To get it to 1 game, which of the aspects would you be challenging?
On what grounds? Severe Impact? player went off with concussion, high contact? his head impacted the ground.
So concussed he managed to get up and snap a goal from the boundary. I’d suggest the severe impact would be questioned on that basis
Terrible defence, i suggest Carlton don't suggest that to the tribunal
www.afl.com.au
So an impact where a player is knocked out cold should be treated the exact same as a delayed concussion type incident? Last year I’m pretty sure DBJ probably plays out the game
I would say concussion and delayed concussion are both still severe impact. The body still has the same health outcome. I am no brain surgeon though, so no putting either of us on the stand.
It was the third hit DBJ received for the night. I’m sure that will become part of the defence
Oh there are more Carlton players inline for suspension? Obviously joking. Good to see someone get done for staging, Cripps nearly won best stage of the weekend, but out done in end.
I don't believe the "C" player wanted to hurt the "PA" player, but i guess that's why it wasn't classified as intentional? Its more severe to have a head hit the turf hard, than a player knock your two front teeth out. I think this is where you are going with not agreeing with severe impact? Sadly, too many of what you consider to not be severe impacts have long term consequences for some players, that can ruin their life after football.
I hear what you are saying but where does it end if we’re considering repercussions 10/20/30/40 years down the track? Because every bump, every tackle, every hit might be adding to he trauma but we just don’t know it yet.
It's been 18 years since Byron Picket copped 6 weeks for a hip and shoulder on James Begley and no other hip and shoulder has been considered as bad since then. I think the head is where it ends. There will be plenty of what we would call fair players get done, but i reckon clubs will be working on tackling technique more than ever. I think that is the goal of the AFL and their doctors (and lawyers).
I agree with your point in general but I see Boyd’s tackle as legitimate. B-J falls as a consequence of lateral pressure. So we can argue that Boyd was responsible or we can argue that it’s just a natural consequence of some actions in the game. If we choose the latter then a lot of players will be getting suspended for innocuous acts. Fine you say… but please don’t complain when it is your player.
We have had 2 players suspended for tackles this year that resulted in no concussion and a player suspended for a bump that resulted in a head clash for no concussion. It’s a fine line between suspending the action and the outcome, but there has to be some level of culpability if there is a concussion.
We've seen players rubbed out for two games with no concussion at all.
