MRP / Trib. AFL Round 13 charges - Steven Johnson receives two-match ban for bump on Pearce Hanley

[Hoffy95]

Hanley kept on playing should count for something since they won there doctors should say hes A ok.

Did he wipe his mouth?

That's what cost Kelly so I think that's all they will be looking for.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Rubbish. The MRP consider whether the player has left the ground whether it's in the rules book or not.

Mark Fraser has continually mentioned it.

That's because it is in the relevant rules.

 

[Conan Troutman]

Looks like a shoulder to shoulder bump to me, but during the follow through, and due to the bump, SJs back hits Hanley's jaw.

Scott Gullan's article has some screenshots showing it, though without seeing the footage beforehand, it's a little misleading IMO.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...on-pearce-hanley/story-fni5f6yf-1226668412198

Probably wishful thinking, but hopefully that will be looked at like the Nick Maxwell and Lindsay Thomas incidents, where the bump caused head clashes.

 

[Vdubs]

SJ.
Bumped and hit head.
Freo. Then Haw.
Deja-vu.

 

[AM]

Keep saying it, reckon the first thing the MRP will be interested in is whether SJ while contesting the ball “did not have a realistic alternate way to contest the ball” ie no alternative than to bump. And/or the result of the contact “could not have been reasonably foreseen”

Reckon SJ could run a reasonable case that he was contesting the ball, there was no alternate way other than bump, and the result could not have been foreseen.

Throw in there was apparently no injury and I reckon he has a reasonable case.

The Player Rules state:

Rough Conduct (Head high Contact)

Where in the bumping of an opponent (whether reasonably or unreasonably)
the Player causes forceful contact to be made with any part of his body to an opponent’s head or neck unless the:

Player was contesting the ball and did not have a realistic alternative way
to contest the ball; or

the forceful contact to the head or neck was caused by circumstances outside
the control of the player which could not reasonably be foreseen

 

[nohairandfair]

The Cats have been reamed by the MRP and tribunal in recent years but surely this bump won't cop a suspension. The replay shows StevieJ lowering his body with feet planted on the ground and no discernible contact to the head.

 

[footscore]

Chris Scott's recent comments about the MRP inconsistencies may be used by Mark Fraser & his panel of armpit sniffers to hit Johnson with a harsher suspension than usual.

Should take em to court if he cops something ludicrous for a bump which seems to be pretty fair, going by opposition supporters comments on the incident.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

yeh' he held his face as if he had acid thrown into his eyes.

Last year Vlad suggested to our President(?) he should consider going over and help out an expansion team - which is a pet hobby of his. I think it was the Prez. May have been the CEO. Anyway, it was turned down. After that we got Selwood out for pushing his brother, SJ out for picking up an opponent. Footy fans were actually repeating Frazer's reasons as if they were reasonable and not made up just to snipe at a club who had turned down a Vlad offer. Yeah, and how many times since have I seen a push, or someone yank up a player and nothing is done about it., All forgotten like the other weird and wonderful excuses the MRP dreams up when they want a player out.

Just like the pettiness over the Matt Rendell scandal when they "got" him, that is also how I think the AFL MRP decisions work.

Didn't the Hawks gets some really weird decisions against them when Kennett was Prez? I think Franklin got targeted a bit. And Kennett was always going on about the AFL hierarchy.

Anyway, that is my tinhatfoil theory. Works for me.

 

[footscore]

Works for me.

That's a nice photo of Sharapova eating a banana.
She seems content and a top player by the way.

 

[catters05]

Last year Vlad suggested to our President(?) he should consider going over and help out an expansion team - which is a pet hobby of his. I think it was the Prez. May have been the CEO. Anyway, it was turned down. After that we got Selwood out for pushing his brother, SJ out for picking up an opponent. Footy fans were actually repeating Frazer's reasons as if they were reasonable and not made up just to snipe at a club who had turned down a Vlad offer. Yeah, and how many times since have I seen a push, or someone yank up a player and nothing is done about it., All forgotten like the other weird and wonderful excuses the MRP dreams up when they want a player out.

Just like the pettiness over the Matt Rendell scandal when they "got" him, that is also how I think the AFL MRP decisions work.

Didn't the Hawks gets some really weird decisions against them when Kennett was Prez? I think Franklin got targeted a bit. And Kennett was always going on about the AFL hierarchy.

Anyway, that is my tinhatfoil theory. Works for me.

Wouldn't put it past the AFL, I like it....

 

[RegHickeyStand]

That's a nice photo of Sharapova eating a banana.
She seems content and a top player by the way.

She seems a nice girl.

 

[footscore]

She seems a nice girl.

very much so.

 

[Copernicus]

If the papers had any say in the matter he'd be gone for four weeks, I reckon. Already running headlines essentially ruling him out - they seem to want it.

 

[Copernicus]

Don't see any difference to the Hodge hit on Henderson last week.

Except for the colour of the guernsey.

 

[you pick one]

After the Kelly one any optimistic presumption is insane. You have to assume he'll get suspended. And he will.

No not worried at all about this one.

 

[mcwilrob]

No not worried at all about this one.

Lotsa people said that about the Kelly incident and we all know what happened there...

 

[Gogeelong]

He should get off.
However he puts himself in these positions.

Play tuff at the ball not the other players.
I have said it many times he lets us down, best player on our list or not.

 

[fpm84]

Can somebody genuinely explain the difference between SJ yesterday and Hodge on Henderson last week which he was cleared for?

Hodge ran past the ball and clearly bumped Henderson in the cheek with his forearm/elbow. Henderson was clearly dazed and impacted by the bump.

SJ was contesting the ball on the spot and it's arguable whether there was head high contact (looked like shoulder to shoulder to me after several slow-mo replays during the coverage last night).

Can somebody please give me a serious answer aside from "SJ wears a Geelong guernsey so that's the difference"?

 

[Vdubs]

very much so.

maybe, but unwatchable without muting.
That screaming she does is blatant cheating, and she NEVER does it warming up!

 

[Slax]

Really hope that He doesn't get rubbed out, at the time looked at it and said great hit. Looking at the reply nothing has change for me. Shoulder to shoulder contact, Hanley's shoulder then went on to make contact with his face. No injury just badly winded from having the stuffing knocked out of him.

If he goes for this then I'm going to go watch netball because there is more physical contact there than what the AFL want is footy.

 

[Gogeelong]

Can somebody genuinely explain the difference between SJ yesterday and Hodge on Henderson last week which he was cleared for?

Hodge ran past the ball and clearly bumped Henderson in the cheek with his forearm/elbow. Henderson was clearly dazed and impacted by the bump.

SJ was contesting the ball on the spot and it's arguable whether there was head high contact (looked like shoulder to shoulder to me after several slow-mo replays during the coverage last night).

Can somebody please give me a serious answer aside from "SJ wears a Geelong guernsey so that's the difference"?

Not only was the ball in play, the umpire said all clear and was right there.
There is no clear shot of head high contact. Corey was on the other side and appeared to have contributed to the contact. Will not go especially when you make the Hodge comparisons.
But "we are Geelong" so who knows.
Time for Johnson to pull his head in or it will keep occurring and cost us at the wrong time. Bring in Caddy if he does go.

 

[catempire]

fpm84, my serious answer is I have learnt from experience with the MRP that saying "X got off for similar conduct therefore so will Y" is folly and that way madness lies. Also, players getting off after making high contact tend to, in my estimation, be the lucky 10%. The other 90% being comprised of about 60% genuinely guilty and 30% who can be genuinely aggrieved at the decision.

I hope SJ falls into the 10% but it's unlikely.

 

[CF]

still think StevieJ hit his shoulder/arm and the other guys head wobbled but wasn't contacted. If StevieJ goes for that there's something wrong with the system.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

If the papers had any say in the matter he'd be gone for four weeks, I reckon. Already running headlines essentially ruling him out - they seem to want it.

More like they know the fix is in.

 

[Brown n Gold]

From an outsiders point of view he's in a fair bit of trouble (which sucks because it was nearly a perfect bump) but the MRP will say that he had an option to tackle.. therefore once you chose to bump if you make high contact you are in a bit of strife. Hopefully if Hanley is OK that will go in SJ's favour... I hate seeing the games entertainers rubbed out for what would have been a perfect bump 10-15 years ago!