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

[LukeParkerno1]

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.

We’ll here’s an idea temper the actions 2 weeks before finals, it’s worth the punishment actually bang on exactly what he deserves for the action

 

[Elixuh]

Let these outcomes sink in.

Worth the legal fees! How Blues’ last-ditch appeal won their superstar the Brownlow​

Worth the legal fees! How Blues’ last-ditch appeal won their superstar the Brownlow

Worth the legal fees! How Blues’ last-ditch appeal won their superstar the Brownlow

www.foxsports.com.au

Now watch the footage

Pie’s premiership dream alive: Maynard cleared for clash with Demons’ Brayshaw​

Pie’s premiership dream alive: Maynard cleared for clash with Demons’ Brayshaw

Collingwood’s Brayden Maynard has been cleared for his heavy hit on Melbourne onballer Angus Brayshaw, freeing him to play in the remainder of the Magpies’ finals series.

www.theage.com.au

Now watch the footage

The Cripps hit is irrelevant to this discussion. Everyone knows it was a dog hit by a thug and it was assessed as such by the tribunal, but the act was never actually considered by the appeals board because he got off on a procedural point. If the Cripps thing happened tomorrow its 3-4 weeks.

 

[ABAB]

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.

And who put him in that vulnerable position? McAdam got suspended for 3 weeks with his bump on a player chest last year which didn't concuss the opposition player but had potential to cause injury. Again the AC joint is classified as high contact and to answer my own question, there was another tunnelling incident this year were there wasn't free kick paid and no report as these are seen as accident, there's no way a player would run directly into another players knee and risk KO themself.

 

[ibd77]

5 weeks would be perfectly understandable if it was going to be 5 H&A games, but surely the fact that he’s going to miss a bunch of finals ought to come into it.

I mean surely missing a grand final for instance is worth 5 regular season games on its own, so the difference between 4 and 5 games here could be monumental.

I reckon a 5 game ban now- for a guy who’s team is pretty much guarantee to play at least two finals- is the equivalent of at least a 10 game ban earlier in the season, or in the preseason. Probably more like 12.

It’s seriously harsh and IMO out of proportion.

If “good blokedness” can come into it, surely the certainty that you’ll miss finals ought to.

It's food for thought and there is precedence of players getting off serious charges prior to finals but they usually depended on how influential the club or the player is to the AFL.

Port made the mistake of not sending Houston to Melbourne to face the tribunal in person. Video conferencing is a lazy option and should never be used in this situation.

 

[Freomaniac]

Did he get concussed from the bump or hitting the ground ? Because I can’t really tell.

If the bump hit his chest and not head at all, it’s just a good hard bump and should get zero weeks. The concussion is just bad luck.

If he made contact with head, 5 plus.

Looking at the incident again. Houston did a front on bump on Rankin's chest.

Rankin wasnt knocked out because of Houston's hit, Rankine was knocked out because his head hit the turf like a basketball

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Take it and move on.

Thank Dan for his contribution to the club if he wants to leave and move on.

Its not coming under 4 on appeal and that requires us to throw the qualifier for him to get back in.
Thats too big of a risk to take.

 

[JimmyBC]

Yep and you partially blame Byron Pickett for this too.

No you don't the bump wasn't judged as it is now it was common, here's the bloke that was commentating the showdown..

 

[hippyhippy]

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.

How dumb of Rankine for not protecting his head when getting shoulder charged and going to ground... I mean, how silly of him to try and mark the ball

 

[Drakescoffeecake]

Beautiful. Hope it stings Dan.

 

[Romeoh1]

5 weeks about right. Bad luck for both players. Can’t be doing this stuff anymore- thank goodness.

 

[SC_Power]

How dumb of Rankine for not protecting his head when getting shoulder charged and going to ground... I mean, how silly of him to try and mark the ball

It wasn’t a mark. But whatever, the AFL has made the call, and now watch them throw it into reverse mode next week.

 

[bonehilda]

Houston is being punished for Rankine hitting the ground, we all know it.

And what incredibly forceful and avoidable action caused Rankine’s head to hit the ground so hard? Have you not been paying attention to the ever evolving nature of how these incidents are being adjudicated now or are you just stupid?

 

[Freomaniac]

My argument is that Rankine was knocked out as a result of Houston's bump. Once that is established you then scrutinise the bump e.g. did he have any alternatives?

Im not sure you understand this topic at all

And that's what happened Houstons bump didn't knock out Rankine . What actually happened was Rankine was knocked out when his head hit the turf.

It's similar to freos Ryan Nyhuis tackle on ports Robbie Gray back in 2018 between Freo vs Port.

Robbie Gray had the ball. Ryan Nyhuis tackled him but unfortunately and accidentally slammed Gray's head to the ground and knock Gray out.

Ryan Nyhuis got 3 weeks for that too

 

[SC_Power]

And what incredibly forceful and avoidable action caused Rankine’s to hit the ground so hard? Have you not been paying attention to the ever evolving nature of how these incidents are being adjudicated now or are you just stupid?

Again, punishing the outcome not the incident, I get it.

5 weeks for this, incl 2 finals and the opportunity for a Grand Final/Premiership, for something in play, no elbow, no jumping, even lowered the body… it’s just manifestly excessive. This was not lining up a player head down over the ball. It’s just ridiculous, but if that’s how football is adjudicated no, then that’s how it is, it’s not my game I don’t own it.

But you know that next week, it won’t be that way. Someone will lay a bump that breaks a collarbone, and it won’t be adjudicated as reportable “because”. Or someone will lay a shepherd that knocks someone over and they hit their head and get concussed, and nothing will happen for the outcome? Or one of the marking contests that result in three times as many concussions as bumps will be seen as “that’s football”?

 

[ABAB]

It wasn’t a mark. But whatever, the AFL has made the call, and now watch them throw it into reverse mode next week.

And? Was not his eye not fix on the ball in the air so there was no way he saw Houston heading toward him at pace.

 

[OverseasCrowNA]

And what incredibly forceful and avoidable action caused Rankine’s to hit the ground so hard? Have you not been paying attention to the ever evolving nature of how these incidents are being adjudicated now or are you just stupid?

Have you seen the folks in Alberton?

 

[SC_Power]

Have you seen the folks in Alberton?

Hey, I’m not Rioli, you shouldn’t make it personal.

 

[hippyhippy]

This was not lining up a player head down over the ball.

You're right... He lined up the player head up under the ball. Which is worse.

 

[ABAB]

And that's what happened Houstons bump didn't knock out Rankine . What actually happened was Rankine was knocked out when his head hit the turf.

It's similar to freos Ryan Nyhuis tackle on ports Robbie Gray back in 2018 between Freo vs Port.

Robbie Gray had the ball. Ryan Nyhuis tackled him but unfortunately and accidentally slammed Gray's head to the ground and knock Gray out.

Ryan Nyhuis got 3 weeks for that too

The force was enough to cause injury to the AC joint and hit his neck so there's enough force on the brain to cause a concussion.

 

[Freomaniac]

View attachment 2083561

Nahhh none at all mate, seriously stfu

I don't know if Rankine was knocked out when Houston hit him.

Rankine was definately knocked out cold when his head hit the turf

 

[Soggy2112]

5 weeks for this, incl 2 finals and the opportunity for a Grand Final/Premiership, for something in play, no elbow, no jumping, even lowered the body… it’s just manifestly excessive.

In regards to the in play aspect, yes, the ball was there, he had the option to tackle, instead he chose the dangerous option of bumping. That differs significantly to a collision in a marking contest where both players go for the ball. That is largely unavoidable, this incident absolutely was. I think the AFL has made it pretty clear that if you choose to bump when you have other opportunities you are liable for the damage you cause.

In regards to the lowered his body aspect, I’m really not seeing it.

Lastly, why does it matter that there’s finals involved. The suspension is what it is, he might miss out on a flag, but Rankine might have serious long term issues because of this. Yes, it was a split second decision, but it’s a decision that could have huge consequences for his opponent so he needs to wear it.

 

[SC_Power]

You're right... He lined up the player head up under the ball. Which is worse.

that is not even worth debating, it’s such an absurd comment.

 

[Freomaniac]

Let these outcomes sink in.

Worth the legal fees! How Blues’ last-ditch appeal won their superstar the Brownlow​

Worth the legal fees! How Blues’ last-ditch appeal won their superstar the Brownlow

Worth the legal fees! How Blues’ last-ditch appeal won their superstar the Brownlow

www.foxsports.com.au

Now watch the footage

Pie’s premiership dream alive: Maynard cleared for clash with Demons’ Brayshaw​

Pie’s premiership dream alive: Maynard cleared for clash with Demons’ Brayshaw

Collingwood’s Brayden Maynard has been cleared for his heavy hit on Melbourne onballer Angus Brayshaw, freeing him to play in the remainder of the Magpies’ finals series.

www.theage.com.au

Now watch the footage

Well that's a weird gif of a dog taking a pee

 

[Bald]

Confuses me that anyone could possibly be against the suspension handed out. I understand Port Adelaide fans want their player to play but maybe don't ****ing bump somebody into the next time zone and he will not have been suspended.

It was worse than the acts that have resulted in 4 week suspensions, but closer to them in comparison than the 7 weeks given to Webster for what looked far more intentional (although it wasn't graded as such).

 

[SC_Power]

In regards to the in play aspect, yes, the ball was there, he had the option to tackle, instead he chose the dangerous option of bumping. That differs significantly to a collision in a marking contest where both players go for the ball. That is largely unavoidable, this incident absolutely was. I think the AFL has made it pretty clear that if you choose to bump when you have other opportunities you are liable for the damage you cause.

In regards to the lowered his body aspect, I’m really not seeing it.

Lastly, why does it matter that there’s finals involved. The suspension is what it is, he might miss out on a flag, but Rankine might have serious long term issues because of this. Yes, it was a split second decision, but it’s a decision that could have huge consequences for his opponent so he needs to wear it.

So if a player flies for a mark and knees an opponent standing under the ball, in the head, and had the option not to do that, what happens?
Marking contests result in 40% of concussions to AFL footballers. Wait for it.

Lowered his body, even the AFL tribunal admitted that.

No one is arguing against the injury from the bump and any penalty wrapped up in that, it’s the luck of what happens afterwards. So many times we see collisions where the player does not hit the ground with their head and get concussed, and no one is calling for 5 matches.

I still can’t believe we’re talking 5 for this, even though I knew as soon as the Melbourne media kicked off their campaign it was never going to be 2 or 3. Have a look at what else has received 5 or more in the past and stack this one up against them. It just doesn’t add up, except the AFL taking a further step towards non contact football.