MRP / Trib. Jacob van Rooyen - How many weeks?

[10571z]

So i guess don't spoil then as any spoil has that potential if you slightly mistime it

How often does this happen? Rarely it was careless. He took his head off. It was basically a round arm.

 

[hawkman]

Is there any more cases tonight after the JVR hearing? It could genuinely get worse if there is and these muppets are on the panel.

Newman and Rioli

 

[maskmcgee]

 

[Bulldogs85]

Newman and Rioli

Rioli is tomorrow night

 

[Slartibartfast]

How then was this not even reported from the same game , was far worse

 

[FRUMPY]

They even admit he was going for the ball in their reason for suspending him......FMD

On CPH2005 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[MarcMaverick]

We have to appeal this.

 

[hawkman]

Are they going to pull up all these spoils now? They all have potential to cause injury and could be classed as low or medium impact even if they don't actually hurt anyone

 

[maskmcgee]

Read between the lines, its exactly what I said back on page 2 or something, if he kept his eyes on the ball and didn't look at Ballard they would of let him off. They say once he looked at Ballard he would of known he was going to hit him in the head. Keep your eyes on the ball, you can spoil any way you want is how I read this.

 

[00Stinger]

wow

So they agree that he was going to spoil the ball (which is totally legal). But in doing so he had a duty of care not to make contact with Ballard

Jokes aside, how long will it be before a player is rubbed out for taking a specky because of their knee hitting a player and the marking player not taking proper duty of care?

 

[jj15]

You idiots keep buying memberships and tickets then the AFL will keep pulling the game apart.

 

[Shadow89]

Both JVR and Close should not have copped anything tonight. Where is the player's duty of care to themselves? Where is the 'grey' area in this whole discussion?

Why the hell do I have to sign a waiver stating that I could die if I go rock climbing...but players being paid millions, can legislate against the AFL, for a contact sport they CHOOSE to participate in?

Everyone knows the dangers of concussion now. How is banning players for football incidents, going to stop players getting concussed?

We are now too far gone. The world will lose its collective mind, when a player gets banned during the finals for one of these incidents. They're happening every week now, and the worst part is - HARDLY ANY OF THE PLAYERS THEY'RE CITING FOR DUTY OF CARE, ARE F*CKING INJURING THE OPPOSITION PLAYER!!

Nearly every single incident, has been about 'duty of care', rather than the result. My god I thought it was bad when it was based on how tough you were to not get sent to the bench/go through a concussion test. Now it's about 'potential to cause harm.' F*ck me, everytime we walk out the door in the morning, we have a potential to get harmed.

I also love, that we don't try going down a different route, like having players wear helmets like Angus Brayshaw

10

Angus Brayshaw

Age

28

Ht

188cm

Wt

90kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.7

5star

K

11.1

4star

HB

8.6

5star

M

3.7

4star

T

4.3

5star

MG

233.5

4star

D

15.5

4star

K

7.7

3star

HB

7.8

4star

M

2.0

2star

T

3.2

4star

MG

233.5

4star

D

11.4

3star

K

8.2

4star

HB

3.2

3star

M

3.4

4star

T

5.6

5star

and Caleb Daniel

35

Caleb Daniel

Age

28

Ht

171cm

Wt

72kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.3

5star

K

11.5

4star

HB

9.8

5star

M

3.5

4star

T

2.9

4star

CL

1.4

4star

D

19.5

4star

K

11.1

4star

HB

8.4

4star

M

3.6

4star

T

2.0

3star

CL

1.0

3star

D

16.4

4star

K

7.2

3star

HB

9.2

5star

M

3.4

4star

T

2.6

4star

CL

0.2

2star

. No instead, let's take tackling out of the game, to show we're doing something for potential future litigation.

It is a literal contact sport. You are now going to end up with players diving head first, to get free kicks at crucial moments. Dawson jumped in that tackle, wasn't called for holding the ball, and didn't try to get rid of the ball. But of course, Close is supposed to just let him run free, despite Dawson demonstrating showing no duty of care to himself, and effectively throwing himself into the turf to get out of the tackle.

Will Day tripped on Close a few weeks back.
Merrett tackled and momentum caused head to hit the turf
Ward tackled and Neale went down like a sack of sh*t
JVR poorly spoils, misses the ball, and then gets two weeks because Ballard was stretchered off - AS A PRECAUTION - and will play this week

It's all f*cked now. I am so furious with where this is heading.

 

[RandB]

Having watched it in real time a few times then slow mo, what made this worse is that Ballard didnt leap for the footy.

It's just a hypothesis, but IMO JVR was gearing up for a big aerial spoil, expecting Ballard to either take a leaping chest or overhead mark.

At full speed and at the last second, JVR realises Ballard is staying down, waiting for the ball to come to him, but JVR is fully committed (and entitled) to the spoil.

As Dunstall said, his fist was going for the ball.

Clearly the AFL didn't like the look of it but football physics isn't always pretty.

2 weeks is harsh IMO.

If it was a bump that's different but this was a spoil.

Big precedent set here.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

I dont see the problem, if you cant spoil the ball without smashing the oppo in the head then youve been out played and should cop whatever comes from it.
One thing that will come from it is more set shots and scores as defenders out positioned cant crash into the marking player.

 

[MarcMaverick]

This decision is coming from people who obviously have never play footy before. Bunch of spineless invertebrate jellies.

 

[maskmcgee]

Why the hell do I have to sign a waiver stating that I could die if I go rock climbing...but players being paid millions, can legislate against the AFL, for a contact sport they CHOOSE to participate in?

The waiver you sign for rock climbing is typically a form of liability release, which is a legal document that limits the liability of the company or organization offering the activity. Essentially, by signing the waiver, you are assuming the risk of the activity and acknowledging that you are aware of the potential dangers. This helps to protect the company or organization from being sued if something goes wrong.

In the case of professional athletes, they are typically covered by workers' compensation insurance, which is designed to provide medical care and wage replacement to employees who are injured on the job. However, if a player believes that they have been injured due to negligence or unsafe conditions, they may have the right to file a lawsuit against the league or team.

It's important to note that athletes who choose to participate in contact sports are assuming a certain level of risk, but this does not mean that they should be expected to accept unsafe conditions or negligent behavior from their employers. In recent years, there has been increased attention given to the issue of player safety in contact sports, and many leagues have taken steps to improve safety measures and reduce the risk of serious injury.

 

[Shadow89]

Can’t tackle, can’t bump, can’t attempt to spoil. What’s next?

Yet you can knee people in the head all you like, when taking a specky.

Seems fair.

 

[Engimal v3]

Definitely the biggest head scratcher of the season so far. Was worth a free kick and shouldn't have been thought of again.

 

[MarcMaverick]

#boycotttheAFL

 

[My Tilly]

May as well rule out the speccie too.
Unrealistic attempts which hurt any opponent will be given an automatic 1 week suspension.

 

[Coasters7]

How often does this happen? Rarely it was careless. He took his head off. It was basically a round arm.

I’ve seen more intentional hits than that given no weeks (the ones that should be being punished to prevent further incidents).

It’s now pretty much luck of the draw regardless of intent. You just need to get them in the right spot and you’re f*cked. Football action, non footballing action, ball in play or not, none of it means shit until you hurt someone or get them in the head which is the wrong way around (and of course the star player tax). Punish the action, not the result

We’re punishing spoils, bumps and tackles whilst completely ignoring cheap shots until it gets to a Gaff v Brayshaw where it’s already too late

 

[maskmcgee]

This decision is coming from people who obviously have never play footy before.

Jurors: Jason Johnson, Stephen Jurica, Jeff Gleeson (chair)

 

[Tulip]

For the good of the game, Melbourne needs to appeal. The more you watch it, and the more you read the rules around it being okay to spoil, the more ludicrous this becomes. Every football decision, when gone wrong, has the potential to hurt the head. Mabior Chol

18

Mabior Chol

Age

27

Ht

200cm

Wt

98kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

7.5

2star

K

5.3

2star

HB

2.2

2star

M

2.3

2star

T

2.7

4star

G

0.8

4star

D

8.0

2star

K

6.0

2star

HB

2.0

1star

M

2.3

2star

T

2.3

3star

G

0.7

4star

D

9.2

3star

K

6.8

3star

HB

2.4

3star

M

3.2

4star

T

1.8

4star

G

1.2

4star

didn't get low enough and smashed Bowey's jaw, not even cited, in the very same game.

 

[MarcMaverick]

Jurors: Jason Johnson, Stephen Jurica, Jeff Gleeson (chair)

Three nobodies then. Three useless nobodies. And Shame to Jason Johnson the traitorous turncoat.

 

[Sttew]

Both JVR and Close should not have copped anything tonight. Where is the player's duty of care to themselves? Where is the 'grey' area in this whole discussion?

Why the hell do I have to sign a waiver stating that I could die if I go rock climbing...but players being paid millions, can legislate against the AFL, for a contact sport they CHOOSE to participate in?

Everyone knows the dangers of concussion now. How is banning players for football incidents, going to stop players getting concussed?

We are now too far gone. The world will lose its collective mind, when a player gets banned during the finals for one of these incidents. They're happening every week now, and the worst part is - HARDLY ANY OF THE PLAYERS THEY'RE CITING FOR DUTY OF CARE, ARE F*CKING INJURING THE OPPOSITION PLAYER!!

Nearly every single incident, has been about 'duty of care', rather than the result. My god I thought it was bad when it was based on how tough you were to not get sent to the bench/go through a concussion test. Now it's about 'potential to cause harm.' F*ck me, everytime we walk out the door in the morning, we have a potential to get harmed.

I also love, that we don't try going down a different route, like having players wear helmets like Angus Brayshaw and Caleb Daniel. No instead, let's take tackling out of the game, to show we're doing something for potential future litigation.

It is a literal contact sport. You are now going to end up with players diving head first, to get free kicks at crucial moments. Dawson jumped in that tackle, wasn't called for holding the ball, and didn't try to get rid of the ball. But of course, Close is supposed to just let him run free, despite Dawson demonstrating showing no duty of care to himself, and effectively throwing himself into the turf to get out of the tackle.

Will Day tripped on Close a few weeks back.
Merrett tackled and momentum caused head to hit the turf
Ward tackled and Neale went down like a sack of sh*t
JVR poorly spoils, misses the ball, and then gets two weeks because Ballard was stretchered off - AS A PRECAUTION - and will play this week

It's all f*cked now. I am so furious with where this is heading.

The game is being over sanitised. Tackling will end up being tiggy