Harry McKay hit on Harry Sheezel

[Corkintheocean]

Joke league. Day cops 2 weeks for a genuine tackle.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

Man it pays to be in the club.

They’ve literally gone against their own guidelines because he’s a star player for a big Victorian club.

Quote:
Impact: Notwithstanding any other part of these Guidelines, any Careless or Intentional strike which is of an inherently dangerous kind and/or where there is a potential to cause serious injury (such as a strike with a raised elbow or forearm) will usually not be classified as Low Impact even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low.

 

[Shinboner '07]

Salt will be delicious from the nuffies.

Don’t think anyone’s salty, just want consistency, which they haven’t shown with this outcome

 

[CrowToon]

Don’t think anyone’s salty, just want consistency, which they haven’t shown with this outcome

Speak for yourself, just call me Saxa right now!

 

[Chism]

Don’t think anyone’s salty, just want consistency, which they haven’t shown with this outcome

If you think that is genuine medium impact no one can help you.

We argued this fact and it was rightly upheld.

 

[Fadge]

They’ve literally gone against their own guidelines because he’s a star player for a big Victorian club.

Quote:
Impact: Notwithstanding any other part of these Guidelines, any Careless or Intentional strike which is of an inherently dangerous kind and/or where there is a potential to cause serious injury (such as a strike with a raised elbow or forearm) will usually not be classified as Low Impact even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low.

Yeah, it's all in the wording:

'Will usually not be classified as low impact'.

There is always an out in the AFL world...

 

[Devington]

The Reasoning:

Gleeson said the Tribunal downgraded the charge for two main reasons.

Firstly, he said McKay did all he could to reduce the force of impact.

"Not only did McKay not move in such a way at the moment of impact to increase the force, he slides up somewhat to make it a more glancing impact. He separates his arms … in a way that appears to demonstrate an attempt to reduce the force of impact," Gleeson said.

"This movement reduces the potential for injury. We don't consider, in the end, this impact had real potential for a head injury."

Gleeson then referenced a case in 2021 between Brisbane's Rhys Mathieson

36

Rhys Mathieson

Age

27

Ht

186cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.1

4star

K

7.9

3star

HB

9.2

5star

M

2.9

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

3.4

5star

No current season stats available

D

18.4

5star

K

9.4

4star

HB

9.0

5star

M

2.2

3star

T

4.0

5star

CL

2.8

5star

and Melbourne's Kysaiah Pickett

36

Kysaiah Pickett

Age

23

Ht

171cm

Wt

73kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.0

2star

K

4.7

2star

HB

3.3

3star

M

0.7

1star

T

2.6

4star

G

0.6

4star

D

8.0

2star

K

4.7

2star

HB

3.3

2star

M

0.7

1star

T

2.6

4star

G

0.6

4star

D

8.0

2star

K

4.8

2star

HB

3.2

3star

M

0.8

1star

T

2.4

4star

G

0.8

4star

that was raised during the hearing, in which the Lions midfielder had his swinging arm graded as low impact.

"There are important differences between the incidents, but we have some difficulty in finding the actual and potential impact here was meaningfully worse than in Mathieson's (case)," he said.

"When combined with the minimising impact issue we described previously, it is sufficient for us to find that the impact was low."

 

[citizen-erased]

They’ve literally gone against their own guidelines because he’s a star player for a big Victorian club.

Quote:
Impact: Notwithstanding any other part of these Guidelines, any Careless or Intentional strike which is of an inherently dangerous kind and/or where there is a potential to cause serious injury (such as a strike with a raised elbow or forearm) will usually not be classified as Low Impact even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low.

Genuinely puzzled
It was a strike to the head that was easily avoided. Mckay showed no intent towards the ball.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

We’ve got the GOAT lawyers

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

You don't want to see anyone rubbed out for something as trivial as that

 

[citizen-erased]

We’ve got the GOAT lawyers

And uncle fitzy

 

[JyeDye]

Can't believe McKay only copped a fine for literally murdering him

 

[Gw2_James]

They’ve literally gone against their own guidelines because he’s a star player for a big Victorian club.

Quote:
Impact: Notwithstanding any other part of these Guidelines, any Careless or Intentional strike which is of an inherently dangerous kind and/or where there is a potential to cause serious injury (such as a strike with a raised elbow or forearm) will usually not be classified as Low Impact even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low.

Oh no, big scary vic player who plays for big scary vic club, is free to play, its a big vic conspiracy i tell ya!

 

[Boozeroo]

The AFL- we don't do precedent

Carlton- we have precedent as part of our defence....

AFL- we will allow it.

AFL- due to the precedent shown, we will fine

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

 

[Shinboner '07]

If you think that is genuine medium impact no one can help you.

We argued this fact and it was rightly upheld.

No, I actually agree with it being low impact, but when you consider Logues and Acres incidents cop medium impact only a week earlier, you gotta ask where’s the consistency?

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

Genuinely puzzled
It was a strike to the head that was easily avoided. Mckay showed no intent towards the ball.

I’m puzzled but also completely unsurprised.

If he plays for a club west of the border there’s no way he gets off. Comp is a joke.

 

[Chism]

Yeah, it's all in the wording:

'Will usually not be classified as low impact'.

There is always an out in the AFL world...

 

[Gumby2Hurley]

Right outcome

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

Oh no, big scary vic player who plays for big scary vic club, is free to play, its a big vic conspiracy i tell ya!

Not scared, just calling BS where it’s warranted.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Adelaide and North supporters outraged. Neutrals cool with the decision.

Says all you need to know.

 

[Erakor]

LolAFL..

He did everything he could to minimise the impact ...LOL. My 4 year old comes up with better crap than that.

 

[Chism]

No, I actually agree with it being low impact, but when you consider Logues and Acres incidents cop medium impact only a week earlier, you gotta ask where’s the consistency?

I never saw either but is it better to be consistently wrong or to get it right like this was ?

AFL tribunal has never been consistent for over 100 years. Wont change now!

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

If you think that is genuine medium impact no one can help you.

We argued this fact and it was rightly upheld.

It’s not about what anyone subjectively thinks, the league’s own guidelines spell it out.

Impact: Notwithstanding any other part of these Guidelines, any Careless or Intentional strike which is of an inherently dangerous kind and/or where there is a potential to cause serious injury (such as a strike with a raised elbow or forearm) will usually not be classified as Low Impact even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low.

Different rules for different clubs. This league is a joke.

 

[ferball]

We’ve got the GOAT lawyers

Chewbacca Defence and Neural Acuity Interference Technique working a treat.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

It’s not about what anyone subjectively thinks, the league’s own guidelines spell it out.

Impact: Notwithstanding any other part of these Guidelines, any Careless or Intentional strike which is of an inherently dangerous kind and/or where there is a potential to cause serious injury (such as a strike with a raised elbow or forearm) will usually not be classified as Low Impact even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low.

Different rules for different clubs. This league is a joke.

#VICBIAS right?