Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Sydney Swans vs GWS Giants - 3:20PM Sat - 1st QF
Squiggle tips Swans at 63% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
LIVE: Brisbane Lions vs Carlton - 7:30PM Sat - 1st EF
Squiggle tips Lions at 73% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
AFLW 2024 - Round 2 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Think there was a Carlton player suspended for a similar action a couple of years ago?
I was thinking that because it wasn’t a marking contest that may be why the whistle wasn’t blown which may also mean that there may not be a suspension due to the fact that it is within the rules of the game.There was a tunneling suspension but it was in a marking contest. There wasn’t a free yesterday because it wasn’t a marking contest.
There’s hope that he gets off purely because of that.
I was thinking that because it wasn’t a marking contest that may be why the whistle wasn’t blown which may also mean that there may not be a suspension due to the fact that it is within the rules of the game.
But either way it was a dangerous action and if it was reversed, I would have been fuming if it were Hippy who copped that and no free kick was rewarded.
That one wasn’t quite as bad, but yes the same action and no free kick.Like Berry getting tunnelled in the same game?
I don't necessarily think it is trial by media. We all think it is, but listen to Michael Christian on Saturday crunchtime, he said there's about 180 incidents any week that are assessed, and this is reduced to the number he looks at. Christian very much takes the AFL line throughout the interview and all about protecting the player (which is fair). So while the media jump on incidents, the MRO is probably already looking at it.The weekly lions suspension media circus.
It shouldn't be trial by media, let the tribunal do what they do then let the media comment.
That one wasn’t quite as bad, but yes the same action and no free kick.
Except he did break a rule with studs up/trip and an unrealistic marking attack compared to a bump
Berry's tunnel should have been a free, but not a reportable offence. it was in the marking contest. (Q1, 3:25 minutes to go).Like Berry getting tunnelled in the same game?
Berry's tunnel should have been a free, but not a reportable offence. it was in the marking contest. (Q1, 3:25 minutes to go).
Hippy's was a charge at a player at the top of his leap. If it had wrapped his arms around Blakey it would have been fine, but he went in with hip and shoulder and caught Blakey below the hips.
Based on the MRP grading table though, he's likely to get a fine, or 1-week at best. Careless, medium/high, contact the body (though they could argue intentional and high contact considering Blakey landed partially on his head).
View attachment 2055368
Disagree on Amartey (unless there's more than 1 incident). Q3 2:15 to go, Harris dives across Amartey's path arms outstretched and exposes his rips. The head contact was Amartey diving back over Harris to get the loose ball and his weight falls on Harris head.Yeah happy for a fine to say you shouldn't risk a more severe consequence in that situation but can cop us being on the receiving end to the AFL randomly choosing what is and what isn't worth a fine
Amartey going after Andrews ribs was more dangerous than this but won't even get a mention
You just know that Christian will find a way to give him a week. He’s a prick and always happy to throw the book at interstate players yet justify anything VIC plays do. Keays did exceptionally well to not be sighted, not that I thought he should’ve been.Berry's tunnel should have been a free, but not a reportable offence. it was in the marking contest. (Q1, 3:25 minutes to go).
Hippy's was a charge at a player at the top of his leap. If it had wrapped his arms around Blakey it would have been fine, but he went in with hip and shoulder and caught Blakey below the hips.
Based on the MRP grading table though, he's likely to get a fine, or 1-week at best. Careless, medium/high, contact the body (though they could argue intentional and high contact considering Blakey landed partially on his head).
View attachment 2055368
You just know that Christian will find a way to give him a week. He’s a prick and always happy to throw the book at interstate players yet justify anything VIC plays do. Keays did exceptionally well to not be sighted, not that I thought he should’ve been.
You just know that Christian will find a way to give him a week. He’s a prick and always happy to throw the book at interstate players yet justify anything VIC plays do. Keays did exceptionally well to not be sighted, not that I thought he should’ve been.
The issue really is how discretionary it is and given Christian always targeting interstate clubs players it doesn’t bode well…however the Swans player would also have to cop something for the tunnel on Berry.Berry's tunnel should have been a free, but not a reportable offence. it was in the marking contest. (Q1, 3:25 minutes to go).
Hippy's was a charge at a player at the top of his leap. If it had wrapped his arms around Blakey it would have been fine, but he went in with hip and shoulder and caught Blakey below the hips.
Based on the MRP grading table though, he's likely to get a fine, or 1-week at best. Careless, medium/high, contact the body (though they could argue intentional and high contact considering Blakey landed partially on his head).
View attachment 2055368
I've seen this so many times now, that I'm wondering if it's come into common usage
I've always thought the word was "cited"? .
Anything on Andrews yet ? Lions have form on keeping injuries quiet until the Qscan update
Nothing yet but there is this:
I did think he got back on the ground a bit quicker than 20m!
Nothing yet but there is this:
I did think he got back on the ground a bit quicker than 20m!
Honestly i could argue multiple categories in all elements!Berry's tunnel should have been a free, but not a reportable offence. it was in the marking contest. (Q1, 3:25 minutes to go).
Hippy's was a charge at a player at the top of his leap. If it had wrapped his arms around Blakey it would have been fine, but he went in with hip and shoulder and caught Blakey below the hips.
Based on the MRP grading table though, he's likely to get a fine, or 1-week at best. Careless, medium/high, contact the body (though they could argue intentional and high contact considering Blakey landed partially on his head).
View attachment 2055368