Dangerfield on Kelly

[Linda_Lovelace]

2 games, 2 KO's. He has to go, shows no respect for opposition player. The rule is simple, you bump and the player suffers a head injury, you are gone, there is no accident.

Its a BS rule but given what he has done, he has to go. Do Geelong good, he is close to done, lost a yard and can't hit a target by foot.

 

[Ron The Bear]

It's all just 'accidental'. He just accidentally does it repeatedly.

Now on the suspension, if Kelly did the exact same to Dangerfield and Danger was stretchered off, Kelly would get 3-4 weeks right?

I leaned 60/40 towards the Vlastuin hit being deliberate but can see why he got the benefit of the doubt. This one there's no doubt, he set himself to bump after ball was gone and actually veered towards Kelly. Poor technique rather than malicious, and I don't know what the Monopoly points say, but most of the time when somebody gets hurt the initiator is punished. Hard to see how he escapes a suspension according to the rules.

For a players' rep, he doesn't show much interest in the welfare of the opponents he's felled.

 

[theyellowsash]

I don't think he should go for that. The ball was released literally .1 seconds before he bumped. How can you pull out of that???

Doesn't matter. It's not that he didn't pull out, it's that he went the bump instead of the tackle. Wouldn't matter if the crows player still had the ball

 

[theyellowsash]

I

Is he not capable of anticipating his opponent would dispose of the ball before he makes contact?

It doesn't matter that he didn't have the ball. If he bumped (and concussed him) and he still had the ball it would be exactly the same.

It's the bump, not it being late.

 

[theyellowsash]

2 games, 2 KO's. He has to go, shows no respect for opposition player. The rule is simple, you bump and the player suffers a head injury, you are gone, there is no accident.

Its a BS rule but given what he has done, he has to go. Do Geelong good, he is close to done, lost a yard and can't hit a target by foot.

I hate danger as much as the next bloke but the vlastuin one was not a suspension. Reaching for the ball and there was a collision.

This is 3 weeks minimum though, if they want to be consistent. It's as bad as the long bump last year.

 

[fairfooty]

They'll argue that it was just an unfortunate head clash.

They can argue all they like - no such thing anymore - head clash like this with a player stretchered off with probable brain injury/concussion you get weeks.

 

[Kernafides]

He chose to bump and knocked a bloke out. Williams chose to bump and the bloke played out the game. Surely danger doesn't get off

 

[luthor]

It's all just 'accidental'. He just accidentally does it repeatedly.

Now on the suspension, if Kelly did the exact same to Dangerfield and Danger was stretchered off, Kelly would get 3-4 weeks jail right?

FTFY

 

[Catsnlakers]

Late is irrelevant, choosing to bump instead of tackle is the issue. Choose to bump, choose the consequences. Has been the go for a while. But you're right, this is Danger, will get nothing.

You conveniently forget when he got suspended for a very soft ‘sling’ tackle that possibly cost him a second Brownlow... He’ll get rubbed out for this without controversy though, it’ll be two weeks.

 

[Grockadoc]

Under old rules, would be okay for the head clash.

Under the new rules, head clashes are a 'foreseeable consequence' of electing to bump, and thus doesn't give the benefit of the doubt to the bumper anymore. The AFL seem to be black and white on this issue based on the whole concussion and CTE issue these days.

If you elect to bump and ANY contact is made to the head, head clash or not, it will result in weeks.

Danger has to go.

 

[Hawk_francais]

Probably 1-2

 

[BF Tiger]

Danger fronting the media tomorrow..:

 

[SunshineBoy]

It’s a sad state of affairs when ppl are baying for blokes to get suspended for a head clash and the bump is straight up the middle. Zach Williams a lot worse, later and jumped in the air

Pity the ball was gone and should have been a free for a hit off the ball, but hey it’s Patrick and he has form

 

[SunshineBoy]

You conveniently forget when he got suspended for a very soft ‘sling’ tackle that possibly cost him a second Brownlow... He’ll get rubbed out for this without controversy though, it’ll be two weeks.

A second Brownlow to add to his premiership medallions

 

[SunshineBoy]

Tbh won’t be looked at

 

[1970crow]

Spare me, Williams clearly jumps in the air to pick the bloke off well after acceptances. They aren’t running in the same direction pretty much at each other, Williams comes in at right angles cheaply, not front on.
The outcome shouldn’t come into it, aesthetically Williams was way worse and had potential to cause a lot more damage as it was shoulder to head, where all the force is.

Unfortunately the AFL does take into account the outcome. It's pure bullshit, but it's how the system operates. One of their examples in recent history was that if you elect to bump and your opponent hits a knee on the way down and gets concussed, then you'll wear the consequences for that. It's just how shit this has become.

 

[1970crow]

careless, high contact, high impact

Don't really see how it can be anything else. Explanation on Fox Footy right now is actually really good.

If the press are at him, he's gone. They set the the narrative based on inside 'leaks'.

 

[HairyO]

It's all just 'accidental'. He just accidentally does it repeatedly.

Now on the suspension, if Kelly did the exact same to Dangerfield and Danger was stretchered off, Kelly would get 3-4 weeks right?

Exactly.

He chose to bump. He hit him high. He knocked him in to next week.

The only question is high or severe. Given the damage done it has to be severe. Given its Dangerfield, it will probably be high.

Should be 3 weeks, will be 2.

 

[_RT_]

It’s a sad state of affairs when ppl are baying for blokes to get suspended for a head clash and the bump is straight up the middle. Zach Williams a lot worse, later and jumped in the air

Accidental head knock. There is nothing comparable in this incident to what Williams did.

Spare me, Williams clearly jumps in the air to pick the bloke off well after acceptances. They aren’t running in the same direction pretty much at each other, Williams comes in at right angles cheaply, not front on.
The outcome shouldn’t come into it, aesthetically Williams was way worse and had potential to cause a lot more damage as it was shoulder to head, where all the force is.

No case to answer, text book bump. Kelly's head hit Danger's, not the other way round!

Will be referred straight to the tribunal. Will be graded as intentional (chose to bump) severe impact (Kelly was out cold before he hit the ground) high contact (obvious head contact)

 

[HairyO]

View attachment 1082103



Will be referred straight to the tribunal. Will be graded as intentional (chose to bump) severe impact (Kelly was out cold before he hit the ground) high contact (obvious head contact)

I think bumps are always deemed reckless not intentional. Would need to have raised an elbow to be intentional.

Hocking may send it to the Tribunal to see if Geelong can get it down to 1 week. 2 weeks would be hard to Appeal.

 

[CrowInFiji]

Given the AFL have had their legal teams scrambling for 15 or so hours now trying to find, or manufacture, a plausible excuse for Danger to not even be cited, let's all spare a thought for the random unfortunate kid who is now doomed to cop 3 weeks for a totally innocuous bump so the AFL can show they are tough on this.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

I laughed so hard at the commentary of “he didn’t jump off the ground and make contact“ and it was literally in the middle of the footage showing both of Dangerfield feet off the ground. As they said this and the footage came the tone of the voice dropped off at the end of the sentence too knowing they were being shown as wrong in real time

Will try to get it on YouTube this week. Has the potential to go viral

 

[OnceWeWereKings]

Exactly.

He chose to bump. He hit him high. He knocked him in to next week.

The only question is high or severe. Given the damage done it has to be severe. Given its Dangerfield, it will probably be high.

Should be 3 weeks, will be 2.

This.

If Williams was medium impact then this has to be severe.
If it’s not, then I don’t understand what type of impact would be then graded severe.

Reckless, High Contact, Severe Impact - 3 weeks and a visit to the tribunal.

Cannot be assessed any other way.

The media response will be as interesting to assess as the MROs.

 

[telsor]

Probably 1-2

That's the thing, it can't be 1.

If it's deemed accidental, it's nothing (not even a fine).
If it's careless, then it'll be 2 or 3 depending on severity.

I remember debating in the Zac Williams thread about the benefits of the system having a little wiggle room...That there can be gaps like this is a good argument about why allowing the MRP a little flexibility is good. (I don't think it applies in this case, but still...jumping from 0 to 3 based on a judgement call on intent is pretty severe)

 

[TEDDY24INC]

Spot on. The current rule interpretation means he should get 3.

TEDDY24INC - not baying for blood, but just stating what the AFL rules have turned into. They do want a lawsuit like the NFL, so have basically outlawed the bump. Danger had no intention to injure his opponent, but he did. And the AFL will argue he had a choice, and by electing to bump he loses the benefit of accidental contact, and therefore grade it reckless.

What was his choice, he can’t tackle as the ball is disposed of, jump out of the way is all that’s left?