News AFL Tribunal appeals board upholds Houston's 5 Week Suspension

[ClintEastwood]

You do come across as the ‘cry all night’ type

As you were…

I feel honored to have been one of your 8 posts in 2 years lol

 

[SC_Power]

You do come across as the ‘cry all night’ type

As you were…

Really, you’ve learned a lot from your ….. 8 post history.

Bit of a lurker are you? Or just don’t want to risk your “real” account?

 

[kirky]

The penalty still has to fit the crime though, does it not?

And missing at least two finals and possibly a GF means that a 5 game ban now is worth 10 regular season games or more, and I don’t think anyone reasonable would be asking for a 10 week ban, if that was 6 weeks ago.

For every action there are consequences.

Poor Dan has learnt this, perhaps next time he will think differently.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Perhaps Dan should have taken that into account before he did it

100%, but that’s his side of it. Show me the post where I’ve said he shouldn’t. I’ll wait here.

The other side of it is those who are dishing out the penalty, and their job is to make the penalty fit the crime, and rubbing a guy out for two finals and possibly a GF is the equivalent of at least 10 H&A games, I doubt immensely that anyone in their right mind would have been calling for that if this had happened 3 months ago, as such, the penalty is manifestly excessive.

 

[Elixuh]

rankine got his karma then too right since he's a thug by your own definition

Yes, Rankine is also a thug. But just because Houston victimised a thug, it doesn't mean he also isn't a thug.

Case in point, Charles Luciano murdered known thug, Joe Masseria. But you wouldn't claim that Charles Luciano isn't a thug.

 

[Freomaniac]

No we didn't. Jason Horne-Francis was took a mark and the umpires called a stop to play.

The umpires carried the Crows for the whole game.

Umpires were balanced to be honest. I would make a decent neutral umpire to be fair.

You Port Adelaide fans think everyone is against you. LoL

The AFL is a against you, the umpires are against you. Hell, Ken Hinkley is against you lol

 

[aussierulesrules]

For every action there are consequences.

Poor Dan has learnt this, perhaps next time he will think differently.

Again, I pretty much guarantee you wouldn’t be saying that if the shoe was on the other foot, and your guy was going to be missing at least two finals, and you really thought about it.

 

[Freomaniac]

He hit his head on the ground because he was unconscious

Rankine ended up unconscious because his head hit the ground.

 

[ABAB]

I read the ruling, and it reeks of a pre prepared statement that hasn’t proven anything.

Remorseful, clean record, lowered body, at no time left the ground, got Rankine in the shoulder, did not get Rankine in the head….. and be thankful it was only 5 matches. What a crock. He didn’t king hit Rankine, it wasn’t off the ball, he didn’t jump off the ground, he didn’t lift an elbow.

All about the outcome of concussion from hitting the ground. So Houston gets the penalty.
If Rankine gets up and played on, no one would be talking about in any way apart from a big hit.
If it were about the action, we’d be watching Thilthorpe taking out Lachie Jones. But he was ok.

Waiting for the inevitable Melbourne club equivalent and the AFL tying itself up in knots to justify letting them off lightly.

Did you miss the part about the neck? I've told you already the AC joint is classified as high. The Thilthorpe incident should have been a free kick and let's face it the entire game was poorly umpired, who has been ever been reported for tunnelling? You think an opponent will purposely run into someone leg and potential KO themselves? Houston's action wasn't a last minute decision like he said in his statement and the footage showed it wasn't an instantaneous and the ruling said the same, he had time to protect himself so the only person who could have been severely injured was Rankine.

 

[CumbyCrow]

Really, you’ve learned a lot from your ….. 8 post history.

Bit of a lurker are you? Or just don’t want to risk your “real” account?

Nah I lurk. Enjoy calling out junk posters from time to time… the night is young.

As you were…

 

[ABAB]

What a joke.

Maynard jumps in the air, bumps a player without the ball and collects their head… no weeks. Plays finals.

Houston hits someone in the chest and gets 5.

AC joint which subsequent hit the neck.

 

[Underarm]

As port said there isn't definitive proof it was head neck impact.

Except Houston's statement...

 

[aussierulesrules]

It’s a 5 week ban, said it when it happened 5-6 is right. 6 on the higher end so if anything they gave him a discount to 5 weeks. Doesn’t matter when it happens r1 or a week before finals. Don’t be thugs and tackle and not bump players into next week. Let’s look at the ones this year Wright fractionally late, got 4 weeks, the GWS bloke got 4, Webster should have hit 10-12 that was a horrible decision, Parker got 6 with a significant injury attached. 5 is perfect for this bang on

Again, if you think missing at least two finals and possibly a GF is equivalent to missing two or three H&A games, you are out of your mind.

OUT OF YOUR MIND.

 

[Paul Kersey]

would of gone 4 games
but do the crime do the time!!
quick ques- if that was Dangerfield not Houston, would it still be 5 games?

If it was Dangerfield I reckon Rankine would still be in hospital.

 

[ABAB]

Rankine ended up unconscious because his head hit the ground.

Clearly hit the AC joint and then neck (as reported in the hearing and ruling) so partially concuss before hitting the ground.

 

[Billy_01]

Sucked in flog

 

[Chism]

Good outcome, we don't want thugs like Houston in the game

Bloke has made 1 mistake in his whole career and you call him a thug???

You are an absolute stain on this forum with your Bay 13 crap style of posting only making comments to rile others up.

5 weeks is deserving for the act and Dan will cop his medicine.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Wtf would you consider giving out discounts for finals? Maybe he should have considered the consequences of shirt fronting a player in round 23? What a ridiculous idea.

Why? Because finals games are obscenely more important than H&A games.

Therefore, rubbing someone out for multiple finals is the equivalent of rubbing someone out for several more H&A games.

This ain’t rocket science.

The penalty doesn’t fit the crime, unless you think this action is worth missing at least 10 H&A games.

FINALS GAMES ARE VASTLY MORE VALUABLE THAN H&A GAMES.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

This picture reveals perfectly what Houston did wrong.

He went shoulder first with his bump. Had he led with the hip it was much more likely to be fine.

 

[Elixuh]

This picture reveals perfectly what Houston did wrong.

He went shoulder first with his bump. Had he led with the hip it was much more likely to be fine.


View attachment 2085937

Yeah it was basically an nrl shoulder charge

 

[bonehilda]

100%, but that’s his side of it. Show me the post where I’ve said he shouldn’t. I’ll wait here.

The other side of it is those who are dishing out the penalty, and their job is to make the penalty fit the crime, and rubbing a guy out for two finals and possibly a GF is the equivalent of at least 10 H&A games, I doubt immensely that anyone in their right mind would have been calling for that if this had happened 3 months ago, as such, the penalty is manifestly excessive.

Not sure applying more weight to finals games is the best way to go about trying to stamp out these incidents. I feel like what your suggesting actually existed for some time and now, given the current climate around concussion, it’s something the AFL are willing to be tougher on no matter the time of year

 

[SC_Power]

Did you miss the part about the neck? I've told you already the AC joint is classified as high. The Thilthorpe incident should have been a free kick and let's face it the entire game was poorly umpired, who has been ever been reported for tunnelling? You think an opponent will purposely run into someone leg and potential KO themselves? Houston's action wasn't a last minute decision like he said in his statement and the footage showed it wasn't an instantaneous and the ruling said the same, he had time to protect himself so the only person who could have been severely injured was Rankine.

Houston is being punished for Rankine hitting the ground, we all know it.
He won’t have to worry about it being in Victoria next year.

As for the other points.
AC joint for the front /side is like a collarbone. Is every broken collarbone a reportable offence? Of course not.
Do you know the definition of tunnelling? It’s defined as running into an opponents legs while they’re in the air. Thilthorpe is lucky Jones didn’t damage his AC joint and concuss himself on the ground.

 

[Freomaniac]

He didn't hit the head from what I saw. It was the whiplash that gave him concussion imo.

Bingo. Rankine wasn't knocked out from Houstons bump, Rankin was knocked out when his head hit the grass.

His head bounced like a basketball

 

[ABAB]

This picture reveals perfectly what Houston did wrong.

He went shoulder first with his bump. Had he led with the hip it was much more likely to be fine.


View attachment 2085937

Exactly, he protected himself before the action. Had he gone with his hip then he would have risked a head clash which was why the ruling said only Rankine was in a vulnerable position of serious injury which he received.

 

[Freomaniac]

They are too scared to outlaw it because it's a long standing part of the game, I'm sure they know with the crackdown it'll pretty much be coached out of kids football and be gone in 10 to 20 years.

It'll be as rare as a drop kick eventually.

Yep and you partially blame Byron Pickett for this too.