Chris Judd - The Crime and the Punishment - 4 Weeks

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I'll spell it out for you
1. being called deluded is hardly Bay worthy

It's hardly a serious discussion either. You failed to comprehend my post and you called me deluded on the basis of your failed comprehension. You failed to expand on your thoughts or articulate an argument. If you quote people in order to belittle them and offer nothing else, it is bay quality no doubt. In fact, it is beneath bay quality as they at least have a comedic angle they are coming from.

2. There are certain people that always blame the umpires for losses. Typically, they are rightly called deluded (even on this bastion of all fun and giggles that is the main board)

You can't seem to see that Adams only kicked out when his arm was being twisted unnaturally. But hey, you aren't the only Blues fan there

I merely pointed out that kicking legs out is something that happens in every tackle where the ball is pinned under a player. They can't extract the ball, can't get a punch on it so look to show as much movement as possible for the umpires benefit. I did not speculate as to whether Adams was doing that, just said that kicking legs out in itself is not necessarily an indication.

Not sure how that equates to me blaming the umpires for a loss. You went off on a tangent there.

However, I think umpiring decisions affect results most certainly. That's not to say it was deliberate on the part of the umpire but if you don't think teams have umpiring go against them from time to time, to an extent where they probably should have won a game they ended up losing, all things being equal, then you are in denial. There is always room for debate on umpiring decisions. The AFL don't have the power to stop that occurring on forums just yet.

 

[Monkey King]

Judd's Manager is saying its an AFL conspiracy to "get" him

This is where most of you blokes fail tbh. Just too happy to make up shit when it sounds good for your cause.

The reality - I feel we're comfortable with the process, except for two things - one, that the (MRP) boss is making comments about the case before it's heard ... and the head of football (Anderson) forever interfering in things. Let's get it straight, Chris knows he's stuffed up and he's apologised. But it's a bit like people want to stone him.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Fairly serious allegation, that Anderson interfered in what is supposed to be an independent process. I mean, we all suspect it happens, but for a licensed person to say it...

Could you point to where an (or any) allegation was made? Also, what did Anderson do that 'interfered' with the process?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

how does jumping on a bandwagon = attention seeking anyway? If I wanted attention I would go against the popular opinion.

Because merely dismissing a post by way of belitting someone, when others are also doing it, tends to ingratiate the posters with like minded posters. It's easy validation for them.

Also the argument of the op has been refuted a few times in this thread anyway, maybe you should take your supporter glasses off for a moment.

Pretty much irrelevant. He might hold an unpopular opinion, but if he was attention seeking knowing he was going to get negative feedback, his motivation would be to bait as many people as possible. The fact that he has made no posts where he is obviously being insincere and he has also attempted to explain his views tell me his post was genuine, not an effort to get attention.

 

[bombermick]

Could you point to where an (or any) allegation was made? Also, what did Anderson do that 'interfered' with the process?

From Sam Edmund's piece:

"Then you've got the head of football Adrian Anderson ... if he hasn't been speaking to Fraser and telling the world why this has to go direct to the tribunal, then I'll go he."

 

[Inspector Malceski]

This is where most of you blokes fail tbh. Just too happy to make up shit when it sounds good for your cause.

The reality - I feel we're comfortable with the process, except for two things - one, that the (MRP) boss is making comments about the case before it's heard ... and the head of football (Anderson) forever interfering in things. Let's get it straight, Chris knows he's stuffed up and he's apologised. But it's a bit like people want to stone him.

firstly tell the manager to cry me a river!
Saying he accepts it etc but also needs to come out and have a major whinge!!

Can the Manager provide evidence where the Head of Football forever interfering in things?

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Aside from his views on intent.

Arguing on intent is beyond me. Whilst he had his hand before the tackle was completed, he obviously intended to cause him some pain.

The damage wouldn't have been done if he released his arm.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Arguing on intent is beyond me. Whilst he had his hand before the tackle was completed, he obviously intended to cause him some pain.

The damage wouldn't have been done if he released his arm.

There is nothing definitive as far as intent. It's all personal opinion. He intentionally grabbed his arm, he intentionally pulled the arm upwards. After that, it comes down to your own sense of logic. It's a weird incident that caused pain. He didn't need to do it so therefore the concensus is that he must have meant to cause pain.

Could he have just wanted to impede him, deny him the opportunity to feign a punch out? Could he have wanted to lift him up to expose the ball and make it available to Carrazzo? I can't definitively say no to that, so the option remains. The fact that he grabbed the arm when Adams was standing up and maintained that hold after he fell down, do we think that he grabbed that arm originally with the intention of twisting it and causing pain? Remember, it's not as though he walked up to him when he was on the ground, reached down and wrenched the arm.

I guess, I'm just more open to entertaining all possibilities, however remote they may be. It's an occupational hazard.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

From Sam Edmund's piece:

"Then you've got the head of football Adrian Anderson ... if he hasn't been speaking to Fraser and telling the world why this has to go direct to the tribunal, then I'll go he."

So not really an allegation. Nevertheless, a line you wouldn't want to be treading with this administration. It's not like it shouldn't have gone to the tribunal anyways - it would be under-estimated with the MRP categories.

 

[Jack2Jack]

Pretty hard to feel sorry for him, regardless what technique he's trying to use.

Don't know why people try so hard to paint him as a saint when those same people will quickly acusse other players of being dogs or thugs in the blink of an eye. He's gone for 4 weeks and will have to cop it on the chin and like other repeat offenders you'd hope this time he'll finally learn from it.

You see plenty of other brain snaps - punches, late dangerous bumps, elbows ect all bad decisions made it split seconds, or moments of rage/madness and alot of those players names get dragged through the mud (not saying any of these things are acceptable btw) but why should Judd be immune/felt sorry for.
But, his actions are very different from thoise - eye gouging, "chicken locks" are not quick brain snaps or poor split second decisions he'd have plenty of think time going on when he's peforming them. 4 weeks is more then fair.

 

[worthy]

There is nothing definitive as far as intent. It's all personal opinion. He intentionally grabbed his arm, he intentionally pulled the arm upwards. After that, it comes down to your own sense of logic. It's a weird incident that caused pain. He didn't need to do it so therefore the concensus is that he must have meant to cause pain.

Could he have just wanted to impede him, deny him the opportunity to feign a punch out? Could he have wanted to lift him up to expose the ball and make it available to Carrazzo? I can't definitively say no to that, so the option remains. The fact that he grabbed the arm when Adams was standing up and maintained that hold after he fell down, do we think that he grabbed that arm originally with the intention of twisting it and causing pain? Remember, it's not as though he walked up to him when he was on the ground, reached down and wrenched the arm.

I guess, I'm just more open to entertaining all possibilities, however remote they may be. It's an occupational hazard.

I'm pretty sure he told the tribunal he didn't intentionally pull his arm upwards, it was along the lines of, he grabbed the arm and the motion of Adams falling to the ground gave the appearance of him pulling the arm back, he also said, his eyes were on the ball, not adams and when he looked back at Adams he realised the arm was bent back, this is when he let go.
Now, of course, non of that matches the video evidence.

What he was trying to do is only part of the case, I certainly don't think he was trying to dislocate his shoulder (my op) I do think he was trying to inflict a bit of pain/discomfort (my op). What he did do was inflict pain/discomfort and injury, the NM doctor confirmed the shoulder was subluxed in the incident.

4 weeks seems fair

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

There is nothing definitive as far as intent. It's all personal opinion. He intentionally grabbed his arm, he intentionally pulled the arm upwards. After that, it comes down to your own sense of logic. It's a weird incident that caused pain. He didn't need to do it so therefore the concensus is that he must have meant to cause pain.

It was intended to cause pain. He intentionally pulled the arm behind Carrazzo's back. I'm no physio... but that would've been as damaging as the effect of the movement after Swallow et al pushing him in the opposite direction. He should've let go. Why not, at that point, if not to cause pain?

Could he have just wanted to impede him, deny him the opportunity to feign a punch out? Could he have wanted to lift him up to expose the ball and make it available to Carrazzo? I can't definitively say no to that, so the option remains. The fact that he grabbed the arm when Adams was standing up and maintained that hold after he fell down, do we think that he grabbed that arm originally with the intention of twisting it and causing pain? Remember, it's not as though he walked up to him when he was on the ground, reached down and wrenched the arm.

That's one thing people are quick to seperate. The hold from the tackle - I prefer not to argue with those who think they were seperate - it indicates a predisposition to the argument.

Pretty hard to feel sorry for him, regardless what technique he's trying to use.

On the other hand, it's difficult for Carlton supporters not to see this as something of a lynching (on BF). 150 pages of some funny, and some really abhorrent posts.

They're a given on this site, however - but perhaps the more aggrevating thing for fans that can't help themselves, is people likening it to torture, to a felony, and other things.

Don't know why people try so hard to paint him as a saint when those same people will quickly acusse other players of being dogs or thugs in the blink of an eye. He's gone for 4 weeks and will have to cop it on the chin and like other repeat offenders you'd hope this time he'll finally learn from it.

The act was no worse than Wellingham's or Hunt's (IMO obviously) alas has attracted this much attention (both in the media and on these boards). If I may speak for the rest of Carlton supporters, it has this overwhelming feeling of some tall-poppy, schadenfreude-like frenzy that is unfair on any player.

Wellingham and Hunt both knew their opponent was going to be incapable of avoiding/preventing the contact and acted accordingly. The profile of the player, yes as one with priors, but also as one of a media darling, and one of the better performed players over the years is all that separates the incidents.

But, his actions are very different from thoise - eye gouging, "chicken locks" are not quick brain snaps or poor split second decisions he'd have plenty of think time going on when he's peforming them. 4 weeks is more then fair.

It is very, very hard not to define them as split second decisions. It's also hard not to suggest they are brain snaps - why would he possibly do them knowing the storm thats coming? The difference is that many players wouldn't even contemplate them.

This is another thing that appears to have irritated fans, the fact that its made out as if this were necessarily a calculated act. He was holding his arm (well) before the tackle was completed.

 

[Outshined]

Got what he deserved.

 

[worthy]

It was intended to cause pain. He intentionally pulled the arm behind Carrazzo's back. I'm no physio... but that would've been as damaging as the effect of the movement after Swallow et al pushing him in the opposite direction. He should've let go. Why not, at that point, if not to cause pain?

That's one thing people are quick to seperate. The hold from the tackle - I prefer not to argue with those who think they were seperate - it indicates a predisposition to the argument.

On the other hand, it's difficult for Carlton supporters not to see this as something of a lynching (on BF). 150 pages of some funny, and some really abhorrent posts.

They're a given on this site, however - but perhaps the more aggrevating thing for fans that can't help themselves, is people likening it to torture, to a felony, and other things.

The act was no worse than Wellingham's or Hunt's (IMO obviously) alas has attracted this much attention (both in the media and on these boards). If I may speak for the rest of Carlton supporters, it has this overwhelming feeling of some tall-poppy, schadenfreude-like frenzy that is unfair on any player.

Wellingham and Hunt both knew their opponent was going to be incapable of avoiding/preventing the contact and acted accordingly. The profile of the player, yes as one with priors, but also as one of a media darling, and one of the better performed players over the years is all that separates the incidents.

It is very, very hard not to define them as split second decisions. It's also hard not to suggest they are brain snaps - why would he possibly do them knowing the storm thats coming? The difference is that many players wouldn't even contemplate them.

This is another thing that appears to have irritated fans, the fact that its made out as if this were necessarily a calculated act. He was holding his arm (well) before the tackle was completed.

Some of what you say IMO is spot on, some not so IMO.

"no worse than Wellinghams or Hunts" - It was the nature or appearance of it that seperates the incidents, one you see every week, the other not seen before (you seem sensible, so I know you wont use Rioli's example), if Judd had laid a bruising hip and shoulder there would still be significant outcry but the footy world would move on pretty quickly as it sees them regularly.
I must admit, the Hunt one looks pretty ugly.
"Tall poppy" is it? or is it the fact Judd was held on a pedestal by the media and could do no wrong?
Also, the BF reaction is hightened due to the reaction of many vocal Carlton supporters who could see nothing wrong.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Also, the BF reaction is hightened due to the reaction of many vocal Carlton supporters who could see nothing wrong.

Not a chance. Some players, some teams get these reactions regardless of input from their own supporters. You will often find a hundred exaggerated opinions before a supporters will jump in to try and defend anything. You've been around long enough to know that detractors need no reason or invitation to have these reactions.

 

[Diesel1993]

This is proof that media hysteria influences the (independent) tribunal

I'm a jujitsu instructor of 20 odd years experience and that was not a chicken wing arm lock
The chicken wing arm lock has a bent elbow and can not be executed from a standing position by holding on to the wrist FFS (other wise the opponent would simply roll or stand up

So if that technique doesn't exist how can Judd be accused of doing it deliberately?

Judd was simply trying to pull him off the ball and if the roo player was on his back instead of his stomach everyone could see it for what it was

If anything the other roo players trying to pull Judd off of him whilst he was still holding the arm would have been what would have caused any damage

Also Did this roo player have any prexisting injury in that same region?

Nope no intent at all to do damage and unfairly beaten up by the media

No great fan of Carlton or Judd but Carlton shoulsd have taken on the tribunal with science

mate, the way people are on these boards I wouldn't even bother. Most are baaaaaaaaaa baaaaaaaaa media sheeps who espouse what they hear on the teeeeveeee.

I'm not fussed with four weeks, but the illegal and underhanded way the AFL pushed this case should be looked at. Judd should take out a civil suit against Anderson, fraser and the AFL.

 

[biggiemediums]

Get over it.

Judd has been weighed, he has been measured, and he has been found wanting.

 

[Diesel1993]

Get over it.

Judd has been weighed, he has been measured, and he has been found wanting.

just like didak, swan, cloke, tarrant, beams...wellingham...it goes on mate

 

[biggiemediums]

just like didak, swan, cloke, tarrant, beams...wellingham...it goes on mate

Please, you have the biggest sniping dog playing for you, don't bring other players into this.

 

[Kaiser Powser]

Due to the profile of this incident the AFL were always going to ensure it got a fairly sizeable suspension. I reckon Carlton know they are on a hiding to nothing if they fight it. They will just have to cop it on the chin or risk making things worse for themselves. You cannot win in a dictatorship.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

"no worse than Wellinghams or Hunts" - It was the nature or appearance of it that seperates the incidents, one you see every week, the other not seen before (you seem sensible, so I know you wont use Rioli's example), if Judd had laid a bruising hip and shoulder there would still be significant outcry but the footy world would move on pretty quickly as it sees them regularly.

That's definitely true - there is a certain level of novelty to this type of act. Very few acts like these happen. Hunt's stomp is in a similar category for mine though.

Wellingham's, as far as intent and severity go was worse, it certainly was no better - Intent was clear cut. In fact it was conceded. Severity was enough to cause a broken jaw, and one of the more sickening concussions you'll see. It had all the ingredients of the Lloyd incident a few years back, alas received far less outrage than what Wellingham's hit did. Another of those love-to-hate players.

"Tall poppy" is it? or is it the fact Judd was held on a pedestal by the media and could do no wrong?

A bit of both - I think that's mentioned in the post quoted.

Also, the BF reaction is hightened due to the reaction of many vocal Carlton supporters who could see nothing wrong.

This is probably a contributing factor. The incident was unsightly, very difficult to defend, and something that shouldn't be seen on the football field. But still, if any other player on our list did it, even Waite, it wouldn't have received a 150 page MB thread. I'd be thinking 20 at tops.

I think it's a pretty shit reflection on the state of (BF) football supporter culture, if nothing else.

Carlton fans should be more inwardly disappointed in their captain who gave North extra impetus to win a crucial match.

 

[worthy]

Not a chance. Some players, some teams get these reactions regardless of input from their own supporters. You will often find a hundred exaggerated opinions before a supporters will jump in to try and defend anything. You've been around long enough to know that detractors need no reason or invitation to have these reactions.

Now, I did say heightened, it was always going to be a big reaction due to who it was and the unusual nature of it.

If it was Judd laying the Wellingham bump, yes the reaction would be huge, but nowhere the reaction of this.

It's the nature of it

It's the vibe

It's Mabo

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Now, I did say heightened, it was always going to be a big reaction due to who it was and the unusual nature of it.

If it was Judd laying the Wellingham bump, yes the reaction would be huge, but nowhere the reaction of this.

It's the nature of it

It's the vibe

It's Mabo

It's .... opportunism. If these detractors were footballers, they would be seagulling cheap uncontested kicks on the flanks.

 

[Admiral Byng]

I'm not fussed with four weeks, but the illegal and underhanded way the AFL pushed this case should be looked at. Judd should take out a civil suit against Anderson, fraser and the AFL.

You can't be serious?

He was reported on the day by the boundary umpire. Nothing underhanded about it at all from the AFL. Like all match day reports it was referred to the MRP for follow-up.

It was sent directly to the tribunal because their isn't a specific category for Misconduct (Manipulating a Limb) or something similar. I thought it could have been covered by Rough Conduct. If it was considered as Rough Conduct (intentional, high impact, body contact) with his prior bad record he would have got 7 weeks.

Rather than complain about a plot against Carlton, I think you should consider Judd got off a little bit lightly.

 

[StevenwellerHFC]

Carlton should fight it, i wanna see Judd get more. haha