Bontempelli's hit on Haynes

[Tugga27]

If it's confirmed Nick Haynes has a fractured larynx, wonder if the AFL will appeal this.....yeah, sure they will.

GWS Nick Haynes might have a fractured larynx as a result of a weekend clash that saw Bulldogs star Marcus Bontempelli handed with a $2000 fine.
If scans confirm a fracture, Haynes will likely miss between two and four weeks.

Low impact - tick.
Weather or not it could cause serious damage - tick.
The medical report was taken into account - tick.

I like the Bont, but the system still looks after the Brownlow favourites.

 

[Roosurgence]

Christian either thinks Haynes has a brittle larynx or he isn’t allowed to publically tell us about the potential Brownlow Medalist discount?

 

[Substance]

Shouldn't have even been a fine.

 

[kernelT]

"If you elect to bump and you collect a player high… a punishment will be determined based on how popular and grouse a bloke you are."

That's the current interpretation of the rules as I understand it.

 

[Sentinel]

Very lucky.

Bont still a Brownlow chance after quirk of MRO timing, GWS not happy

Superstar Bulldog would likely have faced a hefty suspension had the MRO known of Nick Haynes injury

www.afl.com.au

 

[Rob]

How on earth is a 2-4 week injury "low impact"?

 

[kernelT]

How on earth is a 2-4 week injury "low impact"?

glass larynx haynes

 

[ossie_21]

Injury shouldn’t be used as a deciding factor of punishment

 

[The Dodger]

AFL couldn't wait for the medical report or at least ask what Haynes is being checked for before making grading?

 

[BF Tiger]

How convenient of the MRO not to wait for the medical report. Surely the AFL have to appeal.

 

[Mofra]

If Bont hadn't already accepted the fine the AFL could refer it to tribunal.
Bont lucky, there wasn't malicious intent there but injury outcome is a factor they seem to weigh heavily.

 

[The Dodger]

How convenient of the MRO not to wait for the medical report. Surely the AFL have to appeal.

Thats the beauty of it. Coincidentally they cant challenge the findings by the MRO only the tribunal as the MRO are the AFL

 

[Max zero]

Injury shouldn’t be used as a deciding factor of punishment

Well according to the AFL it is.

Sometimes.

 

[The Dodger]

Well according to the AFL it is.

Sometimes.

Oh look if the paperwork is lodged in time... I mean waiting for scans...who has the time for that? I wouldn't even dig deeper into why scans were needed either if I was on the MRO.

 

[Max zero]

Oh look if the paperwork is lodged in time... I mean waiting for scans...who has the time for that? I wouldn't even dig deeper into why scans were needed either if I was on the MRO.

Next thing you will be telling me they suspend people for potential to cause injury or size differences? Crazy talk!

 

[4THAWN]

Injury shouldn’t be used as a deciding factor of punishment

shouldn't be but it has been all year...

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Haynes played out the rest of the game...
Injury probably caused by the Bont contact, but is that provable?

 

[whatis]

Haynes played out the rest of the game...
Injury probably caused by the Bont contact, but is that provable?

Weird because players often play out the game, play the following week, and the medical report always seems to do us in. I'm certain we've copped several suspensions over the last two years due to delayed, minor concussion etc. Haven't seen this incident yet by the way, anyone have a link to footage?

 

[Ichabod Noodle]

Shouldn't have even been a fine.

why?

late
high
causing serious damage

not even a fine?

yeah champ, whatever you reckon.

 

[base615]

 

[Section 5]

"If you elect to bump and you collect a player high… a punishment will be determined based on how popular and grouse a bloke you are."

That's the current interpretation of the rules as I understand it.

Yes - Substitute the Bont with another player not in Brownlow contention they get a week. Or someone like a Mitch Robinson type player they get a minimum of 2 weeks.The sooner they change the Brownlow eligibility the better. Just pick a number anything from 1 to 4 weeks i could live with.

 

[perplexed]

Injury shouldn’t be used as a deciding factor of punishment

Of course it should. What world do you live in?
If you drunkenly run your car off the road do you expect the same punishment if you clip some blokes arm to if you plough through half a dozen kindergarten children?

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Bont's good and clean MRP record had to come into it surely?

A tad lucky, but there has been a lot more howlers by the MRP over the years.

 

[Max zero]

Haynes played out the rest of the game...
Injury probably caused by the Bont contact, but is that provable?

"The injury was caused by a too cold Gatorade that was drunken post game not from the hit."

 

[ossie_21]

Of course it should. What world do you live in?
If you drunkenly run your car off the road do you expect the same punishment if you clip some blokes arm to if you plough through half a dozen kindergarten children?

Totally different, but ok. In footy physical contact is expected, in what appears to be your world I'm not sure if the kids expect to be mowed down by a drunk driver.

Look at it this way, lets say someone leaves the ground to bump & gets someone in the head. The player gets up, isn't affected & plays out the game.
Someone else leaves the ground to bump, gets someone in the head which knocks them out & they miss another week or two. Personally I feel it should be graded on the intention & the act, not the result.