- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #3
MRP / Trib. 2024 - MRO Chook Lotto - Carlton Tribunal News & Reports
- Thread starter Aphrodite
- Start date
- Tagged users None
TENACIOUS
Premiership Player
- Aug 16, 2008
- 3,949
- 14,906
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Players should get extra weeks for challenging and losing…
I knew it was !!!!!!!!
ESKIE
Keeping it Cool.
- Feb 28, 2009
- 33,239
- 57,595
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Who Boyd ? Yes it does
ESKIE
Keeping it Cool.
- Feb 28, 2009
- 33,239
- 57,595
- AFL Club
- Carlton
How the hell boyd wasn’t KO’d
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #280
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #281
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #282
- Apr 23, 2017
- 13,332
- 32,871
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Tough as nails.
thegreatbeast
Team Captain
- Nov 9, 2020
- 312
- 1,120
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The power is all in his headband.
- Nov 27, 2016
- 18,671
- 36,381
- AFL Club
- Carlton
His arms took the impact from the fall, luckily.
He actually did go boots first he just missed Boyd with his left leg.
I was appalled by Jono Brown's defence on the couch. He just doesn't get it...... still!!!!!
I think this whole "what else can a player do now he has left the ground" argument is very flawed, because these players know where the ball drop is and where the player backing in is and can make a judgement prior to leaving the ground.
Toby was never going to mark that ball because he was later to the contest than Boyd. He chose to impact the contest by crashing into Boyd and gave away a free (and thankfully not injuring Boyd but could have seriously concussed him), instead he could have impacted the contest by grabbing hold of Boyd once Boyd had landed.
If Boyd marked it, Greene has stopped play and Boyd takes his kick (free or mark is same result), if Boyd drops, most likely it's a ball up and GWS can reset.
The choice to jump and bump and collect Boyd high is a suspension and should get the same penalty regardless of severity of outcome.
Didn't notice the Toby incident that well during the game, was watching others running to cover the back half
Initially I thought it warranted a week, but watching it more closely ( in real time), not too different to the Wright incident apart from the outcome
Think he is lucky only to be offered a week
Initially I thought it warranted a week, but watching it more closely ( in real time), not too different to the Wright incident apart from the outcome
Think he is lucky only to be offered a week
Last edited:
Wickzki
Definitely Sam MacLure.
- Oct 1, 2010
- 26,501
- 63,684
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Ophidians Old Boys, Blazers, MCFC
You'd feel sorry for the ground getting knocked out like that.
Boydy would've bounced right back up.
Yeah, it was a poor take by Brown
I've got no issue with Greene jumping for that ball, but to not contest the ball by either attempting to mark or spoil and then turning and tucking/bracing for contact eliminates any argument for the suspension to be quashed
- Apr 7, 2006
- 1,716
- 5,273
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Jon Browns defence of Toby was one of the worst things I've seen on one of those footy shows... and I've watched robo.
He straight up lied. Toby was turning from the moment he left the ground. Never made even a slight attempt at the mark. Brown claimed he was going for the mark. Had a stillframe to prove it. Why was it still and not motion footage? Because it showed he was lying.
Why the media all seem to pick toby as their hill to die on I have no clue. But that was ridiculous from Brown.
They spent 4 times longer trying to justify away Toby's thug act than they did on the rest of the game.
I feel for players genuinely contesting the ball and being rubbed out for last second bracing. I am sympathetic as it is a reflex and a reasonable one at that.
I absolutely add myself to those considering Greene is ridiculously lucky to receive only one week. He charged headlong at the contest, realising very early that he was late to the contest. He did not slow or reasonably concede the contest, he took the opportunity to “make Boyd earn it”. He made head high contact recklessly. Even with an outcom based model, he was “entitled” to two, more likely three weeks holiday.
The inconsistent application of rules and interpretation is the most galling thing in the game. (And there are plenty of galling things with the muppets who have assumed control of the/our game)
I absolutely add myself to those considering Greene is ridiculously lucky to receive only one week. He charged headlong at the contest, realising very early that he was late to the contest. He did not slow or reasonably concede the contest, he took the opportunity to “make Boyd earn it”. He made head high contact recklessly. Even with an outcom based model, he was “entitled” to two, more likely three weeks holiday.
The inconsistent application of rules and interpretation is the most galling thing in the game. (And there are plenty of galling things with the muppets who have assumed control of the/our game)
I'm still shocked why GWS doesn't thank their lucky stars and take the 1 week for Toby. Wonder if the tribunal can change the length because on seeing the footage again copious times last night on the various shows it should be 2-3.
I think if Greene wanted to make Boyd earn it, he would have hit him a lot harder.
Dramoth
Premium Platinum
That’s the whole of it. Pulling his arms in removes any argument that he was going for the ball.
Niall is one of the good footy journos, a sensible guy. This is a reasonable take:
www.theage.com.au
Simply not Wright: Why Toby Greene should be cleared
While Toby Greene’s action was right on the edge of acceptable, the bump we saw a month earlier from Peter Wright was different on several fronts.
The only thing he did wrong was tucking in the left arm.
I don't think that players should be suspended for that.
It's not like Charlie Cameron's sling tackle last week.
We saw with Fogarty, he went to dislodge the ball with a punch motion that started during his leap and came out wrong and got a week. The Tobey argument is that when he launched his hands/arms were never going for a mark or punch he pretty much went the tuck in which to me indicates his intention was to collide and hip and shoulder Boyd. A poorly executed hip and shoulder is on the onus of the deliverer.
Dramoth
Premium Platinum
The only thing he can be arguing is the severity. Trying to argue it down from medium (a week off) to low (a fine). The fact Boyd bounced up and continued taking Toby to the cleaners could be seen as being unaffected by the incident. Mind you, the AFL will argue that his mindset was poor because he got dragged for a chat after giving away 2 off the ball free kicks.
Similar threads
- Locked
