MRP / Trib. 2023 - MRO Chook Lotto - Carlton Tribunal News & Reports

[Aphrodite]

 

[RPCB]

Love going on a BF thread on another section of the forum where the majority of people are arguing that there was nothing in the Maynard incident (concussed opponent) and it’s from the exact same people who said Weitering should have been suspended for “eye gouging”, despite only needing one replay to prove them all wrong, and carrying on like that for it seemed like days.

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

The issue here is more about the outcome than the action. Maynard was evidently attempting to smother the kick, and Brayshaw was collateral damage along the way. It was basically a football action with an unintended outcome.

For mine, with the AFL absolutely petrified at anything to do with concussion, I can see a situation that the MRO will refer this straight to the tribunal to sort out - pretty much to cover their arses.

Personally, I reckon he should get off the charge based on the video footage - but, as someone correctly pointed out, it is Maynard who has the same 'clumsy' technique as that sniper Hodge.

 

[lily of laguna]

OK.
I don't think that's realistic.

It happens all the time in all sorts of sports, I’ve done it myself numerous times.

Rather than turn and brace for contact with a hip and shoulder, remain front on and put your arms out. What results from that contact is unknown but it is very realistic that his method/choice of contact is undisputedly not the only option.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[skadoosh]

It goes entirely against the human reflex to protect yourself.
I thought the tribunal's reasoning for rubbing out Plowman was ludicrous, and I think this is the same thing.

Ok - let's forget about the fact that it's a footy game.

What you're saying is it's human reflex to protect yourself - yup, agree.

So put yourself in Maynard's situation -- ALL he is thinking about is protecting himself (apparently) - right?
You turn the body and lead with your shoulder every time do you?

What did Maynard exactly need protection from? Brayshaw had kicked the ball already and was not in any sort of contest. Brayshaw was standing upright - chest towards Maynard. Maynard has sufficient time to put his hands out into Brayshaw's chest. I imagine Brayshaw might lose his balance and fall over backwards....and now we have a different story.

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

Ok - let's forget about the fact that it's a footy game.

What you're saying is it's human reflex to protect yourself - yup, agree.

So put yourself in Maynard's situation -- ALL he is thinking about is protecting himself (apparently) - right?
You turn the body and lead with your shoulder every time do you?

What did Maynard exactly need protection from? Brayshaw had kicked the ball already and was not in any sort of contest. Brayshaw was standing upright - chest towards Maynard. Maynard has sufficient time to put his hands out into Brayshaw's chest. I imagine Brayshaw might lose his balance and fall over backwards....and now we have a different story.

View attachment 1797004

And then this is how he is positioned at impact....

He lined him up, pure and simple!

 

[branedotorg]

Outcome clearly wasn't intentional but failed in duty of care to an opponent who was in the act of disposal.

Sometimes impacts are genuine accidents but in this case he recklessly jumps up and at the kicker, with the intent of making contact, there's no other reason to jump like that.

Gotta go for mine, likewise van Rooyen who lifted the arm as he made contact with McStay.

I'd also give Mitchell a week for his diving

 

[jj1978]

And then this is how he is positioned at impact....

He lined him up, pure and simple!

View attachment 1797011

Anything to do with Maynard suspect there is some premeditation to it. Quite genius in some respects masking a smother as means to collide with player, wouldn't be surprised if they trained for it.

 

[thylacine60]

I don't like Maynard. Reckon he's a faux thug. Witness him bullying Mots I think it was, until Cripps turned up. Hope he gets weeks.

 

[skadoosh]

I don't like Maynard. Reckon he's a faux thug. Witness him bullying Mots I think it was, until Cripps turned up. Hope he gets weeks.

Also made contact to Viney's face/head with his own. Knows not to go a full headbutt motion, but the contact was there...

 

[Blue Pulse]

The issue here is more about the outcome than the action. Maynard was evidently attempting to smother the kick, and Brayshaw was collateral damage along the way. It was basically a football action with an unintended outcome.

For mine, with the AFL absolutely petrified at anything to do with concussion, I can see a situation that the MRO will refer this straight to the tribunal to sort out - pretty much to cover their arses.

Personally, I reckon he should get off the charge based on the video footage - but, as someone correctly pointed out, it is Maynard who has the same 'clumsy' technique as that sniper Hodge.

Totally agree with this and nicely explained as well. The AFL have created a monster with their system, or lack of system.

Cripps committed a similar act last year, football act, unintended outcome. The varying opinions on here, just go to show the inconsistency of the whole process

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

Brayshaw eyes were tracking the ball, not looking at Maynard.

Maynard's eyes were watching Brayshaw, nothing else!

(= he knew exactly what he was doing)

 

[RPCB]

Ok - let's forget about the fact that it's a footy game.

What you're saying is it's human reflex to protect yourself - yup, agree.

So put yourself in Maynard's situation -- ALL he is thinking about is protecting himself (apparently) - right?
You turn the body and lead with your shoulder every time do you?

What did Maynard exactly need protection from? Brayshaw had kicked the ball already and was not in any sort of contest. Brayshaw was standing upright - chest towards Maynard. Maynard has sufficient time to put his hands out into Brayshaw's chest. I imagine Brayshaw might lose his balance and fall over backwards....and now we have a different story.

View attachment 1797004

Have heard the excuse this morning from a Collingwood supporter that Maynard should be allowed to protect himself. As you can see from the provided image, Brayshaw was about to crunch him.

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

Totally agree with this and nicely explained as well. The AFL have created a monster with their system, or lack of system.

Cripps committed a similar act last year, football act, unintended outcome. The varying opinions on here, just go to show the inconsistency of the whole process

A lot of differences to the Cripps' incident.

 

[Blue Pulse]

A lot of differences to the Cripps' incident.

Yep, football act, unintended outcome, totally agree.

 

[Sector 7G]

Yep, football act, unintended outcome, totally agree.

And the rules have been tightened so Cripps would no longer get off on appeal.

 

[Sam The Doc]

we should know by later today? they reckon it'll be referred to the tribunal

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

 

[Sam The Doc]

And then this is how he is positioned at impact....

He lined him up, pure and simple!

View attachment 1797011

I thought he'd get off, but now that I've seen that he has turned from front on to the side has confused me.
Good luck with that one!

 

[Raging Blue]

Under AFL's duty of care this incident should get 2 to 3 wks. Careless, high, high impact 2wks, severe impact 3 wks

• Maynard did do a footy act and attempt to smother. He did this sprinting towards the player. After/during the attempt it is his duty of care to avoid head high contact if he is moving. The ball had been kicked, then contact was made by a player carelessly approaching the play. On the main forum there is vision of Pickett of the Dees doing a similar action only to spring out of the way remaining always in the front position and not turning.
• This is different from the Cripps incident as Cripps shoulder met the Lions player simultaneously as the ball arrived. It was more about what constitutes a contest. You could argue what happened with Cripps happens in a marking contest even though it was not from a kick but a ruck contest. In the case of Maynard it was not a simultaneous contest. Cripps was lucky but there were grounds of a contest if you review the right camera angle.
• We saw what happened with Plowman with the O'Meara incident. He started to put out arms to take a chest mark (footy act) O'Meara lunged across the line of the ball and was collected by Plowman bracing himself. If instead Plowman had stretched his arm out to punch the ball it probably would have been deemed a contest.

Plowman was harshly done by and so would Maynard if he gets weeks, but I can't see how he doesn't get 2 to 3 wks.

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

Under AFL's duty of care this incident should get 2 to 3 wks. Careless, high, high impact 2ks, severe impact 3 wks

• Maynard did do a footy act and attempt to smother. He did this sprinting towards the player. After/during the attempt it is his duty of care to avoid head high contact if he is moving. The ball had been kicked, then contact was made by a player carelessly approaching the play. On the main forum there is vision of Pickett of the Dees doing a similar action only to spring out of the way remaining always in the front position and not turning.
• This is different from the Cripps incident as Cripps shoulder met the Lions player simultaneously as the ball arrived. It was more about what constitutes a contest. You could argue what happened with Cripps happens in a marking contest even though it was not from a kick but a ruck contest. In the case of Maynard it was not a simultaneous contest. Cripps was lucky but there were grounds of a contest if you review the right camera angle.
• We saw what happened with Plowman with the O'Meara incident. He started to put out arms to take a chest mark (footy act) O'Meara lunged across the line of the ball and was collected by Plowman bracing himself. If instead Plowman had stretched his arm out to punch the ball it probably would have been deemed a contest.

Plowman was harshly done by and so would Maynard if he gets weeks, but I can't see how he doesn't get 2 to 3 wks.

Not quite.

This is about what happens after the 'effort' to smother... which was barely realistic in itself.

The stills show clearly a front on position changing to a side on shoulder charge position.

He made that choice, either intentionally or carelessly.

He therefore suffers the consequences of the high contact.

Not to mention Brayshaw is looking elsewhere (looking at the ball) and has no chance to even brace....

Maynard has eyes only for Brayshaw - hard to say he wasn't lining him up at the end of the day.

 

[jimsta10]

Ok - let's forget about the fact that it's a footy game.

What you're saying is it's human reflex to protect yourself - yup, agree.

So put yourself in Maynard's situation -- ALL he is thinking about is protecting himself (apparently) - right?
You turn the body and lead with your shoulder every time do you?

What did Maynard exactly need protection from? Brayshaw had kicked the ball already and was not in any sort of contest. Brayshaw was standing upright - chest towards Maynard. Maynard has sufficient time to put his hands out into Brayshaw's chest. I imagine Brayshaw might lose his balance and fall over backwards....and now we have a different story.

View attachment 1797004

More like he was trying to smother Brayshaw head. But seriously, post kick or not, how high does one need to jump to smother?

 

[Aphrodite]

More like he was trying to smother Brayshaw head. But seriously, post kick or not, how high does one need to jump to smother?

He was in orbit.

 

[Raging Blue]

Not quite.

This is about what happens after the 'effort' to smother... which was barely realistic in itself.

The stills show clearly a front on position changing to a side on shoulder charge position.

He made that choice, either intentionally or carelessly.

He therefore suffers the consequences of the high contact.

Not to mention Brayshaw is looking elsewhere (looking at the ball) and has no chance to even brace....

Maynard has eyes only for Brayshaw - hard to say he wasn't lining him up at the end of the day.

I'm saying there is a duty of care to protect the head if you don't make the contest when in motion. But you're right the "footy act" "non contest" had finished (which was not a contested ball act) and he carelessly (or intentionally) caused damage.

Proving it was intentional or him instinctively bracing to protect himself is hard to prove.

But I agree with you, he should get weeks.

 

[4flagsin5yrs]

I'm saying there is a duty of care if to protect the head if you don't make the contest when in motion. But you're right the "footy act" "non contest" had finished (which was not a contested ball act) and he carelessly (or intentionally) caused damage.

Proving it was intentional or him instinctively bracing to protect himself is had to prove.

But I agree with you, he should get weeks.

sure, it'll be treated as careless, but even then 3 minimum.

 

[Bletch]

Because he was trying to smother, not bump.

So Careless, not Intentional.