Oppo Camp Non-Eagles Discussion

[Chief]

Continued in Part 2:

Oppo Camp - Non-Eagles Discussion

Who gives a **** about finals anyway So overrated It’s all about the draft these days

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Maynard! It's a football action!

 

[Cuzz09]

100% he aimed his shoulder at his head

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[FKASC]

Haven't read back so not sure if it's been raised, but I saw the comment made somewhere and thought it as pertinent as any - if Maynard was at training and was attempting to smother Nick Daicos in the same manner, do you reckon he braces for impact in the same way? No chance. IMO Maynard could have easily opened up his body to end up 'cuddling' Brayshaw and prioritise his (Brayshaws) safety. He chose not to.

Exactly. There’s a reason it seems like such a freak occurrence, and it’s because people trying to smother a ball normally don’t also try to crunch the guy who kicked it. Maynard didn’t try to get him in the head but there’s absolutely no way he didn’t try to bump him at all.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

Imagine if this was Toby Greene. He'd already be locked up.

Matthew McConaughey's closing argument in A Time to Kill vibes.

 

[stylish]

If Maynard gets suspended can anyone explain what would happen if

1) Liam Ryan

1

Liam Ryan

Age

28

Ht

181cm

Wt

76kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.3

3star

K

8.6

3star

HB

2.7

2star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.0

4star

G

1.3

5star

D

9.9

3star

K

8.0

3star

HB

1.9

1star

M

3.3

3star

T

1.6

3star

G

1.3

5star

D

11.4

3star

K

9.0

4star

HB

2.4

3star

M

3.8

4star

T

1.8

4star

G

1.6

5star

stands on someone's head taking the mark of the century but on falling lands on the opposition players head KO'ing him

2) Oscar Allen

12

Oscar Allen

Age

25

Ht

196cm

Wt

96kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.8

2star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.4

4star

G

1.1

4star

No current season stats available

D

8.6

3star

K

5.8

3star

HB

2.8

3star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.0

4star

G

1.2

4star

channels his inner Jonathon Brown/Nick Riewoldt and runs with the flight of the ball taking a chest mark but in the process KO's a defender running the other way.

Do either get suspended and if not why not?

 

[KERRPOW]

Haven't read back so not sure if it's been raised, but I saw the comment made somewhere and thought it as pertinent as any - if Maynard was at training and was attempting to smother Nick Daicos in the same manner, do you reckon he braces for impact in the same way? No chance. IMO Maynard could have easily opened up his body to end up 'cuddling' Brayshaw and prioritise his (Brayshaws) safety. He chose not to.

You cant compare training intensity to finals intensity.

The best comparison i reckon is the Gary Rohan hip and shoulder that knocked out Jezza cameron. No malice, why would someone intentionally KO their team mate. Everyone accepts that as an accident.

If Cameron was an opposition player then Rohan would have got 3 weeks.

 

[Seadog]

If Maynard gets suspended can anyone explain what would happen if

1) Liam Ryan stands on someone's head taking the mark of the century but on falling lands on the opposition players head KO'ing him

2) Oscar Allen channels his inner Jonathon Brown/Nick Riewoldt and runs with the flight of the ball taking a chest mark but in the process KO's a defender running the other way.

Do either get suspended and if not why not?

You have more leeway when you are contesting for the ball.

 

[UseR2006]

If Maynard gets suspended can anyone explain what would happen if

1) Liam Ryan stands on someone's head taking the mark of the century but on falling lands on the opposition players head KO'ing him

2) Oscar Allen channels his inner Jonathon Brown/Nick Riewoldt and runs with the flight of the ball taking a chest mark but in the process KO's a defender running the other way.

Do either get suspended and if not why not?

Neither gets suspended because in both instances both players are playing the ball.

This is distinctly different from Maynard where he was confronting a player in possession.

Let's take a tackle as a more comparable example. If Maynard ran at full pace dived forward in a spear tackle and drove a forearm into brayshaws head knocking him out it'd be decried universally as deserving a suspension.

I don't see much difference between my example and what he actually did except he tried to smother instead of tackle. Fully deserves the 3 weeks.

 

[ziad]

You cant compare training intensity to finals intensity.

The best comparison i reckon is the Gary Rohan hip and shoulder that knocked out Jezza cameron. No malice, why would someone intentionally KO their team mate. Everyone accepts that as an accident.

If Cameron was an opposition player then Rohan would have got 3 weeks.

bad blood between them

 

[Smeg Head]

Maynard! It's a football action!

He got two weeks for a swinging closed fist spoil that knocked out a giants player last year claimed that, appealed and lost. Hes just a pissweak faux tough guy.

 

[AndysAngels]

You cant compare training intensity to finals intensity.

The best comparison i reckon is the Gary Rohan hip and shoulder that knocked out Jezza cameron. No malice, why would someone intentionally KO their team mate. Everyone accepts that as an accident.

If Cameron was an opposition player then Rohan would have got 3 weeks.

I'm not really comparing the intensity of one to the other; I'm refuting the people that say there is nothing else Maynard could have done. And regardless, I disagree that competing in an intense finals match-up absolves you of your duty of care.

I also don't quite agree on the comparison to the Rohan/Jez hit (one that I scrutinised very closely given it resulted in me copping a -3 on field in my draft team!). That was a pure contest for a loose ball, one player came off worse. In these instances, the AFL has shown they are comfortable with a contest (and injuries from that contest) occurring (a la Van Rooyen v Ballard). In Maynard v Brayshaw, the ball carrier needs to be afforded a certain duty of care - this has played out repeatedly in the AFL's rulings over the past few years.

 

[Spod]

If Maynard gets suspended can anyone explain what would happen if

1) Liam Ryan stands on someone's head taking the mark of the century but on falling lands on the opposition players head KO'ing him

2) Oscar Allen channels his inner Jonathon Brown/Nick Riewoldt and runs with the flight of the ball taking a chest mark but in the process KO's a defender running the other way.

Do either get suspended and if not why not?

I think the better comparison is if someone stood on someone's head, came nowhere near getting the ball then knocked them out, in which case I think a punishment may well be fair enough.

In any event someone getting KOd in these scenarios is a relatively outlying outcome on past evidence so suspending someone in a situation where they could have done something differently to reduce the impact (as you can argue Maynard could have done here) would not be the end of the world.

 

[Barrybran]

If Maynard gets suspended can anyone explain what would happen if

1) Liam Ryan stands on someone's head taking the mark of the century but on falling lands on the opposition players head KO'ing him

2) Oscar Allen channels his inner Jonathon Brown/Nick Riewoldt and runs with the flight of the ball taking a chest mark but in the process KO's a defender running the other way.

Do either get suspended and if not why not?

Neither gets suspended because in both instances both players are playing the ball.

This is distinctly different from Maynard where he was confronting a player in possession.

Let's take a tackle as a more comparable example. If Maynard ran at full pace dived forward in a spear tackle and drove a forearm into brayshaws head knocking him out it'd be decried universally as deserving a suspension.

I don't see much difference between my example and what he actually did except he tried to smother instead of tackle. Fully deserves the 3 weeks.

I can see a scenario where going back with the flight of the ball might be outlawed. It would be grey as **** but the argument that would be put up would be that situation could be avoided.

I'm not sure the Liam Ryan example gets much attention though unless a marking attempt was unrealistic.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

If Maynard gets suspended can anyone explain what would happen if

1) Liam Ryan stands on someone's head taking the mark of the century but on falling lands on the opposition players head KO'ing him

2) Oscar Allen channels his inner Jonathon Brown/Nick Riewoldt and runs with the flight of the ball taking a chest mark but in the process KO's a defender running the other way.

Do either get suspended and if not why not?

1) Liam Ryan wins a car. Everyone says **** me. Poor old Maynard is unlucky that he got shitmixed by Ryan in a GF, got outmuscled by Rioli in a GF, and now got landed on and knocked by Ryan falling after taking the mark.

2) Oscar Allen hopefully does this in a season other than the season where 1) occurred, and he wins a car. Poor old Maynard, unlucky that he got shitmixed by Ryan in a GF, got outmuscled by Rioli in a GF, got landed on and knocked by Ryan falling after taking a mark that won mark of the year, and now got knocked out again by Allen who took a mark that wins mark of the year.

The situations you've mentioned are completely different to Maynard in every way.

 

[ziad]

1) Liam Ryan wins a car. Everyone says * me. Poor old Maynard is unlucky that he got shitmixed by Ryan in a GF, got outmuscled by Rioli in a GF, and now got landed on and knocked by Ryan falling after taking the mark.

2) Oscar Allen hopefully does this in a season other than the season where 1) occurred, and he wins a car. Poor old Maynard, unlucky that he got shitmixed by Ryan in a GF, got outmuscled by Rioli in a GF, got landed on and knocked by Ryan falling after taking a mark that won mark of the year, and now got knocked out again by Allen who took a mark that wins mark of the year.

The situations you've mentioned are completely different to Maynard in every way.

not so. the ball was in the air and maynard attacked the ball

 

[Happy Mastenator]

not so. the ball was in the air and maynard attacked the ball

He did not touch the ball, and then to make matters worse he ducked he shoulder into the face of the player who had had the ball.

**** of Maynard. You deserve weeks.

 

[Ishmael_]

You have more leeway when you are contesting for the ball.

You do, but is that right? It's too nebulous for mine. So many incidents swing from 'contesting the ball' to not in milliseconds.

A hypothetical. What if Maynard timed his jump slightly better or Bradshaw's kick was a little lower and Maynard managed to pluck the mark?

Everything else is the same, the brace, the outcome, but he managed to mark the ball. Does he then have no case to answer for?

I don't see how the AFL on its current trajectory could accept that outcome.

And selfish wishes aside that's probably a good thing for the Game's future. But I still think this regulation by enforcement isn't fair. Make it clear at the beginning of next season that if you concuss someone for any reason, you're gone - even if it's your own teammate.

 

[EagleEgo]

If Maynard gets suspended can anyone explain what would happen if

1) Liam Ryan stands on someone's head taking the mark of the century but on falling lands on the opposition players head KO'ing him

2) Oscar Allen channels his inner Jonathon Brown/Nick Riewoldt and runs with the flight of the ball taking a chest mark but in the process KO's a defender running the other way.

Do either get suspended and if not why not?

In most team ball sport, there is an element called SPACE to judge where you should or should not be there. Most of these sport grant the space to the player who own the ball. (Soccer is an example.)
In both examples you mentioned, Liam Ryan and Oscar Allen both successfully marked (hence possessed) the ball. They own those spaces.
Edit: Even though one owns the space, one cannot make any secondary movement intending to hurt players around you. (for example Greene‘s cases)

 

[Nuke Fremantle]

Is anyone else questioning the fact that even, with his history of serious concussions that Brayshaw is still playing football.

When I read that McCartin had been picked up by Sydney I cringed as I could not believe that there was not a genuine concern that he would be concussed again….. as sure as God made little green apples …….that’s exactly what happened.

Also on the Maynard issue.

What would have happened if a he flew for the mark in a pack and then falls on to Brayshaw and knocks him out ?????

Back to my first question….should Brayshaw even be allowed to still play AFL given his medical history?

As a side are the other players that play against him, more vulnerable to knocking him out and missing games because the medical fraternity won’t make the hard call.

Duty of care has more than one element for consideration.

I completely agree but be careful, you'll be accused of "victim blaming".

 

[stylish]

I think the better comparison is if someone stood on someone's head, came nowhere near getting the ball then knocked them out, in which case I think a punishment may well be fair enough.

In any event someone getting KOd in these scenarios is a relatively outlying outcome on past evidence so suspending someone in a situation where they could have done something differently to reduce the impact (as you can argue Maynard could have done here) would not be the end of the world.

So what you're saying is that taking a mark absolves you of responsibility but not getting near taking it (despite trying to take the mark) means you are in strife.

It's getting greyer and greyer by the day.

Surely the easiest way to make it easier to follow is to make a blanket rule that any concussion no matter it occurred results in a suspension.

 

[The Dodger]

You do, but is that right? It's too nebulous for mine. So many incidents swing from 'contesting the ball' to not in milliseconds.

A hypothetical. What if Maynard timed his jump slightly better or Bradshaw's kick was a little lower and Maynard managed to pluck the mark?

Everything else is the same, the brace, the outcome, but he managed to mark the ball. Does he then have no case to answer for?

I don't see how the AFL on its current trajectory could accept that outcome.

And selfish wishes aside that's probably a good thing for the Game's future. But I still think this regulation by enforcement isn't fair. Make it clear at the beginning of next season that if you concuss someone for any reason, you're gone - even if it's your own teammate.

I think that's the same though. Even if you are contesting the ball do it late and make contact with the player who got there before you and you will miss games. The league are asking and the game is going in the direction of each individual contest you cant just go 100% to hell with the consequences.
The game has sped up. There are so many more instances/contests in games where these things can happen. It's seems its perhaps lose that battle to win the war.

I often think what I would say as a coach in that I don't think your players going all out at a contest and getting smashed...while brave...isn't the best as it has too many consequences for the team. Have you already made the sub? You will be missing that player next week. How many times has it happened to him recently could it be a career ending hit?
There is a balance about when to go and when not to that I think players need to be aware ie. pick your battles.

Obviously everyone going 100% every time is the best spectacle for the game but with the speed its played at and 360 degree action concussions are resulting and the AFL are trying to stop them. It will affect that % rate that people contest at and the game will be slightly lesser for it.

 

[stylish]

In most team ball sport, there is an element called SPACE to judge where you should or should not be there. Most of these sport grant the space to the player who own the ball. (Soccer is an example.)
In both examples you mentioned, Liam Ryan and Oscar both successfully marked (hence possessed) the ball. They own those spaces.

What happens if they didn't mark the ball. Does that change the outcome?

 

[EagleEgo]

What happens if they didn't mark the ball. Does that change the outcome?

In some situation, it could be a foul.
Soccer for example, if a defender successfully tackles the ball and in the process takes the opposition player down, it is not a foul. However, if the defender fails to touch the ball and brings the opposition player down, it is a foul.

 

[DirtySandman]

I wonder what Sheppard and Venables think about all this.

 

[Truckosaurus]

They would probably be more focused on Brayshaw than Maynard