Eddie McGuire - Free Buddy!

[Brilliant]

Sorry about the long post, not sure if it's the right thread for it , but anyway.


It is all a bit soft. Stupid rules make it the right decision though.

Looking at the footage Franklin could've tackled and looked as though he intended to do so.

Ben then changed direction as he fained a handball and fumbled the ball.

By doing this he slowed down and ran across Buddy's path. When Cousins fumbled it caused him to take a longer step as he stretched out to regain control of the ball, this slowed his momentum down.

Buddy still could've tackled but decided to go to the bump, he had clearly seen the fumble and knew the handball was a dummy but Benny was now running right at him and Buddy was still changing direction.

By now Buddy was fully comitted to the bump, Cousins still continued directly into Buddy with little awarness as he continued to try and re gather the ball and consequently was hit high.

I blame the fumble. If Cousins didn't fumble he would have endeavoured to get around Buddy, not run straight into him. Buddy did have the option of tackling but in the heat of the moment as soon as he saw the ball fumble he decided to go the bump. Ben was vulnerable, had the ball and an viable target for a hip and shoulder. Which is fair enough, however Ben being off balance and not all that aware of Buddy's position ran into Buddy in a slighly crouching position as he was still trying to re gain control of the ball.

Buddy should get off as Cousins actions did contribute to the high contact. The ruling however doesn't take that into account as tackling was also a viable option.


BTW - Arguing he couldn't tackle because he though Cousins was going to handball is stupid and worse than what really happened. If he though Cousins was handballing and wouldn't have posession therefore a tackle becoming illegal, how on earth would a headhigh bump become acceptable? he would'nt even have the ball and you're knocking him out, I'm sure that isn't legal and worse than the real story.

 

[dipper86]

2nd Edit: Why didn't Rioli 'brace for impact' when Cousins dodged him? He stuck a hand out and missed a tackle.

Its almost idiotic, totally different circumstances, Cousins ran past/wrong footed Rioli, he wasn't head on with Rioli, a natural reaction for when a player running past you is sticking your arm out, you're implying that naturally a footballer who has a player running past him should go for a hip and shoulder that is not a natural reaction/instinct or movement.

Front on impact is a totally different story.

You stand your ground and brace for impact with a bump (a bump is also used for protection) or a tackle which is dependent on the time and the ferocity at which both players are coming at, reaction time for a tackle is almost non existent in this case.......if its quick and hard most players will brace themselves for protection. (which this incident was)

 

[footyfreak]

People SERIOUSLY need to let this go.

I can't WAIT for them to finally put this to bed tonight, and hopefully from now on, when someone (no matter who it is) bumps someone and makes contact they'll be suspended and we'll stop with the whingeing since it's so CLEAR now why they've been suspended.

Be careful what you wish for coz i guarantee with our clubs Murphy's law finals record it will be us that will lose a Didak or a Pendlebury for a GF because of a near unavoidable accidental head collision.

And i guarantee you'd be the first one to say "no it was different to the buddy case". It's all bullshit. He should never have been suspended.

Anyone that thinks he should has no idea about football and how hard it is to make decisions in fractions of seconds.

I can not believe the AFL are screwing this game even further right in front of our eyes and some of you are going along with it.

 

[LuvMyHawks]

Why does anyone compare Maxwell's legal and only viable option bump that unfortunately resulted in a head clash with Franklin's illegal, head high bump that was one of four options and should have resulted in a free kick to Richmond?

Would anyone give a rats arse if it wasn't Franklin? Or if the Hawks were in the bottom 4?

Head high contact has been a free for a lot longer than 2009. Throwing a shoulder into someone's head has been a suspendable offence for a lot longer than 2009.

You MUST be joking!! McGinnity was NOT in possession of the ball, it was outside of the boundary line, the BALL was well over a metre from him when he barrelled into McGinnity.Why didn't Maxwell go for the BALL???He went directly for the MAN!!He had no intentionof going for the ball..If Buddy had tackled him,he would have given away a 50 metre penalty.. Cousins was out cold about 2/3mins, McGinnity had a BROKEN jaw, and could not play for over THREE months..Get you b....y facts right!!
There was no malice or intent in Buddy's bump.
But don't worry you Collingwood supporters, we won't be there to put you out of the finals..He won't get off, he doesn't wear Black & White!!
Maxwell should have gone for a month, for deliberate rough play..

 

[Brilliant]

You MUST be joking!! McGinnity was NOT in possession of the ball, it was outside of the boundary line, the BALL was well over a metre from him when he barrelled into McGinnity.Why didn't Maxwell go for the BALL???He went directly for the MAN!!He had no intentionof going for the ball..If Buddy had tackled him,he would have given away a 50 metre penalty.. Cousins was out cold about 2/3mins, McGinnity had a BROKEN jaw, and could not play for over THREE months..Get you b....y facts right!!
There was no malice or intent in Buddy's bump.
But don't worry you Collingwood supporters, we won't be there to put you out of the finals..He won't get off, he doesn't wear Black & White!!
Maxwell should have gone for a month, for deliberate rough play..

Maxwell couldn't tackle either, he would of gave away a 50m penalty using your logic. Maxwell put on a sheperd for his teammate, something you're allowed to do in Aussie Rules.

This post shows your one eyed Hawthorn mentality. Maxwell got off for the same reasons you try and justify Buddy's. No malice, hip and shoulder (no elbow), didn't jump, couldn't tackle etc etc yet you say Maxwell should of got a month and Buddy nothing.

They both should've got nothing.

 

[LuvMyHawks]

Footyfreak,

FINALLY a Collingwood supporter with a brain..Very well said. A player usually has a split
second to make a decision..At times they don't make the right one, but of course none of us ever make a wrong one...

 

[smiddaz123]

Why didn't Maxwell go for the BALL???He went directly for the MAN!!He had no intentionof going for the ball..:

Ever heard of a shepherd?

 

[LuvMyHawks]

Maxwell couldn't tackle either, he would of gave away a 50m penalty using your logic. Maxwell put on a sheperd for his teammate, something you're allowed to do in Aussie Rules.

This post shows your one eyed Hawthorn mentality. Maxwell got off for the same reasons you try and justify Buddy's. No malice, hip and shoulder (no elbow), didn't jump, couldn't tackle etc etc yet you say Maxwell should of got a month and Buddy nothing.

They both should've got nothing.

Of course it doesn't show YOUR one eyed mentality either!! Open the other eye!

 

[scottyt2]

Why are players obliged to tackle instead of bump? If a legitimate bump is deemed to be a legal part of our game then a player should be allowed to bump OR tackle. I dont get why Franklin should be suspended on the basis that he 'should have tackled'.
If a player does have the option to tackle but it is the lesser option then surely he should be allowed to bump instead. And in this case bumping Cousins was the best option for Franklin because Hawthorn ended up scoring a goal.

 

[Helfarch]

Why are players obliged to tackle instead of bump? If a legitimate bump is deemed to be a legal part of our game then a player should be allowed to bump OR tackle. I dont get why Franklin should be suspended on the basis that he 'should have tackled'.
If a player does have the option to tackle but it is the lesser option then surely he should be allowed to bump instead. And in this case bumping Cousins was the best option for Franklin because Hawthorn ended up scoring a goal.

Except for high contact which should have been a free kick to Richmond, pointing out the umpire's incompetence doesn't help Franklin. If there was no high contact there would be no case. Bumping Cousins in the head was not a legal option or Franklin's best option because an option that 9/10 should be a free and now + suspension is never your best option.

If this was Baker on anyone he wouldn't play until 2011 and if it was on Franklin probably a life ban.

 

[asanque]

Why are players obliged to tackle instead of bump? If a legitimate bump is deemed to be a legal part of our game then a player should be allowed to bump OR tackle. I dont get why Franklin should be suspended on the basis that he 'should have tackled'.
If a player does have the option to tackle but it is the lesser option then surely he should be allowed to bump instead. And in this case bumping Cousins was the best option for Franklin because Hawthorn ended up scoring a goal.

Exactly.
According to the new (stupid) rules, players supposedly have 2 options:
1. Bump; or
2. Tackle.

If a player tackles and accidentally has high contact, then this is not rough conduct.

If a player bumps and accidentally has high contact, then he is suspended for rough conduct.

Logical conclusion: The AFL is trying to kill the bump.

Which is stupid, as it is legal under the rules of the game.

Anderson and Vlad = fail.

 

[Mondeo]

The rule stinks!

Incidental contact is just that! It's not as if he was trying to knock him out.

It would not have been looked at if cousin's just got up and ran off. The fact he got concussed should have had nothing to do with it.

Zac Dawson knocked out one of Buddy's front teeth, why wasn't he suspended?

The players intent must be taken into consideration............

... and if his neck had been broken. The rule is to protect players heads and necks. It really is a very simple concept.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Sorry about the long post, not sure if it's the right thread for it , but anyway.


It is all a bit soft. Stupid rules make it the right decision though.

Looking at the footage Franklin could've tackled and looked as though he intended to do so.

Ben then changed direction as he fained a handball and fumbled the ball.

By doing this he slowed down and ran across Buddy's path. When Cousins fumbled it caused him to take a longer step as he stretched out to regain control of the ball, this slowed his momentum down.

Buddy still could've tackled but decided to go to the bump, he had clearly seen the fumble and knew the handball was a dummy but Benny was now running right at him and Buddy was still changing direction.

By now Buddy was fully comitted to the bump, Cousins still continued directly into Buddy with little awarness as he continued to try and re gather the ball and consequently was hit high.

I blame the fumble. If Cousins didn't fumble he would have endeavoured to get around Buddy, not run straight into him. Buddy did have the option of tackling but in the heat of the moment as soon as he saw the ball fumble he decided to go the bump. Ben was vulnerable, had the ball and an viable target for a hip and shoulder. Which is fair enough, however Ben being off balance and not all that aware of Buddy's position ran into Buddy in a slighly crouching position as he was still trying to re gain control of the ball.

Buddy should get off as Cousins actions did contribute to the high contact. The ruling however doesn't take that into account as tackling was also a viable option.


BTW - Arguing he couldn't tackle because he though Cousins was going to handball is stupid and worse than what really happened. If he though Cousins was handballing and wouldn't have posession therefore a tackle becoming illegal, how on earth would a headhigh bump become acceptable? he would'nt even have the ball and you're knocking him out, I'm sure that isn't legal and worse than the real story.

As I said earlier.

That close up footage gives a poor angle.

Cousins WAS about to get around Buddy, the distance shot the original Ten Broadcast footage has, shows Cousins changes direction TWICE. The second one, to get around Buddy.

Buddy ALSO changes directions, and bumps cousins instead of tackling.

And to those saying had Buddy tackled, he would have given away a free, how is that possible. If Cousins really WAS going INTO him, then a tackle would have wrapped up Cousins AND the ball.

The ball never left Cousins hand. Like I said, look at the DISTANCE angle. Buddy changes direction TWICE to match where Cousins is going. He has his eye on Cousins the whole way, and just as Cousins is about to get around him, he charges/bumps into him instead of making an attempt to tackle like Rioli did.

 

[TheBrownlowMan37]

I'm not sure what's more sickening, Eddie's bullshit or the lemmings that lap it up.

Lock in C, JD's bullshit.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Its clear from the replay that Buddy changed direction in order to get Cousins. Cousins head was over the ball and Buddy decided to go for it and got his right whack.

99.9% of other players manage it every minute of every game so to say that it was split second and not his fault is a cop out. he has exactly same amount of time as every other player in AFL. he also gives away alot of free kicks for stupid things he does on the field and thats where the problem lies, not with the rule.

Get a clue.
Cousins was running upright, how the hell did he have his head over the ball???

Seriously, your hatred for Franklin sees you posting unintelligent twaddle.

 

[johncitizen]

Lock in C, JD's bullshit.

ROFL Eddie is just trying to stop footy from becoming netball. I can't understand some BF people not wanting Buddy to get off. Ed is trying to save the game, no hidden agendas.

 

[anon_ehawk]

Is Tom Cruise still in town?

 

[Jeebs]

Is Tom Cruise still in town?

Doesn't matter. It's Lamb Roasting time.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Thanks for the photos Brilliant...

Franklin clearly setup to tackle - arms spread, legs apart, but he's been caught off guard by Cousins' step - his left foot puts him out of position.

Franklin's body position means his only option is a one-arm tackle (off-balance against Cousins with momentum) which would start at chest/neck height anyway, or try and shift his weight back onto his left foot.

However Cousins fumble and then slip means he doesn't get away from Franklin (if he had completed one of those two successfully, he probably would have made Franklin look stupid). He's now heading straight towards an almost stationery Franklin.

Realising he's about to be cannonned into, Franklin pulls his arm in tight to protect himself, and gets as low as possible to try and avoid giving away a free. Good bump, play on - and bad luck Ben.

It's actually quite funny that not only did this get pulled up at MRP, but it made it through the tribunal, and now probably appeals too.

Yet actual intentional head hits that take players out are let go.

 

[Parallel Andy]

Most fans against Buddy are the Bombers and Collingwood supporters.

Any coincidence that we always flog Collingwood and we play the Bombers this week?

At the time of your post zero Essendon suppoters had made comment in this thread.

9 Collingwood supporters had posted of which 7 were pro Buddy.

Would you like to come back to reality now?

 

[laminex]

I'm not sure what's more sickening, Eddie's bullshit or the lemmings that lap it up.

Nah JD you make sick the most, what a missry you must be to live with.

I feel sorry for your poor mum who has her 30 odd year old son living at home sooking about all the wrongs in the world.

 

[laminex]

If only Ed used his powers for good instead of evil all the time.

He does but many people are to full of hate to see it.

 

[anon_ehawk]

Doesn't matter. It's Lamb Roasting time.

Poaching the roast I'd say. coming from a Melbourne scoughupporter.

 

[WEARECOLLINGWOOD!]

Serial attention seeker.

lol... AT least we dont have that muppet Kernahan as our president!!

WOW Elliot, Collins, Pratt & now him!!!

ANychance of getting someone with substance & integrity at your club???

lol losers

 

[Magpies 2009]

The bump is dead!

Rip