Maynard cleared by tribunal for Brayshaw collision

[Corn Cobbers]

THE AFL has opted against appealing the Tribunal's decision in the Brayden Maynard case, meaning the Collingwood defender is in the clear to play in the Magpies' preliminary final.

AFL ponders rule change after Maynard Tribunal call

The Brayden Maynard saga is officially over after the AFL opted not to appeal the Tribunal's decision

www.afl.com.au

The AFL, having brought the charge against Maynard, said on Wednesday that it would not challenge the Tribunal's ruling, but would comment further later in the day.

"The AFL has confirmed that after careful consideration and review of the Tribunal's decision and reasons following last night's hearing into the incident involving Collingwood's Brayden Maynard and Melbourne's Angus Brayshaw, the AFL has decided not to appeal the Tribunal's decision," a statement read.

"Per the Tribunal Guidelines the AFL had to make this decision by 12:00pm AEST today.

"The AFL will release a further statement later today."

Finally some sanity

 

[Maddo11]

Netball allows more contact.

He was able to protect himself he just didn't.

Time to pop onto a cooling tray mate because you're well cooked

 

[Roby]

What always amuses me about BigFooty is a player is involved in an incident and supporters from the other 17 clubs are calling for blood when they know full well if it was their player, they'd be offering all sorts of reasons why he should be exonerated.

100%. Very few objective people here.

 

[loki04]

If the AFL allow this to happen without any penalty I'd be very surprised if the new head of football, the MRO adjudicator and board members of the club involved are not held personally liable for any consequent actions that cause similar damage from similar incidents once the precedent is set.

Say he gets off, does that empower players next week to do the same, i.e. jump in the air, "accidently" shoulder the player kicking the ball in the face during the kicking motion, and get off scott free. And the next player who cops this sues the AFL and those people directly.

Good luck finding anyone else that will volunteer to sit in those roles.
And just so a certain side can make the grand final.

Do your cost benefit analysis people.

We will beat you without him so don't worry you are still going out in straight sets.

MRO have never been kind to pies you confuse us with Carlton and Swans. We never get players off. Ask Rocca in 03 and J.Cloke in his GF and many others over the decade.

 

[kickazz]

What's he honestly supposed to do? Face plant into Brayshaw and possibly causing more damage, to both of them?

Similar to tackling when you approach from the front - you don't really have many easy legal options. Players should know that approaching a player front on (especially at pace and airborne) brings that risk.

 

[SuperSteele22]

Don't jump then if you can't stop yourself from knocking out an opponent

Such a weird take considering the reason he was in the air was to attempt a smother. Always easy to spot the ones who have never played the game competively

 

[loki04]

So he fails at the smother (pic 4), and then swings his hip..and shoulder.. into him(Pic 5, 6). Hip and shoulder. What else do we call a 'hip and shoulder' again?

Yep, the original motion was an attempted smother, that fails, and he clearly tries to make a statement. Why do people keep saying 'split second' like it means nothing matters? So you're saying in the split second he has enough time to think about protecting himself, but not to think about laying a bump/making a statement? Maynard is known for the latter.. feel for Maynard (and Brayshaw ofc) I like the way he goes about it, but he's clearly stuffed up here, and it is what it is..

He chose to protect himself due to the inevitable clash that was coming, the other player did not and duly come off second best. Free kick at best. Exactly is what it is. Nothing to see.

 

[Vindicater]

Netball allows more contact.

Oh look. This old chestnut again.

 

[Roby]

Your opinions are much better when you leave out the rhetoric about Brayshaw trying to draw contact.

Actually, it's a good point.

Every since the AFL darling Selwood was commended and rewarded for drawing high free kicks, including when he headbutted opponents, there has been a shift in how players view contests. They will risk taking high contact hoping to draw free kicks, but they don't really worry about CTE. They're young of course, and stupid.

 

[Vindicater]

Actually, it's a good point.

Every since the AFL darling Selwood was commended and rewarded for drawing high free kicks, including when he headbutted opponents, there has been a shift in how players view contests. They will risk taking high contact hoping to draw free kicks, but they don't really worry about CTE. They're young of course, and stupid.

Do explain how Brayshaw was risking taking head high contact while kicking the ball?

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Outlaw jumping? Clueless.

Not surprising that you’ve missed the point.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Such a weird take considering the reason he was in the air was to attempt a smother. Always easy to spot the ones who have never played the game competively

So him jumping in the air was the thing that knocked him out was it? Not because he turned his body and bumped him in the head on the way down?

 

[STPer18]

Tackling is a football action.
Tackle goes wrong and a player gets weeks.

Bumping is a football action.
Bump goes wrong and a player gets weeks.

That's how the AFL have judged head high hits in 2023. So surely the same follows here.

Smothering is a football action.
Smother goes wrong and a player gets weeks.

 

[Frederico_WA]

Do explain how Brayshaw was risking taking head high contact while kicking the ball?

Wasn't he wearing a helmet? It's almost like he was inviting a head contact!

 

[HairyO]

So Maginness deserved weeks but Maynard is completely fine?

And you want people to take you seriously with that opinion?

I think we are talking about Blanck not Maginness.

But Blanck kept his body low to avoid hitting Daicos high. His duty of care was to avoid hitting Daicos high. That is what the AFL has said players must do.

Maynard made zero effort to avoid hitting Brayshaw high.

Robbo, BT and Purple all say Maynard should be fine. That alone should be proof Maynard should go.

 

[hawkman]

Netball allows more contact.

Have late bumps after a player has disposed of the ball ever been allowed in the VFL/AFL?

 

[loki04]

Exactly. I don't get how people can't get this through their head.

It started as a football act, but it certainly didn't finish as one.

Hate to break it to you but contact is part of footy Bud.

Even if AFL is transitioning to touch.

 

[SuperSteele22]

So him jumping in the air was the thing that knocked him out was it? Not because he turned his body and bumped him in the head on the way down?

Again, this idea that you've manufactured that a player who is attempting a smother has time to calculate and control his landing whilst still in mid air makes it quite blatant that you've never played the game in any capacity

 

[hawkman]

Robbo, BT and Purple all say Maynard should be fine. That alone should be proof Maynard should go.

Just imagine agreeing with those 3 people and believing you are on the right side of the argument

 

[loki04]

I think we are talking about Blanck not Maginness.

But Blanck kept his body low to avoid hitting Daicos high. His duty of care was to avoid hitting Daicos high. That is what the AFL has said players must do.

Maynard made zero effort to avoid hitting Brayshaw high.

Robbo, BT and Purple all say Maynard should be fine. That alone should be proof Maynard should go.

That definitely wasn't reportable but was late and should of been a 50m penalty and that's it.

Much like Maynard's should of been a down field free and that's it.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Again, this idea that you've manufactured that a player who is attempting a smother has time to calculate and control his landing whilst still in mid air makes it quite blatant that you've never played the game in any capacity

He chose to jump so it's up to him to not bump someone in the head and knock them out of the game, it's that simple

 

[hawkman]

That definitely wasn't reportable but was late and should of been a 50m penalty and that's it.

Much like Maynard's should of been a down field free and that's it.

How can it be a downfield free if it was all Brayshaw's fault?

 

[sherb]

Netball allows more contact.

Actually it doesn't.

Hate to break it to you but contact is part of footy Bud.

Even if AFL is transitioning to touch.

You jumped the shark ages ago. Give it a rest.

 

[eddiesmith]

The treatment of Ginnivan is all his fault, he should be taking appropriate action on the field to protect himself. It's certainly not the fault of innocent opposition players.

Innocent? Opposition players go hard and deliberately high to tackle him knowing they won’t be penalised.

 

[kickazz]

Have late bumps after a player has disposed of the ball ever been allowed in the VFL/AFL?

Probably. But not for quite some time. The 'shirtfront' is one of the first things they got rid of in the nineties.

 

[loki04]

Wait, how did Brayshaw 'look to take the hit'?

He certainly made no effort to protect himself, he knew Brayden was coming and also drifted into his path then didnt brace or put his hands out himself to push.

I don't buy this mentality that people have no responsibility to protect themselves in contact sports.