Classic action from the school of Luke Hodge. I think he gets off.
The appeal didn’t question the high contact, it was the “force” of the impact that was challenged.
This is my problem with these rulings/appeals/citings.
There should be steps taken to ensure that high contact is deemed illegal regardless of the resulting impact.
Just because the force was insufficient to cause damage, the action should still be penalised.
It will fundamentally change how the game is played but that is the outcome we are advocating IF the head is to be protected properly.
The one that still bothers me is Boyd’s tackle where he is penalised when the player with the ball chose to hold the ball rather then break his fall.
If the player protects himself because Boyd in no way pinned his arms there is no suspension. Yet because the player didn’t want risk losing possession to the opposition he allows his head to hit the ground.
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
4flagsin5yrs
Premiership Player
yep.
4flagsin5yrs
Premiership Player
If Maynard (who was attempting to spoil) instead attempted to mark it, and did, knocking out Brayshaw along the way, would that be reportable? If the answer is yes, time to give the game away me thinks.
4flagsin5yrs
Premiership Player
He chose to jump, he chose to turn his body...he made high contact.
Very severe impact..
One of the worst tribunal decisions I've ever seen
Not sure how Maynards is any different to a player in line with another player, chooses to leave the ground to bump and gets them high. In this case instead of leaving the ground on a horizontal trajectory he went more vertically and did not need to collapse himself in the manner he did on the way down either.
Because he was trying to smother, not bump.
The largest factor here IMO, is that upon realising he was going to collide with Brayshaw, Maynard turned his body and shoulder towards towards Brayshaw.
- Aug 24, 2009
- 1,714
- 6,007
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Maynard’s attempted smother was a football act. His turning of the shoulder, barreling into Brayshaw’s head and likely ending Brayshaw’s finals campaign was not a football act. It was a reckless, although unintentional, action that took out a player in his most vulnerable state - while completing his kicking action with an inability to protect himself. There is a duty of care that applies here and players are accountable for outcomes of actions that they entirely initiated.
This’ll play out for the whole week.
This’ll play out for the whole week.
So what is his alternative?
Go front on with no protection?
- Aug 16, 2015
- 12,262
- 21,226
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
What is this football act crap?
A tackle is a football act, but when you get it wrong, you get suspended.
A bump is a football act, get it wrong, get suspended.
Why are people even banging on about football acts?
What someone tries to do is different to what someone does.
A tackle is a football act, but when you get it wrong, you get suspended.
A bump is a football act, get it wrong, get suspended.
Why are people even banging on about football acts?
What someone tries to do is different to what someone does.
- Aug 16, 2015
- 12,262
- 21,226
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
Agree, Maynard protecting himself from a player with no intent to engage him, joke
2 hands out in front.
- Aug 16, 2015
- 12,262
- 21,226
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
Maynard will get 2 weeks, downgraded to 1 on appeal, in a classic AFL back room deal
- Status
Similar threads
