Maynard cleared by tribunal for Brayshaw collision

What should happen with Maynard?

  • 1-2 match suspension for careless, med-high impact, high contact

    Votes: 247 27.9%
  • 3-4 match suspension for intentional, med-high impact, high contact

    Votes: 203 23.0%
  • 5+ match suspension, intentional or careless with severe impact, straight to tribunal

    Votes: 68 7.7%
  • Charges downgraded to a fine

    Votes: 52 5.9%
  • No charge/no penalty

    Votes: 314 35.5%

  • Total voters
    884
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

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.


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 👍
 
Plenty of people will have him guilty for those reasons doesn't mean he should be for this.
He is in the air with his chest towards brayshaw, in that split decision he decided to turn his shoulder into him and knock him clean out. If he doesnt turn the shoulder brayshaw doesnt get knocked out it's that simple.

He had the alternative of turning away or simply taking the contest chest on which would have saved brayshaw so there is no excuse for it, Guilty of knocking someone out must miss the rest of the final series if the AFL is serious.
 
If anyone was watching AFL for the first time they'd swear shoulder high hits were legal since the commentators were so defensive about it. The way the boys club commentators all unanimously agreed and urged that he gets off is actually quite sickening. How about they just shut the * up about it and stop influencing public opinion.

Maynard 100% intended to hurt Brayshaw. Pretended to smother the ball, turns his body in the air, didn't raise his arms to lessen impact and elected to hit him at full speed with his shoulder in the head.

I guess pies fans are loving it because that act of thuggery won the game.

Until Greene does it to Naicos in the Prelim.

Then they would be demanding 6 weeks. And the flog commentatoes would agree.
 
Ok, so my question as to whether anyone can demonstrate a time that a player has been given a puff peice interview after a game to prove their innocence after they've knocked a player out. To which you replied "Happens all the time". You are now saying you can't be arsed proving how it happens all the time. Makes sense. :thumbsupemoji:

Yep pretty much. I'm not digging for evidence for you. My effort level is pretty much capped at just letting you know it happens
 

Log in to remove this ad.

His history of being a flog shouldnt come into it.
He's a repeat offender so it should definitely be considered when making a decision. We all know Maynard is a niggly thug. Even Collingwood supporters know it and love him for it.

They should suspend him with more weeks each time he repeats. Make an example of him. But of course the AFL won't because it seems to me Collingwood are the AFLs designated fairytale team this season.
 
Mate, if Brayshaw is getting knocked out cold from a hit like that he should not be playing the sport. Any other player gets hit like that and they are not concussed. Brayshaw likely has a soft spot, which if hit, he goes out cold.

Ahh a toughguy keyboard warrior. Im sure you take his from 90 kilo guys at speed to the head all the time and brush it off.

Even if Brayshaw brushed it off as well as you would, its still a 1 week holiday any time during the regular season.
 
Highly likely. The AFL dont actually care about player safety.

Or they agree accidents happen sometimes.

Its why Brayshaw should then sue the AFL. And the players' insurers should be funding it.
He'll be joining a very long queue.

If anyone was watching AFL for the first time they'd swear shoulder high hits were legal since the commentators were so defensive about it. The way the boys club commentators all unanimously agreed and urged that he gets off is actually quite sickening. How about they just shut the * up about it and stop influencing public opinion.

Maynard 100% intended to hurt Brayshaw. Pretended to smother the ball, turns his body in the air, didn't raise his arms to lessen impact and elected to hit him at full speed with his shoulder in the head.

I guess pies fans are loving it because that act of thuggery won the game.

He's incredibly clever to do all that in a split second.
 
I'm not even going to try to predict what the verdict will be. But I suspect there will be a Finals and biggest Melbourne team discount.
To my eye it looked a lot like a rugby union charge down where the blocker comes from a long way, goes up, then accidentally on purpose takes out the kicker.
 
Absolutely convinced some of you poindexters have never played a contact sport in your life if you think that's deliberate.
 
Or they agree accidents happen sometimes.


He'll be joining a very long queue.



He's incredibly clever to do all that in a split second.

He managed to get his hands out to brace for impact with the ground in half the time as he chose to drop his shoulder on Brayshaw instead of using his hands to brace there.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He's incredibly clever to do all that in a split second.
He had it in his mind to go for a hit even before Brayshaw kicked it.

Also, Maynard is a thug/caveman, but he's a clever one like Toby Greene. Not saying hes dumb. He's crafty. He had time to decide and did it to perfection.

Look at the replay. He swivels his shoulder around. The more natural reaction is to protect your opponent by putting out your hands.
 
In 2012 Ziebell got four weeks four this:



He didn't have to leave the ground, that was his choice, in doing so he took implied responsibility for wherever his body ended up next, made head high contact with his opponent (who was unable to protect himself), and paid the price (four weeks was too much imho but whatever).

This was over a decade ago, the game has only become more protective of the head since then.

If Maynard gets away with this (and I think he will) it will be yet another demonstration of how we follow a glorified bush league.

Are you taking the p@#s lol. Not even near identical. Ziebel leaves the ground and first action is to bump and hurt. Maynard leaves the ground attempting to smother, then braces for contact. Seriously people are just making up sh$t now. You're not being fair dinkum if you think that deserves a suspension.
 
What is the actual difference between this and a player going for a mark, leaving the ground and kneeing a bloke in the head? The duty of care and all that is exactly the same surely for accidental football injuries where a player is not attempting to bump or tackle
I'd wager that if you flew for a speccy, missed the ball and shouldered someone in the face on your way down you'd probably get done for it.
 
The only thing this proves is Christian and the AFL have absolutely no freaking idea what they are doing.
Everyone is so confused by which angle to take.
The sooner Christian gets sacked the better.
The biggest of nuffies our game has ever seen!
I know, how Gary Rohan got off for that bump on Jeremy Cameron is unbelievable.
 
I'd wager that if you flew for a speccy, missed the ball and shouldered someone in the face on your way down you'd probably get done for it.

So shoulder bad, knee good is the way it is. Makes no sense at all.

if you went for a mark and missed it but landed on a guy on the way down you wouldn't be copping a ban
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Maynard cleared by tribunal for Brayshaw collision

Back
Top