AFL Player #20: Peter Wright - Will kick 40+ AFL goals in 2025

[Lore]

Contract Status: Free Agent (?) 2027
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 21, TheGrizz

 

[citizen-erased]

Surely gets off, was just going for a mark.

Turn will hang him.
If he had thrown the arms out for the mark, he'd probably get 1-2
lack of carlton jumper doesnt help either

Still, i dont mind us playing on edge.

 

[JT_the_Man]

Turn will hang him.
If he had thrown the arms out for the mark, he'd probably get 1-2
lack of carlton jumper doesnt help either

Still, i dont mind us playing on edge.

If he throws his arms out Cunningham shatters his ribs, dunno what they expect of him.

 

[citizen-erased]

If he throws his arms out Cunningham shatters his ribs, dunno what they expect of him.

Shatter the ribs to reduce the liability on the afl?
I really dont know with the mro/tribunal anymore

 

[TheBrightSide]

right in the moosh

If you look down, it gets much worse.

 

[MightyDon]

I like all the BS about him leaving the ground, from here on out all marking contests must have at least one foot firmly planted on the ground. If 2MP was late to the contest this is obviously a very different story but they hit the ball at the same time, the reckless act is from the player coming back with the flight, it is also why it is seen as courageous to take marks going back with the flight, the player running at the ball can and does have every right to protect themselves, the player going back with the flight is leaving themselves wide open and is a consequence of running back with the flight

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Yep, feel the same.

Bracing for contact is risky these days. At least he didn't lift the elbow.

I don't understand what players in Wright's position are supposed to do? I don't think he 'decided' to brace for impact, he instinctively reacted that way (there was no decision process).

 

[MiguelM]

I don't understand what players in Wright's position are supposed to do? I don't think he 'decided' to brace for impact, he instinctively reacted that way (there was no decision process).

Agree. Unfortunately even instinctively protecting himself has consequences if contact made to the head. It is just where we are with all the CTE stuff.

I grew up with 70s/80s footy as a kid and the Wright incident would not even be looked at, but we know more re brain injuries now, and the game has to be clear or be sued out of existence.

It was clear Wright had no intent to knock the player out and hopefully the tribunal agrees.

The commentary on the night and knee jerk reactions were ott IMO. Even heard some calling for the red card ffs.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Agree. Unfortunately even instinctively protecting himself has consequences if contact made to the head. It is just where we are with all the CTE stuff.

I grew up with 70s/80s footy as a kid and the Wright incident would not even be looked at, but we know more re brain injuries now, and the game has to be clear or be sued out of existence.

It was clear Wright had no intent to knock the player out and hopefully the tribunal agrees.

The commentary on the night and knee jerk reactions were ott IMO. Even heard some calling for the red card ffs.

Sure, but suspending players for instinctive acts won't stop those acts taking place, precisely because they're instinctive. The only way to prevent CTE stuff is either via safety equipment or change the rules to something like, "if you encounter an oncoming player you cannot attempt to mark or spoil the all." To try and outlaw instinctive acts makes zero sense.

 

[Lore]

I don't understand what players in Wright's position are supposed to do? I don't think he 'decided' to brace for impact, he instinctively reacted that way (there was no decision process).

Which shoulder has surgery last year?

 

[andleanback]

Didn’t attempt to mark.. book a flight to Bali

Yes put his hands up and bust his ribs and be out for a couple of months

 

[Beerfish]

At least this way he's not out for as long as he would have been with broken ribs and he also doesn't have broken ribs.

Silver linings.

 

[Blind Turn]

I hope the team psychologist is right on to this. Wright is one of the biggest offenders when it come to my current ‘bugbear’ - lack of marking presence from our talls. He seems to be a gentle giant and it’s not in his make-up to clean someone up. It could set him back massively on being able to impose himself on games.

 

[Highly Evolved]

If he throws his arms out Cunningham shatters his ribs, dunno what they expect of him.

Exactly. I'm not breaking my ribs in that instance. Cunningham also has a duty of care to himself - if he chooses to cut into that lead path on an angle then he needs to brace for impact too. It's just unfortunate.

 

[Snake Charmer]

Yes put his hands up and bust his ribs and be out for a couple of months

What’s your point? That didn’t happen. AFL have been pretty clear on it. As a bloke who grew up watching 90s footy I have no issue with it, and still see this sorta stuff week after week in country vic footy. But he went the body and KOd someone. It’s not on now days

 

[BomberFan355]

Just watched it, eyes on the ball and braced for contact.

As usual though, we’ll get ****ed in the arse. 4 weeks.

 

[Blind Turn]

If they’re that worried about CTE then the laws of the game need to be re-jigged for these scenarios to alter the instinctiveness at the marking contest.

You can go one of two ways. You either outlaw all front-on contact regardless of having eyes on the ball. Or you instill right-of-way laws to those going back with the flight. If you do the latter, you’re encouraging reckless courage that is more likely to earn you a free kick and thus more likely to lead to injuries rather than prevent them. So, for me it has to be the first option.

 

[Petrify]

Genuinely think he was trying to take a chest mark, didn't realise the Sydney player was coming, then braced for contact at the last moment

 

[Old Campaigner]

Genuinely think he was trying to take a chest mark, didn't realise the Sydney player was coming, then braced for contact at the last moment

That much is obvious from the replays, you see him fixated on the ball then see the swan's player on the edge of his field of vision causing him to flinch.

I'm sure the exact time will come out in the tribunal but it's literally milliseconds in it.

 

[BrunoV]

It certainly tests the actual issue faced by the AFL.

Wright is clumsy in his attempt to protect himself. It's clumsy because he jumps, to try to take a chest mark, shapes to protect himself and collides with Cunningham. There is no disguise. I don't believe he ever thought he'd be taking Cunningham out, or anything to that extent. He's not wired that way.

But the collision is inevitable at a point that, in my view, makes what happens subsequently irrelevant in terms of protecting the head and changing behaviour.

Wright is clearly entitled to play the ball. That's the issue and no one has said Wright is not allowed to protect himself and certainly not that he is not allowed to play the ball. The decision made after the collision is inevitable and is dishonestly or stupidly classified as electing to bump despite it never being explained to a player what is supposed to happen once he has legitimately decided to play the ball. Should he just hurtle in and knock himself and his opponent out? The AFL has left it to the prosecutor general Jeff Gleeson to try to con the Tribunal into inventing a convention that requires players to pull out. That is not reasonably left to the Tribunal. It needs to be legislated.

And no, none of this has any bearing, whatsoever on the AFL's liability position because the AFL has left this grey area and almost all collisions happen in the grey zone. The only issue there is whether the those running actions against the AFL can think outside of the boiler plate scenarios.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

If they’re that worried about CTE then the laws of the game need to be re-jigged for these scenarios to alter the instinctiveness at the marking contest.

You can go one of two ways. You either outlaw all front-on contact regardless of having eyes on the ball. Or you instill right-of-way laws to those going back with the flight. If you do the latter, you’re encouraging reckless courage that is more likely to earn you a free kick and thus more likely to lead to injuries rather than prevent them. So, for me it has to be the first option.

Yep, exactly.

 

[Nicholas61]

I hope the team psychologist is right on to this. Wright is one of the biggest offenders when it come to my current ‘bugbear’ - lack of marking presence from our talls. He seems to be a gentle giant and it’s not in his make-up to clean someone up. It could set him back massively on being able to impose himself on games.

I thought of this too. Looked gutted straight after the incident too so is a gentle giant, most don't seem to care. Cunningham seemed genuinely accepting of the apology post game when they had a decent chat. I have only seen Wright on the angry pills once and that was against the Saints a few years back where he was crashing packs and hurting guys a bit Dixon style then that cue went back in the rack.

 

[Beerfish]

What I was really pleased with was that he went back and slotted two set shots after that incident instead of letting all the numpty Sydney supporters get to him and completely lose confidence which is what I was expecting.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

Watched the replay in full at normal speed after seeing everybody dissect it frame by frame and I'm fairly comfortable saying there was nothing Wright could to do to not hit Cunningham after he realised it was coming. Lots seem critical of Wright turning his body - if he has continued trying to take the mark then Cunningham would have copped a fist or an elbow to the head instead.

 

[bombreys]

What I was really pleased with was that he went back and slotted two set shots after that incident instead of letting all the numpty Sydney supporters get to him and completely lose confidence which is what I was expecting.

The one from long range was so pure - not many better set shot duos in the league than he and Langers, if any

 

[maskmcgee]

Nothing a lawsuit won't fix.