Pickett bump on Cripps

[Golden_6]

Easily a couple of weeks. Intentional, high and probably medium impact. Might get away with low impact but he did break Cripps’ nose.

 

[Milux]

I don't think you're up to date with the rules.
If you elect to bump and hit him high, you're responsible.

A clash of heads makes no difference

He can and will blamed for it because he got him high.

Some people just don't get it do they.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

That shows exactly what I said. He should be suspended based on current interpretations but can't be because of the Maynard result. The tribunal's hands are going to be tied on this one.

Maynard is a completely different scenario. This is a bump.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Be interesting to see how Goodwin sees this. If he has even a shred of integrity he'll have a go pretty hard at Pickett like he went at Maynard. Pickett's was a dirty hit though, only difference.

Ill tell you what.. I bet he won't.

We won't hear anything from the Melbourne coterie this week criticising their little thug sniper Pickett.

Crickets out of Melbourne. Morally bankrupt the lot of them.

 

[HairyO]

Maynard is a completely different scenario. This is a bump.

Very poorly executed smother. He was going to have his arms out but needed to tuck them into protect himself.

Will be 1 or 2 weeks depending on whether the nose was broken.

The jumper punch was a dumb move but not sure sufficient force for a week.

He was a huge liability for 3 quarters. Faux tough guys generally are.

 

[Roby]

I don't know how you can deliberately hit someone and it's not malicious

Malicious suggests not only an intention to harm but also a degree of premeditation or spite behind the act.

 

[Foucault1989]

Didn't see Goodwin's press conference. I'm assuming he was outraged by Pickett's actions. Left the ground, made high contact.

Sooky hypocritical Melbourne. Got a real stink about them.

 

[Roby]

They really don’t have to.

Malicious would require intent so would be intentional. Google the definition of malicious and you will find that the definition actually has the word intentional in it.

Careless and reckless the AFL already consider together I believe under the careless category.

malice
/ˈmalɪs/
noun
noun: malice
the desire to harm someone; ill will.
"I bear no malice towards anybody"
Similar:
spitefulnes
s
spite
LAW
wrongful intention, especially as increasing the guilt of certain offences.

Do you have a better word for a higher grading?

 

[Fitzey]

There’s been a precedent set in finals, not that it matters now but this gets nothing. You can argue between bump and smother but the thing is, he didn’t knock a bloke out cold, nor even daze him. No case to answer.

 

[Roby]

nothing in it, just an accident he was charging hard to pressure the player who had the ball an it is unreasonable to expect him to stop on the spot. what could he do? cut off his head?

He could've smothered the ball. And in fact of he did, he would've affected the disposal

 

[Roby]

You can bump without actually leaving the ground. It is interesting how he often launches himself like that and I don't know why you would do it unless you intend to smack someone high.

He's not even looking at the ball

 

[Roby]

There’s been a precedent set in finals, not that it matters now but this gets nothing. You can argue between bump and smother but the thing is, he didn’t knock a bloke out cold, nor even daze him. No case to answer.

 

[HenrikLundqvist]

Pickett is a real rat isn't he?

 

[GIRO]

Pickett was trying to smother, Cripps was in his way

 

[Milux]

Pickett was trying to smother, Cripps was in his way

What would of made this interesting is if Pickett had the slightest intention at the ball. Had he of stuck his hands out and cleaned cripps up at the same time then I'd imagine the Dees would have the same argument and be fine. But the fact is he had not even looked at the ball. Chose to launch into cripps.

 

[g_TRAIN]

I reckon there are 3 incidents he will get looked at for altogether not just the bump.

He's a great player but he seems a bit dense.

How hard is it to remember not to hit blokes in the head.

 

[Tugga27]

Easily a couple of weeks. Intentional, high and probably medium impact. Might get away with low impact but he did break Cripps’ nose.

They hardly ever class those bumps at intentional.

It's careless and medium you'd imagine.
A week you'd think.

 

[Tugga27]

There’s been a precedent set in finals, not that it matters now but this gets nothing. You can argue between bump and smother but the thing is, he didn’t knock a bloke out cold, nor even daze him. No case to answer.

JVR and Jack Martin say hi.

 

[Tugga27]

The jumper throat punch might get a look at by the MRO. Players have been rubbed out for that stuff

Fine at most.

Low impact or insufficient force.

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

Has a history, bit of a hot head and needs to pull his head in or he will seriously injure someone.
Should get 1.

 

[Blue and Silver]

Cripps entered Picketts lane and then recklessly disposed of the ball.

Failure to embrace Pickett.

2 weeks

Big blow to Carlton, we need the Captain

On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Vindicater]

Left his feet so could not control the outcome.

Free to play.

 

[Foucault1989]

For all of Melbourne's so called concern with high contact, in the last two weeks they've had JVR elbow a bloke in the jaw and Pickett making contact with McGovern's head twice and Cripps once.

Please keep preaching Dees. Hypocritical straight sets snipers!

 

[Drought Break]

Who would have thought a Pickett would be a dirty sniper. He and his fellow forward Van Elbows need to concentrate more on goals then fake tough guy crap

 

[HTPunter]

Easily a couple of weeks. Intentional, high and probably medium impact. Might get away with low impact but he did break Cripps’ nose.

They don’t grade these as intentional