Goodes - surely must go this time

Remove this Banner Ad

Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

Swanstar said:
OMG i gargled up coke all over my monitor, i hope he wasnt serious
Click to expand...
in·side

Pronunciation Key - S[prep. in-sahyd]

1. on the inner side or part of; within: inside the circle; inside the envelope.

australia-map.gif


Care to explain how the ACT isn't "inside" NSW?

Do you have some knowledge of physical reality, or a new definition of "inside" that I am not aware of.
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

smoovy said:
The only argument is whether it is negligent or reckless. One for the lawyers.

NEGLIGENCE
Definition of ‘negligent’ – [FONT=FWIRUR+HelveticaNeueLT-LightCo,Helvetica Neue LT]A player [/FONT][FONT=YSQBAF+HelveticaNeueLT-LightCo,Helvetica Neue LT]negligently [/FONT][FONT=FWIRUR+HelveticaNeueLT-LightCo,Helvetica Neue LT]commits a reportable offence if the relevant conduct constitutes a breach of the duty of care owed by the player to all other players. Each player owes a duty of care to all other players to not engage in conduct which will constitute a reportable offence being committed against that other player. In order to constitute such a breach of that duty of care, the conduct must be such that a reasonable player would not regard it as prudent in all the circumstances.
Negligence is constituted by a person’s breach of duty to take reasonable care to avoid acts which can be reasonably foreseen to result in a reportable offence. While Australian Football is a contact sport, players owe a duty of care to others not to cause and to avoid illegal contact.
An extra onus applies to protect players from serious neck injuries when they have their head down over the ball and to protect players from bumps to the head. Bumping or making forceful contact to an opponent from front-on when that opponent has his head down over the ball, unless intentional or reckless, will be deemed to be negligent, unless:
[/FONT]a. [FONT=FWIRUR+HelveticaNeueLT-LightCo,Helvetica Neue LT]the player was contesting the ball and did not have a realistic alternative way to contest the ball; or
[/FONT]b. [FONT=FWIRUR+HelveticaNeueLT-LightCo,Helvetica Neue LT]the bump or forceful contact was caused by circumstances outside the control of the player which could not reasonably be foreseen.
The definition of negligent also contains specific wording relating to bumps to the head (see rough conduct section starting page 12).
An example of negligent contact may be where a player collides with another player who has taken a mark and where contact occurs just after the mark has been taken. The offending player has a duty of care to avoid any contact which would constitute a reportable offence by slowing his momentum as much as he reasonably can and a failure to do so constitutes negligence.
[/FONT]
RECKLESSNESS
More serious conduct is known as recklessness.
Definition of ‘reckless’ – [FONT=FWIRUR+HelveticaNeueLT-LightCo,Helvetica Neue LT]A player [/FONT][FONT=YSQBAF+HelveticaNeueLT-LightCo,Helvetica Neue LT]recklessly [/FONT][FONT=FWIRUR+HelveticaNeueLT-LightCo,Helvetica Neue LT]commits a reportable offence if he engages in conduct that he realises or that a reasonable player would realise may result in the reportable offence being committed but nevertheless proceeds with that conduct not caring whether or not that conduct will result in the commission of the reportable offence. The reckless commission of a reportable offence does not require any wish that the reportable offence be committed.
This does not require proof that the player turned his mind to the risk. The test is an objective one - the view of a reasonable player in all the circumstances
A player who without looking swings his arm backwards in a pack and strikes an opposing player in the face may be said not to have intended to strike his opponent but his conduct was reckless because it can be inferred from his action that he realised that his arm might make contact or alternatively a reasonable player in his position would have realised that such contact might be made. The guideline relating to inferring a state of mind with respect to intentional offences has application to determining if the player acted recklessly. However, even if it is not established that the player realised the risk, he will have acted recklessly if a reasonable player in his position would have realised the risk.
In the example given under negligent above, if a player collides with another player who has marked the ball, in circumstances where there is some further time after the mark has been taken, and where he blindly continued on, to contact the player taking the mark, then the act would best be described as reckless.
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Burton's was assessed as reckless. How the hell was Goodes assessed as negligent?:confused:
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

I just caught wind of this.

The system just keeps outdoing itself. This league is a joke.

Finey is right.
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

W.C. Fry said:
Wow. Just wow. But what can you expect from the AFL's lovechild.

PS - Sydney now has to leave NSW 3 more times this year from the next 11 games. How that can happen from a one state team i dont know. Its beyond a joke how much the AFL look after these guys. Im sick of it.
Click to expand...

Um duhhh because we played 6 away games already and one of our other games is in Canberra.
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

chrisjie said:
Haha Finey is going off on SEN.
Click to expand...

Ha yep, and good on him too.

There was a Sydney support who rang up just at the start and mentioned that Goodes was trying to get out of Selwoods way ...

Funny way of doing that aye ... I mean a hip to the head ...
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

DeadlyAkkuret said:
If that brush hurt Waters, then he shouldn't be playing football.
Click to expand...

Particularly considering Goodes only made contact with Selwood. But seriously, it was a nothing incident, and if anything, the offer is too much. There's no point in you all saying this 'if it was anyone else, it would have been 6/8/10/life' crap. If it was anyone else, they wouldn't have been reported.
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

Dylan12 said:
Regardless who it was...if that was one of your club's best players, would you really want them being rubbed out for that? OK Goodes has been lucky BEFORE, this surely was not a reportable/suspendable offence.

The game is already soft as shit and Goodes hardly targeted him. All those complaining...if you want guys rubbed out for that, go follow netball.

Talk about a contradiction - most posters complain about how soft the AFL is making the game, yet you want incidents like Goodes punishable by suspension...Please!
Click to expand...

Very well said. Most of these people are just caught up in their hate for Goodes and they're taking previous incidents into account, instead of looking at this case on it's merits.

The bump alone didn't warrant a suspension.
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

vinnie_vegas69 said:
in·side

Pronunciation Key - S[prep. in-sahyd]

1. on the inner side or part of; within: inside the circle; inside the envelope.

australia-map.gif


Care to explain how the ACT isn't "inside" NSW?

Do you have some knowledge of physical reality, or a new definition of "inside" that I am not aware of.
Click to expand...

That seriously has to be the worst map of the ACT I've ever seen (I'm not disagreeing that the ACT isn't "inside" NSW).
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

I have yet to see anyone demonstrate logically that the impact from the Goodes bump was more forcefull than either Murphy or Burgoyne.

In all other aspects the cases were graded the same, negligent and high contact.

It all comes down to the level of impact and in both cases (Murphy and Burgoyne) the other player was concussed and carried off.

DST
:D
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

Loyal2Port said:
well then if goodes appreciated that there was a possibilitly that in bumping him he could hit his head that is reckless
it is only negligent if he has basically no idea that by bumping him he is going to get him in the head
Click to expand...

The last reckless ruling was on Steven Dodd who had his tripping charge against Richmond's Jack Riewoldt downgraded from intentional to reckless. That was an action that was obviously going to have consequences and was an action that was always outside of body contact sanctioned as legal by the rules. Not a lot of reckless charges stick and a lot of intentional charges get downgraded to reckless. If Goodes was reckless, then so was Murphy and Waters.

EDIT - Sorry, last reckless ruling was Burton. See other post in this thread for details.
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

vinnie_vegas69 said:
in·side

Pronunciation Key - S[prep. in-sahyd]

1. on the inner side or part of; within: inside the circle; inside the envelope.

australia-map.gif


Care to explain how the ACT isn't "inside" NSW?

Do you have some knowledge of physical reality, or a new definition of "inside" that I am not aware of.
Click to expand...

Given the Goodes excitement i obviously overlooked what he said unless he edited his posts, other posters picked up on it as well.
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

Andrew Mc said:
That seriously has to be the worst map of the ACT I've ever seen (I'm not disagreeing that the ACT isn't "inside" NSW).
Click to expand...

It's a little known fact that the ACT technically includes Jervis Bay on the "NSW" Coast.

Ideally, this map should have two circles representing the ACT, one around Canberra and one around Jervis Bay.
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

Michael Johnson got 4 weeks in a preseason game last year and there was less in it than the one with Goodes
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

red+black said:
He needs to get a week, some time, any time.

The longer his consecutive games streak goes for, the harder it will be for him to get suspended.
Click to expand...

Agree.

This is ____ing wrong. Somebody has to say this - Adam Goodes is the AFL's answer to O.J.Simpson. As a dual Brownlow medallist, he is the poster child for their politically-correct efforts to portray football as a sphere in which the black man is able to compete as an equal.

How long until the clubs challenge AFL rules in court and demand that video footage of previous incidents can be cited as a precedent?
 
Re: Adam Goodes offered a reprimand

Interesting that Bondy on 3AW said the MRP should have been assessed it as medium contact and let the Tribunal assess if that was correct or not. Said it was borderline medium/low impact in his opinion.

He read out a list of players charged and apart from Burton the MRP assessed them all as negligent, but different impact levels.

As I said before, the next time Goodes hits someone, they should call the stretcher out. Its the only way they will get him. But his luck has just about all run out.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Goodes - surely must go this time

Similar threads

N
It's Time to go, Simon Goodwin
Replies
15
Views
2K
The Mares Leg
The Mares Leg
dean33
Free Agency Compensation must be abolished
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
211
Views
6K
Blackas87
Blackas87
Chief
News AFL Round 17 - Milestones (3 x 200 gamers), TV times, team line-ups, all the good stuff right here
Replies
4
Views
383
Chief
Chief
Cleric
How good will Riley Thilthorpe be?
Replies
19
Views
565
Del165198
D
PerthBoy86
Is playing too good early/peaking too early a big disadvantage?
Replies
13
Views
574
PerthBoy86
PerthBoy86
greatwhiteshark
Preliminary finals times
Replies
16
Views
882
Dazzler9
Dazzler9
A
Which player from another club do you like or feel good for?
2 3 4
Replies
83
Views
3K
ElectricG
ElectricG

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top