Player Watch Brayden Maynard

[Bianconeri]

That's not what happened, which makes it official that you have no idea what you're talking about or that you simply enjoy trolling the board.

Maynard ran full pelt at Brayshaw then his shoulder landed in Brayshaws face. Atm he’ll be protected because he attempted to smother but I doubt that protection last next season.

It’s quite a simple concept to get your head around. You can disagree whether it’s right a wrong but you should be have been able to understand such simple logic by now…

 

[sr36]

Atm it seems to be protected by it being a footy action. I think next year it will lose such protection similar to the bump.

It's not protected due to being a football action. It's protected if they deem it not careless, eg.nit easily foreseeable that the result of jumping for the smother was knocking out Brayshaw.

 

[Bianconeri]

No more peanuts.

Are you leaving?

 

[anshell]

The more I look at the down the ground view, the more I think that all Maynard did was get his own head out of the way to the left. Otherwise it would have been a clash of heads.

This head movement to the left brought his right hip forward, but you can see from how his number 4 is completely visible throughout, he never turned his right shoulder towards Brayshaw. His shoulders were relatively square and he contacted him with the front of his shoulder rather than the point.

I think these behind the goals stills are the smoking gun in this case,so to speak.They clearly show that Brayshaw deviated off his line and contributed far more to the collision than Maynard did.It also shows that it was almost impossible for Maynard to avoid contact given how Brayshaw moved off the line at the last moment.

I would be absolutely shocked if Maynard goes down for this.Hopefully it’ll be settled at the tribunal on Tuesday night,and we don’t have to go through the appeals process,which would only drag on the whole saga longer than it needs to be.

 

[Bianconeri]

It's not protected due to being a football action. It's protected if they deem it not careless, eg.nit easily foreseeable that the result of jumping for the smother was knocking out Brayshaw.

It will be deemed not careless because it’s a footy action that is deemed as acceptable. Either way it’s just semantics and my point remains the same.

 

[JB1975]

Are you leaving?

A finer peanut you never saw.

In comparison, others are cheap cashews sitting on a bar which have been dipped into and double-handled by men who don't wash their hands.

 

[Kirby]

It’s a risk reward players will have to weigh up similar to choosing to bump.

It’s a pretty simple concept to follow.

It’s an idiotic concept.

Accidents happen in contact sports.

If you follow that “simple” concept then every action you ever take to do anything on a football field has to be considered as forseeably causing injury.

So, if Brayshaw’s kick hit Maynard in the face and knocked him out then Brayshaw would be suspended?

 

[Karma4Pies]

It's a stupid argument to say if Brayshaw was Maynard's team-mate would he have braced for contact? And he probably still should and would. It's still a contact sport and Brayshaw isn't his team-mate so he absolutely must brace for contact to protect himself from head and other injuries, ribs, lungs etc.

 

[loki04]

It's a stupid argument to say if Brayshaw was Maynard's team-mate would he have braced for contact? And he probably still should and would. It's still a contact sport and Brayshaw isn't his team-mate so he absolutely must brace for contact to protect himself from head and other injuries, ribs, lungs etc.

Yeah it's a ridiculous way to view it.

Here Maynard just pretend he's your team mate. Next minute.

 

[Kes1984]

This thread has lost the plot

 

[JB1975]

This thread has lost the plot

Given that the drama with Maynard makes no sense at all, I'd say that this thread fits the situation quite nicely.

 

[sr36]

It will be deemed not careless because it’s a footy action that is deemed as acceptable. Either way it’s just semantics and my point remains the same.

There's 3 things that are different yet get blurred together. What the commentators say. What the AFL wants and the guidelines that the independent tribunal follow

 

[Fonzeno1]

There is no doubt in my mind that McCartin should be suspended for hitting McKay with the back of his head. He chose to back into a marking contest and would have known that players behind him would be attempting to mark the ball and that his head may have come into contact with other player's heads. It is just a variation of the maynard situation.

I'd like to see the AFL investigate all previous concussions and retrospectively suspend the nearest opposition player....For instance in Brayshaw's case, players in the past should be held accountable for his previous concussions. If possible, I would investigate his junior footy years to determine the culprits.

Haha they could suspend the bloke that knocked Brayshaw out when he kicked the ball into his head.

 

[76woodenspooners]

You want to hope that the point of the elbow doesn’t land over the heart. As soon as you think of guidelines for players actions, other ways of causing injury will emerge. It’s a contact sport.

Exactly.

The only way the risk of concussion can be minimised is if you turn the game into a non-contact sport (netball, basketball) or a limited contact sport (soccer)

 

[76woodenspooners]

This circumstance might in fact be a direct result of the 666 rule too, given Bradshaw was on a break and Maynard’s only option was to run full spreed in his direction and attempt a spoil.

… and given the dimensions of the MCG that becomes more of a risk there compared with other grounds. Impacting home ground advantage, etc, etc.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

If Christo had dismissed it, we would currenty be in a shitstorm of biblical proportions which neither club, or Maynard, would want.

Oh, to be in that shitstorm and have Maynard available. Like Carlton were in a shitstorm last year but Cripps still got to play in their most important game of 2022, and win a Brownlow.

 

[Markfs]

Haha they could suspend the bloke that knocked Brayshaw out when he kicked the ball into his head.

It depends how far away brayshaw's head was, when the player kicked it. If you kick a ball and a guy is standing right in front of you, then you have to wear the consequences if it hits his head. This is where the standard needs to be set. If its reasonable for maynard to foresee himself concussing brayshaw on thursday, then players need to take every single incident into consideration. We need consistency

 

[thebigsaveloy]

Exactly.

The only way the risk of concussion can be minimised is if you turn the game into a non-contact sport (netball, basketball) or a limited contact sport (soccer)

Basketball has much more frequent contact with other players than soccer, especially if you're a forward or centre. If you're a big who plays in the post, most of the match is spent battling for position. It's very physical.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Oh, to be in that shitstorm and have Maynard available. Like Carlton were in a shitstorm last year but Cripps still got to play in their most important game of 2022, and win a Brownlow.

Yeah I'd love to be in that shit storm actually. The wait until Tuesday is going to be excruciating.

 

[Bramax]

Exactly.

The only way the risk of concussion can be minimised is if you turn the game into a non-contact sport (netball, basketball) or a limited contact sport (soccer)

I guess the upside to making it non contact, can’t jump, can’t tackle is we can resume the international rules series again.

 

[Mollythedolly]

Two for Martin…

Seems Carlton are set to appeal. Not sure on what grounds.

 

[danielnajdek]

Seems Carlton are set to appeal. Not sure on what grounds.

Didn't you hear he was trying to spoil/tackle.

 

[stormskye]

Seems Carlton are set to appeal. Not sure on what grounds.

They will try for 1 week instead of 2. That’s about it tbh. Which again is the issue of the afl being so outcome focussed because it all comes down to luck when the action should be what’s important

 

[sideswipe]

Seems Carlton are set to appeal. Not sure on what grounds.

But for Blakey’s lack of shoulders means it should have been body impact.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[jmac70]

Seems Carlton are set to appeal. Not sure on what grounds.

Martin mistook Blakey’s head for a footy.
Easy mistake.