Coalface
Team Captain
Given the fixture I think every North Melbourne fan could...No-one can look at that and think it deserves a week
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Given the fixture I think every North Melbourne fan could...No-one can look at that and think it deserves a week
Repeating it over and over again won't make it true.Putting aside the comedy distractions like the Bushranger and Underarm- it's taken two pages for the discussion to arrive back at my point, posted 2 pages back.
It’s all in the wording of the directive - it says something like - ‘will USUALLY result in a grading of intentional’
I would argue this is not ‘usual’
- The tackling player CONTRIBUTED by slipping and this brought his head down to waist height
- the tackling player was actually ‘hanging on’ and Heeney’s clear intent was to clear the tackle, not strike the player
-Heeney was not watching the tackling player at poc.
- Contact was with the back of the hand and his nose was NOT the 1st POC.
There is simply no way the mechanics of this accident fall into the USUAL actions this rule was drawn up to prevent.
He’ll get off and we can all enjoy watching these poisonous bomber flogs calling for a lynching , burn up in the flames of their own straw arguments.
You're having a mare MareSays another bomber supporter, foaming at the mouth over a Swans player for some pitiable reason or other.
Be proud.
Honestly cant tell if dogs supporters in here are having a laugh or really believe that BZT's act was reportable.BZT was not trying to create separation. Heeney was
That’s the difference. The rule specifically uses the word separation
Putting aside the comedy distractions like the Bushranger and Underarm- it's taken two pages for the discussion to arrive back at my point, posted 2 pages back.
It’s all in the wording of the directive - it says something like - ‘will USUALLY result in a grading of intentional’
I would argue this is not ‘usual’
- The tackling player CONTRIBUTED by slipping and this brought his head down to waist height
- the tackling player was actually ‘hanging on’ and Heeney’s clear intent was to clear the tackle, not strike the player
-Heeney was not watching the tackling player at poc.
- Contact was with the back of the hand and his nose was NOT the 1st POC.
There is simply no way the mechanics of this accident fall into the USUAL actions this rule was drawn up to prevent.
He’ll get off and we can all enjoy watching these poisonous bomber flogs calling for a lynching , burn up in the flames of their own straw arguments.
I don't see how this can be argued down to careless. They've stated that if you choose to strike off the ball and get your opponent high, it doesn't matter where you intended to strike, it will be graded intentional.
I think they've also done him a favour by grading it low impact and not medium.
Under the criteria for medium impact, it has to clearly have some impact on the player (blood nose) and/or the player leaves the field for a period of time (Webster had to leave under the blood rule and receive treatment).
It certainly fits medium better than it fits low, which has no impact on the game (resulted in an uncontested mark and goal and an opposition player having to leave the ground) and that the player continues to play unabated (clearly not the case when you have to leave the ground with blood pouring out of your nose).
The AFL certainly loves some guidelines made out of spandex. Have to stretch them to fit the occasion.
If it was medium impact, he'd be appealing 2 weeks down to 1 and guaranteed out of the Brownlow race. Massaging the impact down to low, allows him to appeal it down to a fine, whilst looking like they're trying to do the right thing in suspending him.
Will be interesting to see the mental gymnastics required to get this down to careless. There's already talk of a favourable medical report, but I don't see how that affects anything other than the impact grading, which is already at the lowest possible level.
Gotta love these oppo supporters desperately convincing themselves into a fever over a 1 weeker for an obvious accident.
I’m betting they’ll be as salty as a Jatz cracker if he gets off.
I referenced the ‘accident’ as it wasn’t deliberately dirty play -When has it being an accident ever stopped someone being suspended before?
90% of the suspensions this year are from incidents that are accidents, but the ban still sticks.
St kilda has had 4 players accidentally hit someone in the head this year, they have all be rubbed out for multiple weeks, Should players be judged differently by which team the player for or how high they might be on a brownlow betting site?I referenced the ‘accident’ as it wasn’t deliberately dirty play -
Nothing to do with whether he’s guilty or not.
An accident, yet the panty-wetters still need to want to see a stake driven in - to justify their perverted sense of what’s right - when really its just jealousy of a top class player.
Agree and I wish you could bet on the appeal,gets off for sure for meAll the MRO can do is tick boxes.
The rule is written to have an out, just in case a high profile player was to challenge it.
There is no way the AFL is going to allow Heeney to be suspended.
He will get off and may even get an apology letter from St Kilda for that dirty player putting his blood on young Heeney.
It is Sydney, they found a way to get Barry Hall off, this one will be easy.
We all know the AFL will do what they can for the swans. Not a single person, Essendon supporter or not will be surprised if he gets off.
St kilda has had 4 players accidentally hit someone in the head this year, they have all be rubbed out for multiple weeks, Should players be judged differently by which team the player for or how high they might be on a brownlow betting site?
Do you think it's fair that they make an example of average players at the tribunal and give those "top class players" slaps on the wrists?
for this? Not even close to similar.
Would you have supported a suspension if the player Merrett struck slipped and the strike hit the other player high?Talking about the suspensions he has had over the last few years for punching in the guts about as hard as you swipe a fly
Yep. Chuck in the Redman suspension, the Zac Merrett gut punch suspensions, the weiderman suspension. Consistency is pretty much what everyone wants. There is noneHave Essendon fans always been this broken or did one of their players bring suspended for shoulder charging another player in the head push them over the edge?
Will be interested to see if the AFL counsel mention that re: low v medium.I don't see how this can be argued down to careless. They've stated that if you choose to strike off the ball and get your opponent high, it doesn't matter where you intended to strike, it will be graded intentional.
I think they've also done him a favour by grading it low impact and not medium.
Under the criteria for medium impact, it has to clearly have some impact on the player (blood nose) and/or the player leaves the field for a period of time (Webster had to leave under the blood rule and receive treatment).
It certainly fits medium better than it fits low, which has no impact on the game (resulted in an uncontested mark and goal and an opposition player having to leave the ground) and that the player continues to play unabated (clearly not the case when you have to leave the ground with blood pouring out of your nose).
The AFL certainly loves some guidelines made out of spandex. Have to stretch them to fit the occasion.
If it was medium impact, he'd be appealing 2 weeks down to 1 and guaranteed out of the Brownlow race. Massaging the impact down to low, allows him to appeal it down to a fine, whilst looking like they're trying to do the right thing in suspending him.
Will be interesting to see the mental gymnastics required to get this down to careless. There's already talk of a favourable medical report, but I don't see how that affects anything other than the impact grading, which is already at the lowest possible level.
So only bloods players can draw blood? And in Cripps case, only Blues players can put others in Hospital and still be deemed Brownlow winners?Hope he gets off . Why so many bombers fans foaming at the mouth about this ?
Boes back to Dunkley/Hird. They lost, but still want us to keep losing - seriously perverted.Hope he gets off . Why so many bombers fans foaming at the mouth about this ?