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

[PenAndPaper]

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.

So why did Fogarty not receive anything for his hit on Murphy doing the exact same thing? That's the problem here, there is absolutely zero consistency with what does and doesn't get reported and even with how many weeks things get.

It is beyond a joke now.

 

[dees arent rabble]

Afl should ban all contact

 

[PenfoldsFan]

You can also bump and tackle, so long as you dont make contact with the head or the head with the ground and you can still spoil, if you can do it without contacting the head, if not, dont do it.
Pretty straight forward I'd have thought.

 

[Imet Hassa]

The tribunal result will make no difference at all to how the game is played. There will be dozens of similar incidents in coming weeks with no report as in attempted spoil, head contact, no injury - no report. By then the media will have a new shiny object to focus on and this suspension will be forgotten. Tough on JvR though, being made an example of for something that won’t be consistently followed through on.

 

[Shadow89]

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.

That's actually very interesting information, thanks for that

Unfortunately, what this translates to, is us legislating contact out of our game. Potential to cause harm is such a grey area, that it can be basically applied to any situation, where the AFL/MRO/Tribunal, does not believe the offending player has exercised a duty of care to their opponent.

This means, that in ANY contest - marking, spoiling, tackling, bumping, breaking a tackle - that players are now going to get rubbed out, if ANY action they commit is seen to POTENTIALLY cause any harm to the player.

I can't see a positive way forward out of this.

 

[PenAndPaper]

You can also bump and tackle, so long as you dont make contact with the head or the head with the ground and you can still spoil, if you can do it without contacting the head, if not, dont do it.
Pretty straight forward I'd have thought.

but you can jump up to spoil or mark the ball and knee an opponent in the back of the head without even having a free against. It is absolutely not straight forward.

 

[Toump Ass]

If someone from another team was suspended in this fashion I'd laugh, but because it's a Melbourne Demons player it really sucks.
Hope we appeal.

 

[Coasters7]

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.

A lot of the issue is they slow the vision down to within an inch of its life and all the stills obviously look horrible.

They’re basically telling him to stay on the ground and let Ballard take an uncontested mark. Like you say, JVR has no way of knowing Ballard won’t jump and by the time he realises it’s too late.

So if he exercises his “duty of care” and doesn’t jump to contest the ball but Ballard does (which you’d expect most of the time he would) then JVR comes out looking like a goose for shirking the contest.

Basically, the game is f*cked if they go down this route and the players have no idea what they should or shouldn’t be doing

 

[Shadow89]

The tribunal result will make no difference at all to how the game is played. There will be dozens of similar incidents in coming weeks with no report as in attempted spoil, head contact, no injury - no report. By then the media will have a new shiny object to focus on and this suspension will be forgotten. Tough on JvR though, being made an example of for something that won’t be consistently followed through on.

Mmm I honestly don't know this time...

They've been very consistent all year, and I've never seen this many players banned in such a short amount of time. There's literal appeals every single week - sometimes 3-4 of them in a single round. Litigation is the reason behind this push, and the AFL cares more about money than any other aspect of the sport.

There's going to be at least another 50 suspensions before the year is out - and that troubles me greatly, given that's around 1/10th of the overall Best 22-26 playing lists. It's insane where we've got to in such a short space of time.

Make no mistake, the 'potential to cause injury' clause may destroy our game as we know it.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

So why did Fogarty not receive anything for his hit on Murphy doing the exact same thing? That's the problem here, there is absolutely zero consistency with what does and doesn't get reported and even with how many weeks things get.

It is beyond a joke now.

I cant answer that, probably should have and if it happened next week would be under the precedence just set.

Have people not worked it out yet, Aussie Rules is finally being refined away from the outdated barbaric relic it was allowed to remain for far too long and will soon be a Gaelic Football/Soccer hybrid.
Either move with it or whinge about how everything was better back in the day.

 

[Shadow89]

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

Reminds me of 'Sarcastaball' in South Park. If you haven't seen it, look it up. It's meant to be a ridiculous joke, but it's legitimately happening now in a lot of sports. The AFL is just accelerating it far faster than I ever could have imagined.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

but you can jump up to spoil or mark the ball and knee an opponent in the back of the head without even having a free against. It is absolutely not straight forward.

It'll change too, give it time.

 

[Shadow89]

I cant answer that, probably should have and if it happened next week would be under the precedence just set.

Have people not worked it out yet, Aussie Rules is finally being refined away from the outdated barbaric relic it was allowed to remain for far too long and will soon be a Gaelic Football/Soccer hybrid.
Either move with it or whinge about how everything was better back in the day.

The fact that you're ok with this, suggests that you don't really like our game in its current format. If so, why have you been a fan, and why do you have a BF account?

Odd mentality to not want a contact sport to be a contact sport anymore.

 

[Coasters7]

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

Get them all to sign waivers and those that won’t are more than welcome to pursue other careers. I’m sure there’s plenty of state footy players lining up for a gig. Don’t know how easy it is from a legal point of view but it’s either that or in 10 years we’ll be playing touch footy with pads up to our eyes balls NFL style

 

[Slartibartfast]

I cant answer that, probably should have and if it happened next week would be under the precedence just set.

Have people not worked it out yet, Aussie Rules is finally being refined away from the outdated barbaric relic it was allowed to remain for far too long and will soon be a Gaelic Football/Soccer hybrid.
Either move with it or whinge about how everything was better back in the day.

Agree that the game will change due to fears of permanent injuries.

Any changes need to be announced pre season and clearly defined and NOT a gradual increase in determination with changes from week to week.

 

[PenAndPaper]

I cant answer that, probably should have and if it happened next week would be under the precedence just set.

Have people not worked it out yet, Aussie Rules is finally being refined away from the outdated barbaric relic it was allowed to remain for far too long and will soon be a Gaelic Football/Soccer hybrid.
Either move with it or whinge about how everything was better back in the day.

There is a massive difference between the outdated barbaric acts you are talking about and what JVR did. In a contact sport there are going to be incidents that have poor results without any ill intent, JVR was absolutely trying to spoil the ball. Sometimes it can be fine for a free kick to be the punishment, not everything needs to have some sort of suspension.

 

[citizen-erased]

One of the more baffling ones. Both from MRO and tribunal.
Slippery slope this one.

 

[Libba39]

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

Don't you need to have some kind of remotely vague notion of where the actual ball is in order to spoil it....?

 

[freddy mercury]

Absolutely farcical that he even got reported.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

The fact that you're ok with this, suggests that you don't really like our game in its current format. If so, why have you been a fan, and why do you have a BF account?

Odd mentality to not want a contact sport to be a contact sport anymore.

I dont think a bicep to the head is fair game regardless of the nature of the game.
If he cant make a legal spoil we get a mark and shot on goal, same game different scoreline.

 

[My Tilly]

Is it Michael Christian who has the final say?

That bloke always got ko'd in his playing days. No wonder he's anal about head knocks.

 

[SplintWhisky]

!00% convinced that if he wasnt running to the drop zone/contest looking straight at the Gold Coast player, he would of gotten off. One of those idiosyncrasies in AFL where you get away with a lot more if you are looking at the ball whilst doing it.

 

[Shadow89]

I dont think a bicep to the head is fair game regardless of the nature of the game.
If he cant make a legal spoil we get a .ark and shot on goal, same game different scoreline.

You're tying yourself up in knots now - just like the MRO/Tribunal.

Of course it's a free kick...but Ballard left the ground as a precaution, while JVR was in the act of spoiling. He does not seek to intentionally take him out, he does it in the act of the contest.

If you believe that a bicep to the head isn't fair game, then you also believe that a knee to the head isn't fair game? This means the specky should go in your eyes.

Next, if you don't think a bicep to the head is fair game, then you don't think a standing marking contest is fair game - where oppo players/players in the pack, smash each other in the contest about 100 times a game.

So that removes spoiling, speckys and marking in general. Even in Soccer, Basketball, Gaelic football etc. there are contests that result in 'biceps to the head.' It happens in the act of contesting, regardless of whether it's a non-contact sport or not.

What you're stating here, is that there should be NO CONTACT AT ALL within our sport. What that inherently would mean, is that you could not get the ball back from the opposition player, because you are not allowed to contest at any time.

This is INCIDENTAL contact. Which occurs within the sports you have mentioned. If you outlaw it, you literally don't have a sport anymore - because you need to contest the ball, to get the ball back. The only way that you would get the ball back, is by scoring a behind. At which point, it wouldn't matter, because the other team would then just take the ball coast to coast, however they saw fit.

The slippery slope here is monstrous. You cannot outlaw incidental contact in a sport. Tackling is one thing...but spoiling or contesting...gee, that's it for our game if that goes.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Will end up with zero weeks, the footage doesn't show anything new.

Suspension stands. Sensible.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

You're tying yourself up in knots now - just like the MRO/Tribunal.

Of course it's a free kick...but Ballard left the ground as a precaution, while JVR was in the act of spoiling. He does not seek to intentionally take him out, he does it in the act of the contest.

If you believe that a bicep to the head isn't fair game, then you also believe that a knee to the head isn't fair game? This means the specky should go in your eyes.

Next, if you don't think a bicep to the head is fair game, then you don't think a standing marking contest is fair game - where oppo players/players in the pack, smash each other in the contest about 100 times a game.

So that removes spoiling, speckys and marking in general. Even in Soccer, Basketball, Gaelic football etc. there are contests that result in 'biceps to the head.' It happens in the act of contesting, regardless of whether it's a non-contact sport or not.

What you're stating here, is that there should be NO CONTACT AT ALL within our sport. What that inherently would mean, is that you could not get the ball back from the opposition player, because you are not allowed to contest at any time.

This is INCIDENTAL contact. Which occurs within the sports you have mentioned. If you outlaw it, you literally don't have a sport anymore - because you need to contest the ball, to get the ball back. The only way that you would get the ball back, is by scoring a behind. At which point, it wouldn't matter, because the other team would then just take the ball coast to coast, however they saw fit.

The slippery slope here is monstrous. You cannot outlaw incidental contact in a sport. Tackling is one thing...but spoiling or contesting...gee, that's it for our game if that goes.

You better get used to it sooner than later or 6 months of every year of your life will be pretty boring soon enough.
The game is changing before your eyes.
You can probably add basketball to the hybrid mentioned..for the coast to coast angle.