Ginbey/Lalor incident

[bzparkes]

Duty of care is further defined as what a reasonable player may think is prudent in the circumstances. It can be assumed that the scenarios you list would be considered prudent by reasonable players because they are within the rules of the game. They are legitimate choices a player has. What Ginbey did is not within the range of choices a reasonable player would consider prudent. It is pretty easy to see this by watching the sport played. You will see loads of legal bumps. Loads of players raising knees in ruck & marking contests. Almost no players choosing to push an opponent running at speed in the back with force into oncoming traffic.

You're making the ridiculous assumption Ginbey meant to push his opponent into his vulnerable teammate's back, which is the dumbest thing anyone's theorised about this incident.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

You're making the ridiculous assumption Ginbey meant to push his opponent into his vulnerable teammate's back, which is the dumbest thing anyone's theorised about this incident.

I don't need to make that assumption about his intent. Assessing the action requires no assumption.

 

[Bald]

I don't need to make that assumption about his intent. Assessing the action requires no assumption.

Assessing the MRO views on it also requires no assumption.

 

[bzparkes]

I don't need to make that assumption about his intent. Assessing the action requires no assumption.

So, we can all safely assume that Ginbey had zero intention of pushing Lalor into Brock then, other than in your head.

Because I can't imagine any of his teammates would be happy with him, let alone his coach, if he actually did that.

Please think before posting.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Assessing the MRO views on it also requires no assumption.

He didn't publish his views for us to assess, so I disagree.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

So, we can all safely assume that Ginbey had zero intention of pushing Lalor into Brock then, other than in your head.

Because I can't imagine any of his teammates would be happy with him, let alone his coach, if he actually did that.

Please think before posting.

The charge I recommended included a finding of careless rather than deliberate conduct, so it is you who should think before posting.

 

[bzparkes]

The charge I recommended included a finding of careless rather than deliberate conduct, so it is you who should think before posting.

Well there was no charge, because the incident wasn't deemed worthy of one to begin with, other than in your imaginary scenario.

So you should probably stop posting altogether.

 

[HongKongRoo]

2 more copycat incidents leading to serious injuries and still nothing from the AFL, looks like Ginbey was correct in his actions.

 

[BF Tiger]

Seems the AFL are concerned after all...

Last week, the AFL sent out a warning. The league emailed the wrong people

A spate of injuries from pushes in the back prompted the AFL to send a warning to clubs. But it was addressing the effect of the problem, not the cause.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Seems the AFL are concerned after all...

Last week, the AFL sent out a warning. The league emailed the wrong people

A spate of injuries from pushes in the back prompted the AFL to send a warning to clubs. But it was addressing the effect of the problem, not the cause.

www.theage.com.au

So concerned the MRO is now suspending Richmond players for forcing opponents to deliberately push them into contests.

"Richmond needs to be better."

 

[smasha]

Lynch gone but Ginbey giving a player a fractured jawline gets nothing.

Boy's club never fails.