Review Cats sink Dockers by 11 points.

[Warhorse]

Freo had the top 3 ranked players on the ground, and 8 of the top 10. How did that work out for them?

Do you think we win a flag if that stat stays the same throughout the finals?

 

[Zouz Kitty]

Watching the game replay + Cameron’s Disposals = 1 + kicked his first goal

 

[Zouz Kitty]

Can't find the pic or I would post it

Probably Addy: Headline + full spread on Page 1

 

[cats_09]

 

[Generalissimo]

LOL, what a joke. You just know that if it had been Zuthrie doing that to Banfield it would have been two weeks. This laughably lenient verdict on top of the "missed" 50 is the AFL sending a message, and it's an insulting one.

 

[cats_09]

More on the report:

A TOTAL of 18 players have been fined after a fiery Saturday of action in round 22, while Port Adelaide ruck Jordon Sweet has avoided suspension for striking Melbourne's Clayton Oliver

13

Clayton Oliver

Age

27

Ht

189cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

27.8

5star

K

9.5

4star

HB

18.4

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

6.3

5star

CL

6.3

5star

D

25.1

5star

K

11.1

4star

HB

14.0

5star

M

3.6

4star

T

5.6

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

19.2

5star

K

4.6

2star

HB

14.6

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

4.4

5star

CL

3.8

5star

.

The League handed out a total of $42,500 worth of fines from Saturday's five games, a total bill that can be reduced to $27,500 if all 18 players accept their sanctions.



Pretty sure there could have been even more fines from our game as Luke Ryan ran straight into an umpire during a boundary stoppage

 

[Gunf]

Should have been classified as

High Intentional low 1 week

 

[cats_09]

LOL, what a joke. You just know that if it had been Zuthrie doing that to Banfield it would have been two weeks. This laughably lenient verdict on top of the "missed" 50 is the AFL sending a message, and it's an insulting one.

Disagree that a Geelong player would have been suspended - we've had a few guys fined this year for conduct during matches, so let's not pretend that the AFL is suddenly harsher on us with MRO & tribunal decisions

Don't forget that this all comes down to the decision matrix - first time is to classify the action, and as it's been deemed "misconduct", it's a fixed fine, regardless of what colours the player wears

Now, even if deemed as striking it would only be a fine: careless conduct, low impact and high contact = fine

And as much as we view it as intentional, it would be deemed as "in-play" which is why it would be careless not intentional - if it was graded intentional it would be a 1-week suspension, Freo would take it to the tribunal and argue it down to careless saying Banfield slipped

 

[Generalissimo]

Agree to disagree then. I don't see how it could have been graded as anything other than intentional conduct + low impact + high contact = 1 week, and if it was us doing it that'd be the least I'd expect. Good thing for us that we're not dirty grubs, eh.

 

[cats_09]

Should have been classified as

High Intentional low 1 week

Misconduct = fixed fine sanction

They would have had to deem it striking to go to the grading matrix

Elbowing itself isn't deemed a classifiable offence:




Banfield's charge has fallen under this category:

 

[Cataholic]

A piffling ****teenth.

It was a dog act, and the AFL's hardline against such actions is a piddly $1250??

Pfft.

 

[cats_09]

Agree to disagree then. I don't see how it could have been graded as anything other than intentional conduct + low impact + high contact = 1 week, and if it was us doing it that'd be the least I'd expect. Good thing for us that we're not dirty grubs, eh.

It's as simple as he hasn't been charged with striking

That's why there's no grading on his charge - he's been charged with misconduct not with a classifiable offence

 

[cats_09]

A piffling ****teenth.

It was a dog act, and the AFL's hardline against such actions is a piddly $1250??

Pfft.

If he used his knee, it's a week on the sidelines

But using his elbow instead in the manner he did, allows it to only be a fine

If it drew blood, it would then likely have been deemed striking and he's looking at time on the sideline

 

[Zouz Kitty]

Replay: Q1 15:44
OHenry with a super tackle + goal
0 - 18


No memory of Jordan Clark

6

Jordan Clark

Age

23

Ht

185cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.7

4star

K

9.4

4star

HB

4.3

3star

M

4.2

4star

T

2.6

4star

MG

172.0

3star

D

12.5

3star

K

8.5

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

4.0

4star

T

1.5

2star

MG

172.0

3star

D

12.2

3star

K

10.4

4star

HB

1.8

2star

M

3.4

4star

T

2.4

4star

at Geelong Played 32 games. A time, around 2021, I was unable to watch games.

Google states he wanted to return to his home + was excited about developing with Dockers' core of young players, which contrasted heavily with the mature Geelong team, who had recruited heavily in Clark's roles.

Clark was encouraged by the opportunity to contribute to Dockers’ need for speed in both positions.

His antics are criticised in this thread. Would he be a DH if he’d stayed with us?

How much does a club’s culture influence game behaviour?

 

[Cataholic]

If he used his knee, it's a week on the sidelines

But using his elbow instead in the manner he did, allows it to only be a fine

If it drew blood, it would then likely have been deemed striking and he's looking at time on the sideline

The elbow is as dangerous as a knee.

There was a deliberate intent to inflict contact to the head and / or neck.

Neither that intent, or the action, has a place on the footy field, and if the AFL were fair dinkum about cleaning the game up, and you know, protecting the head, they'd adjudicate it more severely.

There's plenty of instances (off the footy field) where applied pressure to the head / neck has had a serious outcome.

 

[cats_09]

The elbow is as dangerous as a knee.

There was a deliberate intent to inflict contact to the head and / or neck.

Neither that intent, or the action, has a place on the footy field, and if the AFL were fair dinkum about cleaning the game up, and you know, protecting the head, they'd adjudicate it more severely.

There's plenty of instances (off the footy field) where applied pressure to the head / neck has had a serious outcome.

Totally agree - and this is where a review of the MRO post season would be good to include elbowing as it's own classifiable category rather than it falling under striking

If Banfield was more deliberate with swinging of the arm into Guthrie's head, it's a striking action for sure

But he was just clumsy enough to make it more of a push which then introduces a grey area for classifying his action

Thus misconduct becomes the safer reporting option, because I could easily see a situation of a striking charge being challenged and him getting off due to legal jargon that his actions don't fit the definition of a striking motion

Add elbowing as a classifiable offence, and even with a careless charge it's one week on the sidelines because surely there's no arguing against him using his elbow for what he did

 

[fpm84]

More on the report:

A TOTAL of 18 players have been fined after a fiery Saturday of action in round 22, while Port Adelaide ruck Jordon Sweet has avoided suspension for striking Melbourne's Clayton Oliver.

The League handed out a total of $42,500 worth of fines from Saturday's five games, a total bill that can be reduced to $27,500 if all 18 players accept their sanctions.

View attachment 2076328

Pretty sure there could have been even more fines from our game as Luke Ryan ran straight into an umpire during a boundary

Phew, was a bit worried about that tackle Jez laid on Walker when Walker’s head hit the ground. He looked dazed for a few seconds but then bounced up and was involved in the next play.

 

[cats_09]

Phew, was a bit worried about that tackle Jez laid on Walker when Walker’s head hit the ground. He looked dazed for a few seconds but then bounced up and was involved in the next play.

Don't worry, I'm sure there'll be bitching Dangerfield wasn't suspended for this:

 

[Gunf]

More on the report:

A TOTAL of 18 players have been fined after a fiery Saturday of action in round 22, while Port Adelaide ruck Jordon Sweet has avoided suspension for striking Melbourne's Clayton Oliver.

The League handed out a total of $42,500 worth of fines from Saturday's five games, a total bill that can be reduced to $27,500 if all 18 players accept their sanctions.

View attachment 2076328

Pretty sure there could have been even more fines from our game as Luke Ryan ran straight into an umpire during a boundary stoppage

I am glad the Freo player wasn't suspended for the Bruhn incident

 

[Generalissimo]

I am glad the Freo player wasn't suspended for the Bruhn incident

Me too.

 

[D BRIDGE]

It is. Darcys long contract will be a millstone for them.

One of the weirdest contract extensions I have ever seen.

 

[Hamingja]

This was his issue at Geelong and Geelong doesn’t tolerate bad defensive players.

I think the game just changed favourably towards his skill set just as he was traded to Freo.

I would not say that Duncan or Holmes, who Geelong use in that new role, are good defensive players.

 

[Commando]

Thank you

I feel less stoopid now

I thought they were discussing boots too,

What were they discussing?

 

[D BRIDGE]

Jordan Clark

6

Jordan Clark

Age

23

Ht

185cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.7

4star

K

9.4

4star

HB

4.3

3star

M

4.2

4star

T

2.6

4star

MG

172.0

3star

D

12.5

3star

K

8.5

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

4.0

4star

T

1.5

2star

MG

172.0

3star

D

12.2

3star

K

10.4

4star

HB

1.8

2star

M

3.4

4star

T

2.4

4star

has become the very player I hoped he'd be for us.

In saying that... he is a complete flog (this is without question), which makes me feel a lot better about not having him.

 

[allrighty]

The elbow is as dangerous as a knee.

There was a deliberate intent to inflict contact to the head and / or neck.

Neither that intent, or the action, has a place on the footy field, and if the AFL were fair dinkum about cleaning the game up, and you know, protecting the head, they'd adjudicate it more severely.

There's plenty of instances (off the footy field) where applied pressure to the head / neck has had a serious outcome.

The issue for me is that it was clear there was a secondary and deliberate action. That has always been THE issue in reports and MRO or whatever.

But really I don't care anymore. It is just a pick up sticks sorta thing now.

Nothing to see here, move along.