That's what I see. A tangle and overbalancing, and unfortunately Duggan hits his head.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
MRP / Trib. MRP and Tribunal - 2024 - Grand Final
- Thread starter Chief
- Start date
- Tagged users None
He lost balance because Cameron pinned his arms and drove him backwards.
Or... he tried to pull away from Cameron but couldn't break the tackle. Take off your West Coast glasses.
mpal6
Norm Smith Medallist
Duggan in the end was trying to turn Cameron sidewise to loosen his grip. Cameron stuck with the bear hug and Duggan fell on his back, head on the ground is a collateral.
If it's off the ball Cameron would've got the Rankine treatment. Here he may get a week since Duggan won't play next week.
If it's off the ball Cameron would've got the Rankine treatment. Here he may get a week since Duggan won't play next week.
manureid
Laziest Poster on Figbooty
Suns will be losing a couple after yesterday one would feel.
Yes, for the sake of consistency.
The AFL have constantly proclaimed "the head is sacrosanct", to the point where players are now being suspended for the potential to cause injury. Its a stupid ruling, but if you are going to commit to it then it has to be consistent. Cameron's tackle resulted in an actual head injury, so by the interpretation of the AFL's own ruling, he gets weeks. Otherwise we end up existing in some twilight zone where "good blokes" get to drop guys on their heads without repercussion, and others get multiple weeks for the bad optics of a tackle - like what has already happened this year.
Truthfully the whole system needs to be overhauled, and my belief is that the only way to do that is to highlight how farcical it currently is.
- May 3, 2015
- 15,591
- 18,299
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
So let me get this straight; Charlie grabs Duggan, drags him to the carpark, puts him in a car, puts the car in reverse and drives backwards
I don't think this is a suspendable offence
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,094
- 108,831
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
Christian will cite Cameron from pure media hype alone but it should be a very good tribunal test case of how far the AFL want to go with this because it really is a pure “shit happens” incident where Charlie did nothing wrong.
If the AFL is going to punish outcome regardless of circumstances, then we will know this week. If they are consistent with whatever they decide from this case, so be it. But it could be a very different game depending on their decision.
If the AFL is going to punish outcome regardless of circumstances, then we will know this week. If they are consistent with whatever they decide from this case, so be it. But it could be a very different game depending on their decision.
Is it more important to be consistent than just wrong?
You know yourself a suspension is harsh yet want consistency on bad decisions?
Priorities are wrong imo. Let’s not keep being incompetent because incompetence is a consistent thing.
The fact that all 4 umps didn't think the elbow warranted a reversal, just shows the divide in standard of umpiring from the best to worst.
Disgrace Rosas isn’t more. You just simply can’t give a week to someone running past the man on the mark and elbowing them in the head.
Doesn’t fit the matrix but simply needed to be upgraded with their magic “potential to cause injury” clause to 2-3.
Doesn’t fit the matrix but simply needed to be upgraded with their magic “potential to cause injury” clause to 2-3.
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,094
- 108,831
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
Three weeks for Cameron.
Simply must and will be tested at the tribunal.
Probably correct by the inflexible MRO guidelines so the tribunal is the only place to get it adjusted to something less manifestly disproportionate to the act.
Will be stunned if the final result is 3 weeks. Great test case.
Simply must and will be tested at the tribunal.
Probably correct by the inflexible MRO guidelines so the tribunal is the only place to get it adjusted to something less manifestly disproportionate to the act.
Will be stunned if the final result is 3 weeks. Great test case.
Where is the duty of care from the umpires to blow the whistle and stop the tackle?
Umpires should go to the tribunal, as they didn't even give it a free kick.
Reid got 2 weeks for a tackle that yielded zero damage so Cameron was always getting cooked for a tackle that resulted in a concussion.
No good bloke defense this time around unfortunately.
No good bloke defense this time around unfortunately.
The Cameron one is a nasty one in my opinion. The ball was clearly not going to come out and it was going to be a ball up. It was pinned between the two players.
Cameron could have looked after Duggan and chose drive him backwards. He was basically was looking to hurt him. Three weeks is stiff but maybe Charlie might look after a player in a compromising situation next time?
Cameron could have looked after Duggan and chose drive him backwards. He was basically was looking to hurt him. Three weeks is stiff but maybe Charlie might look after a player in a compromising situation next time?
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,094
- 108,831
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
Reid is a terrible comparison if the Tribunal are going to be judging intent/technique. So, so different.
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,094
- 108,831
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
I think the argument is going to be made that Duggan was the one pulling the tackle in that direction. It looks like he is driving his legs hard to escape the tackle only to lose balance whereas Charlie’s hand position looks like he is holding on rather than pushing/driving.
Whether the tribunal see it that way, who knows, but that will be the case made.
Will involve a biomechanist no doubt.
ferball
desperately terminally-contrarian
North Melbourne - 2024 Hugh Greenwood Player Sponsor
Veteran
North Melbourne - 2023 Ailish Considine and Bella Eddy Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2023 Aaron Hall and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
10k Posts
30k Posts
North Melbourne - 2022 Aaron Hall and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2022 Kaitlyn Ashmore and Aileen Gilroy Player Sponsor
- Jul 24, 2015
- 47,264
- 99,230
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
I reckon Duggan drags and turns Cameron trying to break free of the tackle. At one point it looks like Cameron trips on Duggan's leg and he loses his balance and falls.
Three weeks is ridiculous for that.
Muddiemoose
Moderator
- Aug 24, 2017
- 28,526
- 103,320
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #472
3 weeks for Bedford is bullshit as well
Free kick was all it needed
Free kick was all it needed
Hollow Knight
Imperfect vessel
- May 3, 2005
- 97,094
- 108,831
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Scuderia Ferrari, Dallas Cowboys
And I think a biomechanist will be able to make that case. The umpire will also likely give a similar account when asked why no free kick was paid.
Very good case to argue here. Similar to Dangerfield/Walsh in that the tackler arguably was not responsible for the momentum that caused the head impact.
- Jan 17, 2013
- 8,125
- 9,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
3 weeks for Bedford is absolutely nonsensical. He had to reach out with both arms and dive, otherwise he couldn’t have made the tackle. Everything else is accidental.
Very similar to Dangerfields… let’s see if it plays out the same.
Very similar to Dangerfields… let’s see if it plays out the same.
Similar threads
