McGovern reported

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

The fact that words like “duty of care” and “potential to cause” have even entered the AFL lexicon show how sanitised the game is

Every year - the game is sanitised further.. bit by bit

People cling to the words above as though they are now sacrosanct.

The Durdin decision this year again highlights just how far the AFL have come in trying to manipulate the game for some ideaological ambition

It’s a contact sport - people get hurt

But rules are set up based on optics - not football

Kicking a bloke, elbowing a bloke - they deserve weeks

Laying a textbook bump or blocking a player - aren’t deserving of weeks

Somehow the AFL have lead us down a path, bit by bit that we forget how far the game has sunk
 
View attachment 696598
View attachment 696600
Best I can do...but yes he did hit the fence head first. Wasnt immediately apparent on the first viewing

I reckon his head did hit the fence. But those stills certainly don't show it. Could have been his left shoulder.

Or perhaps his left shoulder bounced off the chair, then his head went into the fence as a result. I guess we will only know if the eagles appeal.

I don't think he would get off if he appealed. Pushed him while over the line and he concussed him.

He came back on after the incident. So I guess Essendon will have to say that it was delayed concussion in order to avoid a fine.
 
Not sure a week suspension for this is how this sort of incident should be adjudicated going forward. McGovern was trying to affect someone in play at the time. The outcome was unfortunate but I'd be more concerned with incidents on the boundary/near the fence that happen for seemingly no reason, the sorts of pushes that aren't warranted at all whereas Govern should be able to apply physical pressure.
 
That sets a dangerous precedent.
McGovern's actions: -push player between shoulder and knee = legal
-while player is in possession = legal
-within the field of play = legal

1 out of 3 doesnt cut it unfortunately for Gov as Guelfi wasn't in possession & wasn't in the field of play, so you know, there's that...

 
Will we see the plastic chair called to give evidence?

"I put it to you plastic chair, that you were in fact responsible for deflecting Mr Guelfi into the fence head first, when he otherwise would have hit the fence with his body.

Your silence says it all. I rest my case."

witnessbox_crop.jpg
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

1 out of 3 doesnt cut it unfortunately for Gov as Guelfi wasn't in possession & wasn't in the field of play, so you know, there's that...


Lineball.
Was a concussion confirmed? I've heard he came back onto the field and then went to get his ribs tested. If no concussion, and he took no further part because of the ribs that should be careless medium impact to the body and a fine. If he failed a concussion test/suffered delayed concussion then we'll cop the week and swap him out for Barrass.
 
1 out of 3 doesnt cut it unfortunately for Gov as Guelfi wasn't in possession & wasn't in the field of play, so you know, there's that...



Bumps a player as he disposes it, even if he doesn't have the ball that is legal as the ball is within 5m, it's probably within 30cm at point of contact which was inside the line.

I don't buy this second action nonsense, looked like every other bump.

Anyway you look at it, medium impact to the head? Had no concussion so how is it medium? Also Zurhaar pushed Mirra into a fence last year, far far worse and only got a 2k fine.
 
Here's how it works:

MC picks a punishment without even viewing the incident. (WCE player = suspension)
Then tweaks anything to arrive at that conclusion.
Job done.

How else could you explain the flying elbows getting nothing?
Then a bump after play, oh that's a one match suspension - even when there was no injury. Where's the consistency?

Results rather than intent. Absolutely ludicrous way to judge incidents.
Let's take this model and apply this to everyday life:
If that was the case, there would be no manslaughter, every joke that offended someone would be banned (it's heading that way now), every accident would be all about the result and not about the intent. Insanity ensues... everyone sues everyone.. oh wait, I see that's a thing now.

People are levelling this at the "salty eagles supporters" when in reality, our team has been punished far worse than any other team, for things which MC can't even justify properly. I'll never forget his (MC's) justification of the NN tackle and the face of Matt Thompson as he did it ( WATCH THE CAMPAIGNER SPEAK ). It all started there for us and continues up to now. Isn't this a stain on the game? I agree we can't go back to the 70's head-smash era, but this new make the rules up as you go attitude with Christian at the helm, who is clearly out of his mind is not a good direction.

I think some of you would be just as angry if your team had been targeted by this BS 4 times in a row now.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

McGovern reported

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top