No Oppo Supporters General AFL discussion and other club news

[Mr Lizard]

lol "smother"

 

[eldorado]

Can’t believe the same people who were in disbelief (all of us) about Sicily getting 3 weeks are in shock about Maynard possibly getting the same.

I’m sorry but if I’m about to have contact with an on coming object, my first thought would be to extend my arms forward and try to deflect and soften the contact. Not tuck in and drop the shoulder.
The guy meant it. This is Maynard we are talking about.
3-4 weeks.

You always tuck in, to protect your face, abdomen and testicles...you ALWAYS turn side on....

It's the most basic self-preservation instinct for an impact there is.

But I guess if the AFL says you shouldn't, that takes precedence...

 

[SammyC]

I think the afl is probably more than comfortable with this as an accident, but want a definitive ruling either way from the ‘independent’ tribunal.

Future liability and all that.

 

[Mr Lizard]

 

[Yardie]

Resignation that he gets 3 weeks. Because it’s us, and the demonstrated track record, and that the mrp delight in shitting on us

But would you agree with the decision?

 

[kirbatron]

hope the boys have taken Mitch's advice & seen the step up in pressure & intensity. finals footy is not pretty a lot of the time

glad that wardy is studying guldens tapes

 

[Yardie]

The AFL have gone too far with head high contact by not accepting that accidents can and do happen. They are seeking to hold someone responsible at every opportunity.

I actually don't believe Maynard should be suspended but the AFL set the benchmark with Sicily and have to continue with it now.

But they didn't hold Rampe (concussion) and McCartin (Broken Jaw) responsible. So that argument is flawed.

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

Ok, so we can add 'smother' to the list of things one shouldn't do unless one can be absolutely sure no undue contact will eventuate in the aftermath...

The NRL banned the move. The game survived.

How often have you seen a guy being knocked out from a smother attempt? Cite them so I can mourn the passing of this common occurrence.

 

[Yardie]

C'mon, that is a kid's argument you're making. Were his arms in the air when he made contact?

The smother was the first action, the bump was there to take if he wanted it, and he did. Drove right through the guy.

How many big hits have we seen like this, in a game where guys run and jump in front of the kicker dozens of times each week?

If what you're saying was remotely true, this argument would be all over big footy every week.

It's not for a really clear reason.

You were comparing Buddy who was bumping players with Maynard who was in the act of a smother. Completely different actions. Not a "kid's argument" at all, just stating the difference between the two. You're obviously angry about how Hawthorn players are treated (and so am I) but want everyone else treated the same for the detriment of the game. Now that's throwing the toys out of the cot....

 

[Crankyhawk]

But would you agree with the decision?

of course not but it would be consistent with how sicily gets treated by the mrp. And despite those who say the mrp doesn't play favourites it does appear that it does and we are the ones copping it consistently.

 

[Yardie]

of course not but it would be consistent with how sicily gets treated by the mrp. And despite those who say the mrp doesn't play favourites it does appear that it does and we are the ones copping it consistently.

Agree 100% but that is a completely different issue that needs addressing. The AFL needs to step back and take a good hard look at all of these decisions. In particular they need to come out with a definite way forward. You can't have some players being done for concussion (Sicily) while others get off (Rampe). It is just confusing the players and making a mockery of our game.

 

[eldorado]

The NRL banned the move. The game survived.

How often have you seen a guy being knocked out from a smother attempt? Cite them so I can mourn the passing of this common occurrence.

Well, we just saw one.

According to you, he shouldn't have leapt in the air if it was possible that he might then hurt the guy.


And answer my second point...what should happen the next time someone flies for a specky, and someone else gets hit in the head by the knee?

 

[Crankyhawk]

Agree 100% but that is a completely different issue that needs addressing. The AFL needs to step back and take a good hard look at all of these decisions. In particular they need to come out with a definite way forward. You can't have some players being done for concussion (Sicily) while others get off (Rampe). It is just confusing the players and making a mockery of our game.

Of course the AFL need to do this if they were running a competition with integrity
but what they actually do is continue to play favorites as the uncertainty drives media clicks/ work room discussions and keeps them front and center where they need to be to justify their bloated salaries.

 

[toomanysquibs]

From the time he leaves the ground to the time he makes contact is 2 seconds roughly on video - I genuinely don’t believe he has the time to realise he’s not going to smother it so to change his entire tactic and lay out a player in some sinister plot. Jason Dunstall, Kane Cornes, Dangerflog, Jimmy Bartel are among just some of the players who agree it was a footy incident that went wrong from a genuine smother attempt - something tells me the former players have a pretty good idea of a player’s ability to change their entire motive when in mid-air.

If you wanted s dictionary picture perfect definition of a smother - you'd have close to it with Maynard in act one of his attempt.

If you wanted the same definition of a hip and shoulder - you'd have it with act two of his attempt.

Classic form - Arm is tucked, he’s side on, flushes him in the head. Victim is defenseless because he just disposed of the ball.


Understand on opening point, but the group of players you mention all tend to say things like this come finals time when a suspension threatens the quality of the contests. Players historically had a code at the tribunal, where they always defended each other no matter what happened. Some of these commentators played in that era. I take it all with a bit of w grain of salt, really nobody likes to see good players miss finals.

Ok, so we can add 'smother' to the list of things one shouldn't do unless one can be absolutely sure no undue contact will eventuate in the aftermath.
L

 

[Jet_black]

Those two touched behinds = the karma bus. Swans didn't deserve to play finals.

Totally agree

You have Longmire carrying on in the press conference about it then claims he didn’t see it properly because he is not in the media.

Time to move on John. The swans,whilst having immense talent, have been floundering when it comes to finals.

 

[Brishawk]

Yes but … it was graded careless so this grading could be tested and decided at the tribunal. There would have been uproar if dismissed at the MRO stage.

He will get off, nothing surer.

Could do but i think the afl will strongly argue on this one. Brayshaw is probably already a lawsuit waiting to happen for concussion given his history.

 

[vaughnie]

I've watched the vision probably a hundred times and changed my mind several times as to whether Maynard is guilty or not. But, I've watched the behind the goals vision again today.
Having left his man to run to intercept Brayshaw, Maynard is almost stationary. He may have taken one step forward as he leaps to try and smother.
He is not in line with Brayshaw, he is to the left of him.
At the time Brayshaw kicks the ball and Maynard is in the air, Brayshaw is still to right of Maynard. But, for whatever reason, he starts to fall away to the left and into Maynard's line.
The last frame as contact happens, Brayshaw completely turns into Maynard's line.
If Brayshaw had continued in a straight line contact might have been the shoulder but nothing more.
I can't see that Maynard changed his line at all. I don't think he could be blamed for the contact when Brayshaw (obviously not deliberately) fell into Maynard's line after kicking the ball.
Reckon he will be really unlucky to get done.

 

[Off The Couch]

Ok, so we can add 'smother' to the list of things one shouldn't do unless one can be absolutely sure no undue contact will eventuate in the aftermath.

Got it.

Watch out for the specky next. Careless, high contact, almost every occasion...Sorry, Jeremy Howe, where else did you think your knees were going to hit him when you jumped that high? Three weeks for you...


This game is in good hands when the AFL can start creating this ******* mess, and so many are willing to go along with it.

“Unrealistic attempt” has been a favourite of Jack Reiwoldt’s for years and the number of times he has made contact with his knee to the head of an opponent is too many to count.

It’s why the rule is a joke - it’s subjective and that’s why we get rulings like the ones on Sicily and Maynard but nothing for Jack and the like - always classified as accidental contact in a “marking” contest

AFL are always having to make it up as they go along and why these decisions always end up as major talking points rather than clear cut outcomes

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

Well, we just saw one.

According to you, he shouldn't have leapt in the air if it was possible that he might then hurt the guy.


And answer my second point...what should happen the next time someone flies for a specky, and someone else gets hit in the head by the knee?

Who gives a rats arse about a speccy? It's irrelevant. You have to change actions cos you have no point other some nonsense about protecting the game.

He jumped on a bloke and knocked him out. It's not that difficult.

 

[Yardie]

Who gives a rats arse about a speccy? It's irrelevant. You have to change actions cos you have no point other some nonsense about protecting the game.

He jumped on a bloke and knocked him out. It's not that difficult.

Explain why Rampe got off at tribunal if it is not that difficult.

 

[The Gotham Penguin]

What was your stance on the Sicily / McCluggage incident?

Sicily was very harshly treated.
As he was when McCreery put him down off the ball for a minute with a strike to the stomach. No free, no report.

 

[Mr Lizard]

I've been laughing all morning at this extended definition of 'smother'...all those times the guy on the mark jumps up and tries to touch the kick, those are attempted smothers...haven't heard it before but okay, gotcha.

The smother is going the way of the bump. You are still allowed to do it, but you can't smother to the head.

 

[SodaPop]

I've watched the vision probably a hundred times and changed my mind several times as to whether Maynard is guilty or not. But, I've watched the behind the goals vision again today.
Having left his man to run to intercept Brayshaw, Maynard is almost stationary. He may have taken one step forward as he leaps to try and smother.
He is not in line with Brayshaw, he is to the left of him.
At the time Brayshaw kicks the ball and Maynard is in the air, Brayshaw is still to right of Maynard. But, for whatever reason, he starts to fall away to the left and into Maynard's line.
The last frame as contact happens, Brayshaw completely turns into Maynard's line.
If Brayshaw had continued in a straight line contact might have been the shoulder but nothing more.
I can't see that Maynard changed his line at all. I don't think he could be blamed for the contact when Brayshaw (obviously not deliberately) fell into Maynard's line after kicking the ball.
Reckon he will be really unlucky to get done.

I agree, it was Brayshaw that moved off his line, not Maynard. Neither had eyes at each other, only the ball.

If Maynard really wanted to hurt him, he would've just kept running and hip and shouldered him. His intention was to smother, the impact was secondary in that split second.

 

[hebog]

No doubt the place was full of Carlton fans. Was in N30 and my friend who follows Carlton also thought it was quiet given the size of the crowd. Maybe we’re just deaf.

Perhaps the loudspeakers weren’t working where you sat.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

I've been laughing all morning at this extended definition of 'smother'...all those times the guy on the mark jumps up and tries to touch the kick, those are attempted smothers...haven't heard it before but okay, gotcha.

The smother is going the way of the bump. You are still allowed to do it, but you can't smother to the head.

Mate it’s an attempted smother, clearly you don’t like this fact because it doesn’t fit into your narrative. Brayshaw also moves into his path towards the end of the action so if he was trying to hit Brayshaw he was doing a pretty bad job of it for 95% of the time.

Not sure I’ve seen many players choosing to bump who start off with both hands pointed skywards: