Rankine on Starc.

[Hollow Knight]

Compare this to other 4 week incidents (e.g. Tom Stewarts hit on Prestia which was miles worse), this is a crazy outcome.

A bizarre comparison. One was off the ball to begin within.

I think you're getting confused between not learning something and criticising it. I hope it was therapeutic for you to summarise the rule, but what I'm criticising is this (helpfully summarised): "'Whether he intended to hit him high or not doesn’t matter in the assessment of intentional". It should.

I don’t agree.

Choosing to bump an unaware player off the ball is as intentional as it comes.

To be classed as careless it has to be a consequence from a football incident in which you had no obvious alternative course of action. Off-the ball incidents give you essentially no grounds to claim carelessness. You simply had the alternative option of not doing it.

This wasn’t a football incident. Rankine saw an opportunity to bump Starcevich off the ball and took it. The fact he stuffed it up is irrelevant to the grading of intentional. Rankine not intending to knock out Starcevich is irrelevant. The act was intentional, not the outcome. Andrew Gaff probably didn’t intend to bust Brayshaw’s jaw apart, but he sure as shit chose to hit him.

If we followed your logic, an intentional grading becomes unenforceable. It would be like drink driving and accidentally killing someone, and expecting leniency because you didn’t intend to kill someone. Of course you didn’t “intend” to kill someone. But you intentionally drove drunk and are therefore culpable for the outcome.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

What a joke.

They’ve graded this the same as Powell-Peppers hit in the pre-season which is literally insane.

 

[Elixuh]

What a joke.

They’ve graded this the same as Powell-Peppers hit in the pre-season which is literally insane.

Salt and Peppers act that led to the suspension was on-ball. The Crows player was also slung into him from memory which was a bit unlucky.

Rankine was off-ball. Off-ball hits which lead to injuries are the worst kind.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Salt and Peppers act that led to the suspension was on-ball. The Crows players was also slung into him from memory which was a bit unlucky.

Rankine was off-ball. Off-ball hits which lead to injuries are the worst kind.

No, this not true at all even though port fans tried to argue it.

Yeah the ball was near by but there was no way for SPP to impact the ball. Keane’s arms were pinned, and unable to defend himself, and SPP went for the bump anyway.

Rankine was off the ball, but Starcevich was completely unrestricted in his movement but not completely aware of his surroundings.
Brabant fans are acting like Rankine king hit from behind.

Keane had way less opportunity to protect himself than Starcevich did, which is more important than how close the ball.

Rankine lowered his body and the the top of his head hit Starcevich’s jaw.
SPP went high and the hard point of his shoulder hit Keane in the cheek.
SPP also had far more force.

If Rankines is 4 than SPP’s should have been 10

 

[Hollow Knight]

What a joke.

They’ve graded this the same as Powell-Peppers hit in the pre-season which is literally insane.

Jesus Christ, I despair.

1. Stop comparing on ball incidents with off the ball ones. You are either being wilfully disingenuous or simply don’t know what you are talking about.

2. It wasn’t graded the same. Powell-Pepper’s was graded as Careless not intentional (because it was juuuust close enough to be classed as on ball) and therefore got 3 weeks which was technically under the newly clarified MRO guidelines. The MRO considered this inadequate and then sent it to the tribunal where he ended up with 4 weeks.

The sanction for both incidents was the same, but the grading was not. SPP got the fourth week because the Tribunal has the discretion to go beyond the MRO categories of careless and intentional, where they found SPP to be “extremely reckless” which fits between the two categories.

Rankine straight up got the 4 from the MRO because it fits clearly within their guidelines of “intentional” as it was unquestionably off the ball.

And even if they were “graded the same” (which they weren’t) so what? No two incidents are ever going to be identical. One incident can look worse than another, but still fall within the same guidelines of each grading. Unless you want players getting suspended for 3.2 games or something… there are going to be “rounding” issues.

The same people who demand simplicity and transparency also seem to be the first to complain when the simplified system results in predictably unnuanced outcomes.

 

[Elixuh]

No, this not true at all even though port fans tried to argue it.

Yeah the ball was near by but there was no way for SPP to impact the ball. Keane’s arms were pinned, and unable to defend himself, and SPP went for the bump anyway.

Rankine was off the ball, but Starcevich was completely unrestricted in his movement but not completely aware of his surroundings.
Brabant fans are acting like Rankine king hit from behind.

Keane had way less opportunity to protect himself than Starcevich did, which is more important than how close the ball.

Rankine lowered his body and the the top of his head hit Starcevich’s jaw.
SPP went high and the hard point of his shoulder hit Keane in the cheek.
SPP also had far more force.

If Rankines is 4 than SPP’s should have been 10

I'm not reading all that mess. You're right. Tell the world. I'd get the Crows fans being illogical if their season had any meaning, but your season has been dead for weeks. Its a true who cares. If anything this suspension will assist you to get a better draft pick and expedite the sacking of your spud coach.

 

[Handyandy]

No, this not true at all even though port fans tried to argue it.

Yeah the ball was near by but there was no way for SPP to impact the ball. Keane’s arms were pinned, and unable to defend himself, and SPP went for the bump anyway.

Rankine was off the ball, but Starcevich was completely unrestricted in his movement but not completely aware of his surroundings.
Brabant fans are acting like Rankine king hit from behind.

Keane had way less opportunity to protect himself than Starcevich did, which is more important than how close the ball.

Rankine lowered his body and the the top of his head hit Starcevich’s jaw.
SPP went high and the hard point of his shoulder hit Keane in the cheek.
SPP also had far more force.

If Rankines is 4 than SPP’s should have been 10

Haha
The tribunal accepted that SPP did not intend to bump
They accepted that he was legitimately contesting the ball & Keane was slung into his path & SPP turned instinctively to protect himself at the last moment.
Sounds familiar? Hello Maynard
However they found him guilty because he approached the contest with speed & should have reasonably foreseen high contact was likely hence his actions were deemed reckless
Keane had the ball in his hands when hit
Rankine sniped an unsuspecting bloke behind play
Way worse, cowardly
One a footy accident
The other very calculated & deliberate
Your post underlines crows supporters ignorance and self delusion

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Haha
The tribunal accepted that SPP did not intend to bump
They accepted that he was legitimately contesting the ball & Keane was slung into his path & SPP turned instinctively to protect himself at the last moment.
Sounds familiar? Hello Maynard
However they found him guilty because he approached the contest with speed & should have reasonably foreseen high contact was likely hence his actions were deemed reckless
Keane had the ball in his hands when hit
Rankine sniped an unsuspecting bloke behind play
Way worse, cowardly
One a footy accident
The other very calculated & deliberate
Your post underlines crows supporters ignorance and self delusion

Everything you said is garbage.

I know what tribunal said you ignoramus, but it was pure tripe.

SPP shaped to bump early, instinct has nothing to do with it.

If he was genuinely trying to protect himself he would have slowed down, tucked in the shoulder and braced for impact,

Instead he sped up and leaned in hard with the shoulder, against a player he knew couldn’t defend himself.

And spare us the swinging tackle excuse which has always been bullshit. SPP saw that he was already being tackled but chose to keeping running anyway.

What he did was absolute cowardice, and only most stupid, gutless ferals defend it.

 

[Port 2004]

Everything you said is garbage.

I know what tribunal said you ignoramus, but it was pure tripe.

SPP shaped to bump early, instinct has nothing to do with it.

If he was genuinely trying to protect himself he would have slowed down, tucked in the shoulder and braced for impact,

Instead he sped up and leaned in hard with the shoulder, against a player he knew couldn’t defend himself.

And spare us the swinging tackle excuse which has always been bullshit. SPP saw that he was already being tackled but chose to keeping running anyway.

What he did was absolute cowardice, and only most stupid, gutless ferals defend it.

You are a gutless feral and an imbecile.

 

[p4p1]

Think you can miss up to 6 games (70% is the minimum). How many will this take it to?

What if a players was to miss 7-8 games but have an Ablett like season from when he kicked the ton in 14 games and wins the Coleman?

 

[DazalenkoUBewty]

Take ya 4. It's a real dirty hit.

I see peeps talking about the SPP incident. Dude got lowered in the spinning tackle and flung into SPP. If SPP copped 4, Rankine should probs cop 10.

 

[Elixuh]

I don’t care what bs rules are used to come this result, if anything that just shows how ridiculous the mro is.



Lol the classic straw man when your argument fails.

You’ve taken someone’s comments on the mro and thrown them at me, why?
You’re just proving that you’re making shit up.

Everything you said is garbage.

I know what tribunal said you ignoramus, but it was pure tripe.

SPP shaped to bump early, instinct has nothing to do with it.

If he was genuinely trying to protect himself he would have slowed down, tucked in the shoulder and braced for impact,

Instead he sped up and leaned in hard with the shoulder, against a player he knew couldn’t defend himself.

And spare us the swinging tackle excuse which has always been bullshit. SPP saw that he was already being tackled but chose to keeping running anyway.

What he did was absolute cowardice, and only most stupid, gutless ferals defend it.

Whenever there are these really simple to grasp incidents - like an off the ball hit which concusses a player - we always see the very end of the distribution tail chiming in to show us they still exist. Like clockwork. You've really outdone yourself in this thread, its to be commended.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Whenever there are these really simple to grasp incidents - like an off the ball hit which concusses a player - we always see the very end of the distribution tail chiming in to show us they still exist. Like clockwork. You've really outdone yourself in this thread, its to be commended.

The thread on the Crows board is wild too.

Massive respect to Crows posters like Vader, cmndstab and DangerousField who are calmly and rationally trying to explain to their own why the ruling is correct, posting the actual rules and MRO guidelines etc and just getting drowned out by emotional rants about the “Crows Tax”, Sam Powell-Pepper and some bloke who even suggested that because it was a clash of heads that Starcevich should also be suspended too on “principle”.

No wonder the AFL is slow at fixing the real problems in their systems, because for every rational and informed criticism from the punters, there are 100 uninformed and unstable weirdos dribbling out utter nonsense.

 

[Elixuh]

The thread on the Crows board is wild too.

Massive respect to Crows posters like Vader, cmndstab and DangerousField who are calmly and rationally trying to explain to their own why the ruling is correct, posting the actual rules and MRO guidelines etc and just getting drowned out by emotional rants about the “Crows Tax”, Sam Powell-Pepper and some bloke who even suggested that because it was a clash of heads that Starcevich should also be suspended too on “principle”.

No wonder the AFL is slow at fixing the real problems in their systems, because for every rational and informed criticism from the punters, there are 100 uninformed and unstable weirdos dribbling out utter nonsense.

My personal favourite was the poster who said the lions were to blame because they tagged rankine

 

[Hollow Knight]

My personal favourite was the poster who said the lions were to blame because they tagged rankine

Man, if Rankine has earned the right to assault people after a handful games of being close-tagged, Lachie Neale would be able to go on a murder spree at this point.

Fortunately the Crows forgot to tag him, so there were no fatalities yesterday.

 

[Jugada]

I would comfortably rank the Rankine bump worse than the SPP one. Both bumped the player and collected high but Rankine did his off the ball when the play was over and the player wasn't looking

 

[Romeoh1]

Wasn’t worth 4.

 

[bungalow_bill]

Man, if Rankine has earned the right to assault people after a handful games of being close-tagged, Lachie Neale would be able to go on a murder spree at this point.

Fortunately the Crows forgot to tag him, so there were no fatalities yesterday.

Zorko would have nutted Touk Miller a few times at least

 

[Scragmaster]

Everyone who has played footy past about the under 14s knows that these kinds of bumps (yes, especially off the ball) happen every match - particularly when a tagger is involved. Still, the result was that the top of Rankine's head connected with Starcevich's jaw and knocked him out. The head-knock was clearly accidental but the hit was not. Players, quite rightly, have a responsibility to avoid this kind of result. Under the rules of the game, it deserves a few weeks. Four seems a bit excessive, but whatever.
Certain fans here acting like it was a dog act or something have clearly never played the sport.
It was a very normal football hit that ended badly. I hope Starcevich recovers quickly.

 

[KissKiss]

What if a players was to miss 7-8 games but have an Ablett like season from when he kicked the ton in 14 games and wins the Coleman?

The video from the selection committee a few months ago stated its a hard cut off at 70% of games. So doesn't matter what you do if you fall below it. GAJ I think a few years back just made it and he was so far ahead of everyone else. But the more games you miss the better you need to be than the competition

 

[BF Tiger]

Deliberate act poorly executed resulting in serious brain injury to opponent. Suspension seems fair.

 

[Denno]

Zorko would have nutted Touk Miller a few times at least

I think Miller nutted Zorko last year, didn't he?

 

[Jugada]

Everyone who has played footy past about the under 14s knows that these kinds of bumps (yes, especially off the ball) happen every match - particularly when a tagger is involved. Still, the result was that the top of Rankine's head connected with Starcevich's jaw and knocked him out. The head-knock was clearly accidental but the hit was not. Players, quite rightly, have a responsibility to avoid this kind of result. Under the rules of the game, it deserves a few weeks. Four seems a bit excessive, but whatever.
Certain fans here acting like it was a dog act or something have clearly never played the sport.
It was a very normal football hit that ended badly. I hope Starcevich recovers quickly.

Going at a bloke off the ball who isn't looking is a dog act if you get them in the head or not. The fact it happens often at different levels doesn't make that not the case

 

[The Red Menace]

Going at a bloke off the ball who isn't looking is a dog act if you get them in the head or not. The fact it happens often at different levels doesn't make that not the case

Maybe not in this instance but let's not pretend taggers are innocent. There is plenty that goes on behind the play in every game. It wouldn't be the first time a smaller, more talented player has been harassed by a close tag and let their emotions get the better of them.

 

[Jugada]

Maybe not in this instance but let's not pretend taggers are innocent. There is plenty that goes on behind the play in every game. It wouldn't be the first time a smaller, more talented player has been harassed by a close tag and let their emotions get the better of them.

Sure if a tagger runs through someone when they're not looking off the ball they are equally to blame