I think Maxwell should lay off the caffeine WTF was he doing last night,was directly responsible for 4 goals from brain fades.I would think Collingwood would hope for a suspension saves them the embarrasment of dropping him.
-
LIVE: Sydney v Port Adelaide - 7:40 / 7:10 Fri
Squiggle tips Swans at 57% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
-
LIVE: Geelong v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Cats at 54% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Prelim Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round SF Winner: And_ROOS
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Maxwell gone.
- Thread starter Blue and Gold Blood
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Watching the build up to the Adelaide-Sydney game and they seemed to have access to the reverse angle shot of the Maxwell incident.
Funny how Channel 7 couldn't find it last night but that might be because Maxwell works for them and is much clearer than the other shot
Funny how Channel 7 couldn't find it last night but that might be because Maxwell works for them and is much clearer than the other shot
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,896
- 6,923
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
Maxwell 2 and should also lose the captaincy. He was terrible last night 3 or 4 really dumb acts not what you need from the captain.
The Falcon Strike
Hall of Famer
Harbrow knocked Jordan Lewis completely out a few years back - should we now just rub him out?
The fact you get someone high shouldn't be the deciding factor - the intent or action should be considered.
In no way was Maxwell's actions malicious nor any intent to do harm - he was simply trying to block space.
WC stand to benefit from his omission - but i still don't think he should get done
Which part of: "The head is sacrosanct" don't you understand. JZ had intent for the ball in the contest and was rubbed out for four weeks.
Maxwell backhands someone 50m behind play and there is no intent? Get real.
So we shouldn't even bother turning up for the game? Well done on winning the grand final in advance.
I love nick maxwell,he is one of the reasons we won that 2010 gf.go and watch it and get back to me.who was Richmond last premiership captain I cannot even remember.
The Falcon Strike
Hall of Famer
Which part of Harbrow knocking Jordan Lewis out by hitting him in the head don't you understand? Blokes get whacked in the head in every game and it isn't a free kick nor reportable.
Backhands?? Might want to re-watch it me thinks
Ah the old it is justified because someone else did it and it was worse. Nice, my three young children use that argument. If it is wrong for them....
The Falcon Strike
Hall of Famer
No it is called common sense and simply casting a blanket comment like "head is sacrosanct" without considering such a thing as context suggests a simpleton
You sound like a Carlton supporter justifying Judd's actions. BTW,
resorting to abuse of me because the AFL made the rules shows the real weakness of your argument.
Pretty sure if Harbrow had done that 50m off the ball he would have got 8 weeks, the reason he got off was both players were contesting a loose ball and lack of intent.
Maxwell was nowhere near the ball, put on a clumsy but deliberate block well behind play and broke his opponents nose. Worst than Stevie J's block as if caught the player high and caused damage. Min 1 week with an early plea and discounts, should get two.
Maguire's running of the Maxwell defence on Fox's coverage this afternoon was downright embarrassing. Apparently Maxwell's action was 'in play.' It's pretty straightforward really. If the player should not reasonably expect contact then the transgressor is in strife.
You're forgetting the tribunal rule; low contact, love-tap impact (but Academy Award acting).
Yeah that was interesting. Was it not channel 7's camera or something?
- Banned
- #167
That's the point, besides your rose coloured glasses tainted opinion of the supposed "Academy Award acting." Finals time means tribunal adjudications against star players will conveniently be downgraded so as to allow them to perform on the biggest stage and not lessen the spectacle. Barry Hall is the example, hence "Barry Hall finals rule."
So was just looking at the Tribunal booklet. If he was to go, lets assume high contact, Reckless (rather then intentional or negligent, although if decided behind play could be intentional), medium impact (broken nose). Thats 6 pts and level 3 offense. Level 3 Rough conduct is a 325pt offense. with an early plea comes down too 243. No good or bad record that I can find (suspended in 2009 round 3. No loading as loading lasts 3 year. No good record as have to be clean 5 years). So would miss Semi and Prelim back for Granny (assuming Pies keep winning). To challenge would risk the Granny as well.
Nasty situation (not saying incident is nasty but not being able to challenge without risking the granny). Interestingly if it was considered striking, would only miss 1 week (2 if they challenge).
Nasty situation (not saying incident is nasty but not being able to challenge without risking the granny). Interestingly if it was considered striking, would only miss 1 week (2 if they challenge).
- Jan 30, 2006
- 11,299
- 9,847
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Moderator
- #169
Maxwell a star player? Okayyy
Gonski....!
- Jun 17, 2007
- 3,798
- 4,972
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Inverleigh Hawks
Better than eye-gouging, pressure-points and chicken-winging blokes who can't defend themselves.
Ha ha, a scum supporter having a go at Maxwell when your captain is one of the dirtiest dogs going around.
- Banned
- #172
I was talking about Hall.
Based on the other footage, I don't think he should get any games.
I think he's a complete w***er, but he shouldn't get games for basically protecting his front position in the race to a contest.
