Certified Legendary Thread Patrick Cripps and Ah Chee

[raffrox]

This is right. An unfortunate sporting incident just like the Ah Chee one. You don't see Carlton fans whining about a suspension.

The fact of the matter is, the only people lamenting Cripp's actions are a bunch of Collingwood, Richmond and Fremantle fans who hate Carlton and a bunch of childish Brisbane supporters who are clearly insecure about their performance. It's embarassing.

It was a contentious decision without a clear outcome that needed three groups of people to deliberate on it with the last group taking 5 hours (!!) to talk about it. Some in the media still think it didn't go down well. It was also contentious enough the it's had 71 pages of discussion here. They are the facts of the matter.

But no, it's just some hate campaign which has led to people having a different view and you think having a different view is embarrassing???

I've been on Big Footy for a long time but sometimes I still get surprised.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

And all the Carlton supporters in this thread do nothing but gaslight.

“There was no bump”
“Cripps’ arms were extended”
“He was contesting the ball”
“Ah Chee jumped into the air”

So which part of Cripps’ anatomy are you going to tell us knocked Ah Chee’s head off now?

Since when is stating facts considered gaslighting?
The bump one is more controversial because it comes down to the definition of a bump in the context of play. There was contact.

I don't recall seeing Ah Chee's head rolling around on the ground, detached from his body, but you've shown to have a loose grip on reality. I know that it wasn't his hip.
Your posting is getting worse as this thing goes on, and it wasn't very good to start with.

 

[gungho]

Ah Chee had options too. One of those choices was to leave the ground to contest the loose ball, which he did.
You're again basing all of this on the assumption that he CHOSE TO BUMP.

No, I am basing it all on the fact that Cripps chose to leave the ground. Forget the word "bump". You can call it "brace" or whatever you like. The truth is Cripps left the ground, and then connected with Ah Chee - who had the ball. This connection resulted in Ah Chee being concussed and missing this week. Ah Chee is the guy with the ball, not Cripps. Ah Chee is the guy that needs to be protected from a player that has left the ground (so has no control over his movement). As I said in my previous message, Cripps' undoing was he chose to leave the ground, whether he left the ground to bump, brace, tackle or whatever is irrelevant at that point.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

It was a contentious decision without a clear outcome that needed three groups of people to deliberate on it with the last group taking 5 hours (!!) to talk about it. Some in the media still think it didn't go down well. It was also contentious enough the it's had 71 pages of discussion here. They are the facts of the matter.

But no, it's just some hate campaign which has led to people having a different view and you think having a different view is embarrassing???

I've been on Big Footy for a long time but sometimes I still get surprised.

And the AFL Tribunal system is run by Essendon and Geelong old heads who also hate Carlton... what don't you understand about this? Maybe just stop watching the Jack Newnes goal and you might chill out a bit bro.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Would Carlton appealed the appeal if it was in the middle of the year?

Given he was in prime Brownlow voting form then, I dare say we would

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Care to give just one example of this involving Trent Cotchin?

Off the top of my head, quickly...
Dangerous tackle
Kick to the inner thigh/groin area
The disappearing fine that would've seen him miss a grand final

 

[HereComesJuddy]

Care to give just one example of this involving Trent Cotchin?

Revisit 2017 and what the poster I replied to wrote

 

[Elixuh]

Profile pic is a Bulldogs player. Can't quite make it out but it looks like Bont.

May not be talking about the same person because it was definitely a picture of Cripps. He’s actually changed it to a picture of an NBA player now.

 

[tiger_tough]

Revisit 2017 and what the poster I replied to wrote

"So the bloke who got concussed isn't allowed to play this week and the bloke who bumped him deliberately can?

Make sense - this is the AFL where common sense never happens"
--------------
1st of all the mandatory rest after concussion was introduced in 2020, so not relevant to trent cotchin or dylan shiel in 2017.
2nd of all - although you are technically correct that Shiel wasn't allowed to to play the following week.....He had to make the Grand Final the following week to not be allowed to play

Off the top of my head, quickly...
Dangerous tackle
Kick to the inner thigh/groin area
The disappearing fine that would've seen him miss a grand final

All of no relevance to the original quote above....

Geez I thought maybe Carlton fans would stop hating us so much after they won in r1 but nah still whiny as ever.

 

[Aphrodite]

May not be talking about the same person because it was definitely a picture of Cripps. He’s actually changed it to a picture of an NBA player now.

I've got a screenshot from Ah Chee's Insta story and the avatar is definitely a Bulldogs player.

 

[AndyLucimitis]

It does make you wonder . . . why are Carlton's odds to make finals so low. They have been hovering around $1.30 with two of the toughest games to finish the season.
Now Cripps getting off.

Perhaps the AFL desperately need a big club like the Blues in the finals. Always great for business.

Similar to a previous post - do you think the AFL sat their last night - AFTER suspending him for 2 weeks at their own hearing - and said 'Gil says we need Carlton in the finals - anyway we can get him off ?".

Seriously - tin foil hat stuff

 

[AndyLucimitis]

"So the bloke who got concussed isn't allowed to play this week and the bloke who bumped him deliberately can?

Make sense - this is the AFL where common sense never happens"
--------------
1st of all the mandatory rest after concussion was introduced in 2020, so not relevant to trent cotchin or dylan shiel in 2017.
2nd of all - although you are technically correct that Shiel wasn't allowed to to play the following week.....He had to make the Grand Final the following week to not be allowed to play


All of no relevance to the original quote above....

Geez I thought maybe Carlton fans would stop hating us so much after they won in r1 but nah still whiny as ever.

A Richmond fan complaining about another club being 'whiny' - that's the funniest thing I've read all day.

 

[Elixuh]

I've got a screenshot from Ah Chee's Insta story and the avatar is definitely a Bulldogs player.

Perhaps he has changed it several times today, certainly the team he supports is not important in this.

 

[Madblue]

To be honest I thought Cripps was a bit lucky to get off. I'm just not sure what the AFL and NRL are going to do going forward as they are collision sports and accidents do happen

It's time to take the name Cripps and the club Carlton out of this discussion. The problems are in a deeply compromised AFL system.

1. These people have known for some years that concussion is a time bomb for all contact sports and some non contact ones too. They have expressed their concern and a commitment to dealing with concussion. The changes that followed have been terribly inconsistent and often contradictory. Their thrust has been largely cosmetic.

2. They have totally lost the plot on high tackles. The rule was always there, and has had some verbal reinforcement with "the head is sacrosanct" declarations. The "Selwood Shrug" was ignored until a loud mouthed Ginnivan made this impossible. High tackles are now OK if the umpire says so, particularly on some players. This will be litigation heaven for future lawyers.

3. They have shifted the emphasis at the tribunal from the act (bump or whatever) which the players control, to the result (concussion mostly) which they don't. The inconsistency in charges and penalties that have followed from this has had supporters of every club tearing their figurative hair out at one time or another.

4. They have placed the rules and their interpretation in the hands of shall we say a "hard man" with a twin brother coaching a team and expect that we will believe he is impartial or even thoughtful.

5. The total control of media accreditation by the AFL means that honest reactions to AFL decisions are not to be found. Nobody dares or their access to the game is gone.

This is only one area in which the AFL administration is failing the players and the game. Since they have total control of the reporting of the game, an enormous amount of money and a ruthless commitment to maintaining the cash flow above all else, I despair of the game's future. These people are killing it.

Problem is like the NRL they are obviously contact sports where collisions occur frequently and alot are accidental so not sure you can ever get the tribuneral system right

 

[The Royal Sampler]

All four of those statements are correct, i won't gas light you i'll say it straight to you - you're a crazy person.

Well I’m a physiotherapist with nearly two decades experience, and a special interest in sporting injuries and head trauma in the sporting arena.

I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that I know what an extended arm looks like. Cripps’ elbows are bent beyond 90 degrees. There is no way his arms are extended. Zero. Zilch.

Therefore in my view, while he may believe he was contesting the ball, and by the simple fact that self-interest is God, Carlton supporters readily accept that he was contesting the ball, there is no video evidence to support the claim.

I could be persuaded that he was contesting the drop zone. Even then there should be a duty of care, because you haven’t made the ball your object, but keeping someone else from it. Ah Chee’s extended arms are what contesting the ball looks like, and if Cripps had done the same, it’s likely he would have flipped mid-air as though tunnelled, and we’d be saying it was an unfortunate collision where both players made the ball their object.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

All of no relevance to the original quote above....

Geez I thought maybe Carlton fans would stop hating us so much after they won in r1 but nah still whiny as ever.

Admittedly, I just saw the comment that you replied to that mentioned "The Cotchin Rule" and assumed it was referring to getting off for reportable acts in general. I didn't go back any further. Surely you can understand the confusion? I mean he does seem to get away with a lot of things that others wouldn't.

The amount of whining going on in this thread by oppo supporters and you have the audacity to call us whiny?!?

 

[Chief]

Meh. Anyway it's done.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Since when is stating facts considered gaslighting?

Your willingness to posit self-interested opinions as fact gives great insight into how cults and terrorist organisations are able to indoctrinate the disenfranchised.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Well I’m a physiotherapist with nearly two decades experience, and a special interest in sporting injuries and head trauma in the sporting arena.

I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that I know what an extended arm looks like. Cripps’ elbows are bent beyond 90 degrees. There is no way his arms are extended. Zero. Zilch.

Therefore in my view, while he may believe he was contesting the ball, and by the simple fact that self-interest is God, Carlton supporters readily accept that he was contesting the ball, there is no video evidence to support the claim.

I could be persuaded that he was contesting the drop zone. Even then there should be a duty of care, because you haven’t made the ball your object, but keeping someone else from it. Ah Chee’s extended arms are what contesting the ball looks like, and if Cripps had done the same, it’s likely he would have flipped mid-air as though tunnelled, and we’d be saying it was an unfortunate collision where both players made the ball their object.

You're making up your own definition of an extended arm. Cripps arms are 'extended' in a chest marking position to take control of the ball. There is no requirement for his arms to be extended at an 180 degree angle - you are making that up to suit your own agenda and pre-conceived bias.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Well I’m a physiotherapist with nearly two decades experience, and a special interest in sporting injuries and head trauma in the sporting arena.

I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that I know what an extended arm looks like. Cripps’ elbows are bent beyond 90 degrees. There is no way his arms are extended. Zero. Zilch.

Therefore in my view, while he may believe he was contesting the ball, and by the simple fact that self-interest is God, Carlton supporters readily accept that he was contesting the ball, there is no video evidence to support the claim.

I could be persuaded that he was contesting the drop zone. Even then there should be a duty of care, because you haven’t made the ball your object, but keeping someone else from it. Ah Chee’s extended arms are what contesting the ball looks like, and if Cripps had done the same, it’s likely he would have flipped mid-air as though tunnelled, and we’d be saying it was an unfortunate collision where both players made the ball their object.

Quick question; when a player is going for a chest mark, do you consider their arms extended?

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Quick question; when a player is going for a chest mark, do you consider their arms extended?
View attachment 1474433View attachment 1474434View attachment 1474435
View attachment 1474437

Great question, my answer is “no”. The J Riewoldt picture you posted would be the exception, because the flexion at the hips/trunk actually means his arms do have to extend. Toovey there might be similar but hard to tell front-on. Mr. Walker a definite “no”.

 

[Hoops]

Absolute disgrace.

Imagine his name was Ben Long

That would mean two Ben Longs in the competition just like there were Josh Kennedys

 

[The Royal Sampler]

You're making up your own definition of an extended arm. Cripps arms are 'extended' in a chest marking position to take control of the ball. There is no requirement for his arms to be extended at an 180 degree angle - you are making that up to suit your own agenda and pre-conceived bias.

No I guarantee you it already has a definition, I’m just working within it.

Anatomically, extension of the shoulder/arm is putting it behind you, so no, I’m not being pedantic and just using jargon.

 

[_RT_]

Clearly no idea

Both players jumped into a contest and knocked the opposition player out, oh that's right I forgot Cripps apparently had eye for the ball. I guess Milburn was just guessing where Silvagni was.

 

[Aphrodite]

#IStandByCallumAhChee