Unofficial Preview Changes V Swans

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
The AFL will fight this appeal very hard.

Because if Charlie gets off it disrupts the agenda they're hell bent on at this juncture.

But I wouldn't be surprised if the penalty were downgraded to some degree because on balance he was not responsible for the outcome bar being the guy who had hold of him when it happened.
I don't know.
Possibly the AFL has made a point of being seen here considering the player was concussed in a tackle and had no further involement in the game.
Incident noted and taken to the judiciary.
So down the track if this case comes up against them in Court, well they can say the incident was thoroughly investigated and a result of no malice was found by Charlie Cameron, it was an accident.
Or indeed the player was found guilty and received 3 weeks, saying we don't accept this behavour.
I wouldn't be totally surprised if Charlie got off or just one week was the verdict.
Could this be the new norm , when everytime a player is concussed in a tackle, maybe.
Now if Charlie or the other chap goes for 3 weeks then they truly have lost tact.
 
Last edited:
Isn't this Duggan's second concussion, with the last one being in June? I wouldn't think he only misses one game.
He probably needed more time away from the game.

I was reading somewhere, that even though you can pass the protocols, the bloodwork can still showing elevated levels of ???? which is an indicator for trauma.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'll just reference the goose Maguire suspension when he bumped Jude Bolton and knocked himself out

Wonder how many weeks he'd get now
Even bumped is too strong a word from memory, I think they were both going for the ball and clashed heads.
 
If that is the AFLs only question then our answer is pretty easy and supported by the footage in that Duggan clearly turns his body and uses his strength to move backwards and tries to fight the tackle.

Does the AFL think the tackler is always the one in complete control of the action? FMD.
4or 5 steps is rubbish
 
That is the way I remember it but I could be wrong. I remember at the time being really confused why one player was rubbed out but not the other.
You say you were confused at the time.
Wait , did you once have a show called Brew with a goose or was it Gooses brew.
Wait
I think I am the other player.
 
Isn't this Duggan's second concussion, with the last one being in June? I wouldn't think he only misses one game.
pertinent point considering where the game is at with lawsuits from past players.

Thought I read somewhere there is now a blood test that can reveal if a players brain is still impacted by a concussion, even though there may no longer be symptoms. I think it won't be too long before 21 days across the AFL is mandatory ( i think VFL is 21 days break), and then possibly a further extension on that timeframe if a player has been concussed during the season.

Err on the side of caution, if not, AFL, coaches and club doctors will likely have claims made against them, as is occurring now.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

After 15 years of nothing despite doing head shots and other illegal things week in, week out.
had a quick look on the internet and apparently been charged 19 times and missed a total of 14 weeks (i think prior to latest suspension), that seems a lot, but as you said has played for 15 odd years. The NRL apparently has a loading type system, so he probably received some fines and then maybe a 'Toby Greene' type tax is applied.

I watch the odd Broncos game and seen him play, he certainly seems to be a rough player and a bit of a thug
 
Charlie Cameron’s ban has been upheld. He will miss the next three matches. Can't believe it myself.
 
If the AFL is going down the path that any concussion must be traced to an opposition player and an automatic suspension then we are in all sorts. Marking attempts must also be caught by this and then what, if a teammate is also kneed is he suspended for concussing his teammate.

Trust me; concussions aren’t being eradicated from the game and are legal cases now going to be thrown out because the AFL suspends players from football acts as if that protects the AFL?

Clown are running the game and it’s showing.
Spot on McIvor.

Concussion can never be completely wiped out of a body contact sport, even if they completely outlaw the tackle and the bump, what about flying for marks?

A future "safe game" rule could be you can only mark or attempt to mark a ball with both feet on the ground.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
it is what it is, from my understanding if a tackle results in a concussion youre basically always going to get weeks now just a matter of how many.

Yep certainly seems like it.

I will say I always doubted that Charlie could get off - he does apply SOME force to the tackle, even if Duggan trying to break the tackle is the main cause.
 
No value to the AFL in reducing the sentence their interest lie with the Suns, the Swans and the bigger Melbourne clubs.
 
Geez everything is against us this year! Huge effort if we make finals from here! Who are we expecting to come in for Charlie? Or do we just shuffle a few players around and a straight swap for Starce?
 
Obviously straight to the appeals on Thursday.

It’s an absolute miscarriage of justice and I don’t even barrack for Brisbane.
I can’t see how any real footy fan would be happy with this decision. No one wins.

And yet Cripps got off for a worse act and essentially wins a Brownlow as a result given he would have been suspended in the game he got his final votes against Collingwood to win the award.

There’s justice for you.
 
Geez everything is against us this year! Huge effort if we make finals from here! Who are we expecting to come in for Charlie? Or do we just shuffle a few players around and a straight swap for Starce?
If we don't appeal it probs shuffle a few around so Bruce starts, Starc in for Brain then Brain or Answerth as the sub.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top