McGovern reported

[Taylor]

Yeah you are a troll good work. Ablett clocking blokes in the footy is ok because he didn't put them in hospital? Idiot. Structurally we are well covered if he goes down so it doesnt really matter except that was a legitimate and reasonable action that any AFL player would be expected to make in that situation.

Would you rather they base punishment off the result of an action or the possible result of the action?

 

[Max zero]

Just accept it dude... FFS WC supporters here are precious lol... You would think someone took a premiership off them.



It seems its not that easy to diagnose mild concussion straight away hence the reason he probably passed the severe concussion tests but showed up with symptoms later on.

Well they seem to know right as the game ended. Perfect timing. He could still play (if it wasnt for his ribs) but you can still claim he was concussed later.

 

[RookiePick]

Just typical VFL bullshit.

Delayed, mild concussion that won't possibly keep Guelfi out next week but somehow makes a medium impact grading justified for rubbing out the Interstate player.

Just keep making up the rules as you go along. It just makes our flags all that much sweeter.

 

[Oxirane]

Given that mild or delayed concussion can take days to present, the AFL should probably delay the MRO process to the middle of the next week before performing the assessment. Lots of contact deemed insufficient force that ultimately would be deemed medium impact is probably being missed,.

 

[Balls In]

Would you rather they base punishment off the result of an action or the possible result of the action?

Both. Not one over all else.

 

[Taylor]

Both. Not one over all else.

Well the result of this event was a player out of the game.

Last season Ryan Nyhuis tackled Robbie Gray and knocked him out, three week ban, Robbie played the following week. It wasn't as bad as that.

 

[Dazzler9]

Oh would you look at that. West Coast supporters AGAIN proven wrong.. It just doesn't stop lol...

Your meme makes little sense.

 

[Dazzler9]

Would you rather they base punishment off the result of an action or the possible result of the action?

Has to be the action first, the outcome second.

 

[Mudguts12]

The Emu ok fella tell me how Bellchambers was judged to be careless conduct and not intentional then?

 

[Balls In]

Well the result of this event was a player out of the game.

Last season Ryan Nyhuis tackled Robbie Gray and knocked him out, three week ban, Robbie played the following week. It wasn't as bad as that.

McGovern did exactly what was expected of a footballer in that situation. Legitimate football action complicated by proximity to the boundary and a chair/security guards knee and unfortunate vision of Guielfi entering a taxi looking all sore. Turns out he is fine other than this talk of "mild delayed concussion" that has mysteriously surfaced. Meanwhile Shuey gets an obvious dangerous front-on and Christian isnt interested?

 

[TassieEagle]

Not worthy of a week.

I think the biggest change that needs to happen is no biased media coverage of potentially reportable incidents.

Commentators rattling on about so and so being in trouble just starts a trial by media.

 

[Taylor]

McGovern did exactly what was expected of a footballer in that situation. Legitimate football action complicated by proximity to the boundary and a chair and unfortunate vision of Guielfi entering a taxi looking all sore. Turns out he is fine other than this talk of "mild delayed concussion" that has mysteriously surfaced. Meanwhile Shuey gets an obvious dangerous front-on and Christian isnt interested?

If Essendon were another team I expect Shuey goes to ground and stays there, goes off with trainers and bravely comes back on. Bellchambers gets banned then.

It's an unfortunate situation when a player who is really tough will push through and another can really milk it and both will influence the penalty.

Not saying either happened here

 

[garlic munchers]

No it clearly isn't.. Guelfi's foot is already past the line when McGovern actually makes contact with the BUMP. He then goes from the BUMP action to a PUSH action way past the boundary line............View attachment 696122

Whoops, if that foot is past the line then your view of the world would fit in nicely with Gils & the MRC.

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

Whoops, if that foot is past the line then your view of the world would fit in nicely with Gils & the MRC.

Time to move on buddy - decision has been handed down correctly - pushed him way when ball was 3m away and over the boundary. Let's see if you contest the charge OR your club actually takes some responsibility unlike your fellow supporters and admits he made a mistake and move on.

 

[garlic munchers]

Time to move on buddy - decision has been handed down correctly - pushed him way when ball was 3m away and over the boundary. Let's see if you contest the charge OR your club actually takes some responsibility unlike your fellow supporters and admits he made a mistake and move on.

My post made no mention of whether charge is valid or not.

It did however take issue with a poster using a photo as evidence to claim contact was over the line when the photo actually shows contact inside the boundary.

It’s exactly this sort of shite that is becoming synonymous with the ‘we didn’t mandate a crackdown AFL’.

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

My post made no mention of whether charge is valid or not.

It did however take issue with a poster using a photo as evidence to claim contact was over the line when the photo actually shows contact inside the boundary.

It’s exactly this sort of ****e that is becoming synonymous with the ‘we didn’t mandate a crackdown AFL’.

He PUSHED him when he was way over the boundary - move on. The BUMP occurred on the boundary line when the ball had already been disposed - see the yellow thing floating in the air - thats called a football and it means that the player is no longer in possession which means you cannot push them straight into a fence. Got it? Can't make it any more simple for these WC fans. You are seeing what you want - not reality. Take of the bias glasses.

 

[Coasters7]

Not at all - decision and grading was exactly as I predicted which tells me most of you and your fellow supporters don't understand the game and the grading system. I understand your bias is influencing your views which I can't change. I see you have a lot of anger and frustration towards Ablett - let me know which players he had sent to hospital in those incidents and I will happily respond.

That’s where the problem is with the whole system and what everyone is pissed off about. In isolation maybe 1 week is fair enough, but with precedence for similar incidents only copping a fine and other, more dangerous acts getting similar treatment, it’s all a bit frustrating. Using the Ablett example, he has full intention to hit those guys high (with a non footballing action), and has the potential to end someone’s season if he hits the right spot. Gov, intentionally pushed, fair enough.. but didn’t go into the contest trying to wrap Guelfi around the fence, and it was relatively in the contest. Not sure how you can’t see the discrepancy here. I’d be happy for them both to be a week.

The grading system is a mess and leaves a lot to interpretation. Can’t have a specific part of the body (body, head etc) then have a force measurement which is so generic, medium impact because he went to hospital, even though that’s for his ribs. Can’t have one of each.

Then there’s always the “duty of care” which only gets trotted out when it’s convenient, not for flying elbows apparently.

 

[Altum Volantes]

Only dispute would be the high impact part I reckon. Considering he impacted the body.

Would be worth challenging based on that alone if high vs body can get it down to a fine.

 

[Coasters7]

Would you rather they base punishment off the result of an action or the possible result of the action?

Think basing punishment off the outcome should only come into effect if the grading is intentional. Can’t be punishing someone extra weeks for the outcome they didn’t foresee happening.. especially in a footballing act such as a push or bump.

 

[Chumly]

Studs up in soccer is an immediate red card. Why? Because players have had broken legs from it. Bones broken flush in half.

That violent Essendon player could have broken Allen's ribs yet gets next to no punishment.

Oh this thread is about the Gov? Rolls eyes.

 

[Chumly]

Can somebody explain to me the difference in these two incidents? (Frawley was deemed careless, body and low impact for this in Round 8, which was a fine. )

One reply to this and the reply glossed over any meaningful discussion. Shows what campaigners they are.

 

[tropicaltiger]

That sets a dangerous precedent.

Why the **** was that campaigner sitting in a chair so close to the boundary? Not McGovern's fault. If the fence or officials aren't a safe distance from the play (i.e. a player can do something that happens 10 times a game and it happens within the field of play), then bring the ******* boundary in.

From now on, that says if a player is injured from anything in the game, it's rough conduct.

reminded me of this guy. comedy hour. gov no case to answer.

 

[Coasters7]

He PUSHED him when he was way over the boundary - move on. The BUMP occurred on the boundary line when the ball had already been disposed - see the yellow thing floating in the air - thats called a football and it means that the player is no longer in possession which means you cannot push them straight into a fence. Got it? Can't make it any more simple for these WC fans. You are seeing what you want - not reality. Take of the bias glasses.

Don’t think using stills is a good way to mount an argument in such a high speed game. Go watch the video and let me know if it’s possible Gov can pull out after the ball is released. He lines him up and commits while he still has possession and makes contact just as the ball leaves Guelfis hands (all within about a second) Anything following that point is incidental.

 

[wal]

I have nothing to add to the discussion, just popped in to savour the WC melts.
Wasn't disappointed

 

[imperial_oz]

Don’t think using stills is a good way to mount an argument in such a high speed game. Go watch the video and let me know if it’s possible Gov can pull out after the ball is released. He lines him up and commits while he still has possession and makes contact just as the ball leaves Guelfis hands (all within about a second) Anything following that point is incidental.

I don't agree with any of that.

It was an intentional act to push an opponent into the boundary fence and he's very lucky it was graded careless



Ignore the text as I took this from another website but you can clearly see the two handed push and the proximity of the boundary fence.

Take the week, apologise for the action and count your lucky stars it wasn't three weeks