Autopsy AFL 2023 Round 6 - Cats v Swans Sat April 22nd 7:25pm AEST (GMHBA)

Who will win and by how much?

  • Cats by a goal or less

    Votes: 3 7.9%
  • Swans by a goal or less

    Votes: 2 5.3%
  • Cats by 7 - 20

    Votes: 14 36.8%
  • Swans by 7 - 20

    Votes: 9 23.7%
  • Cats by a lot

    Votes: 6 15.8%
  • Swans by a lot

    Votes: 3 7.9%
  • Draw

    Votes: 1 2.6%

  • Total voters
    38
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Just watched the Duncan bump. He didnt run past the ball or elect to bump. The ball was still ahead of him, the Sydney guy went low and missed it and cannoned into Duncan.

I dont know what people expect Duncan to do when someone charges you at shoulder height head first there isnt much options.

Sent from my SM-S901E using Tapatalk
Duncan has nothing to worry about, he had nowhere else to go as the Swans player ran past the ball and a collision was unavoidable. In fact, Duncan did well to execute a perfect bump that was a footballing incident and nothing more. It's nether reckless or careless, it won't even get cited.
 
It’s ok. You are obviously biased because it’s your player. It will be interesting to see what a ‘balanced’ media person who has a big agenda for protecting the head, has to say about this, regarding his favourite team.

No need to get personal with me mate, I know you are passionate, but play the discussion as it is.

I find this all a little odd, as I and others vehemently defended Lynch's bump as a football action...yet there's plenty in here crucifying Duncan, for what is not a black and white situation at all.

a) Fox runs past the ball, so is not contesting the ball

b) Fox slips, and cannons into Duncan - very similar to Brayshaw and Libba last night

c) Duncan braces, rather than electing to bump

d) The main impact from the hit comes from the whiplash, and the head hitting into the ground

e) Fox does not leave the ground, nor suffer any injury

f) The ball is in the vicinity, so it's not off the ball

***********************

Now with everything we've seen over these past few weeks, I legitimately do not know how this will pan out. But I do think that this is not an open and shut case, like say the Jonas hit today.

It's very murky given all the aforementioned factors, and it's quite an unusual incident that will be hard to both grade and decide on a penalty/or not at all.

These discussions shouldn't be about tribal differences - perceived or otherwise -, they should be about the facts at hand and an objectively correct outcome.

If Duncan does get a week, we are then saying he's not allowed to protect himself when another player comes at him. We also could be saying that bracing to protect, is still a bannable offence, so get out of the way or try to tackle them somehow without hurting yourself.

If he does get a week, it'll fall in line with the trend of banning contact...and that is inherently problematic.

TL; DR - If you believe Lynch should have gotten off due to what was a football incident, then you probably should feel the same about this incident - even if it is a player from a team that you hate.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

You should be made to play all Victorian teams at either the MCG or Docklands like everyone else.

You should only get your stupid home ground advantage down there against interstate sides..

How many counsellors will you need if we ever have to play all our home games there in our home city at our home ground
 
Crikey- Cameron and Dangerfield gave 8 good years to the clubs they were drafted to. Then they came home. Perfectly reasonable.
ps we gave a up quite a lot to get Cameron by the way.
I've never said anything suggesting they hadn't. I just said comparing Tom Boyd leaving GWS and going to the Dogs was very, very different to Dangerfield and Cameron going to the Cats.

Dangerfield and Cameron both left teams that were almost there to join a very good team.

Tom Boyd left a rabble to join another rabble.
 
I've never said anything suggesting they hadn't. I just said comparing Tom Boyd leaving GWS and going to the Dogs was very, very different to Dangerfield and Cameron going to the Cats.

Dangerfield and Cameron both left teams that were almost there to join a very good team.

Tom Boyd left a rabble to join another rabble.

Geelong didn't make finals the year Dangerfield signed.
Pretty significant choice considering he had just played in a semi-final for a team on the up.

Cameron made the right choice.
This is evident by where GWS are currently tracking.

If I were Himmelberg, I'd get outta the joint the moment a good team says they are interested.
 
Geelong didn't make finals the year Dangerfield signed.
Pretty significant choice considering he had just played in a semi-final for a team on the up.

Cameron made the right choice.
This is evident by where GWS are currently tracking.

If I were Himmelberg, I'd get outta the joint the moment a good team says they are interested.
I won’t disagree with any of that.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy AFL 2023 Round 6 - Cats v Swans Sat April 22nd 7:25pm AEST (GMHBA)

Back
Top