-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Autopsy Round 1 v Swans - Friday August 30th. 7:15pm @ North Sydney Oval. Broadcast on ch7
- Thread starter Jen2310
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Mollythedolly
Norm Smith Medallist
- Oct 21, 2021
- 6,730
- 8,072
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Elect to bump, you’re responsible for the outcome.
Jen2310
Premium Platinum
- Thread starter
- #81
TRIBUNAL TRIBULATION
Regardless of what you thought about Tarni White’s bump on Maddy Collier and whether it deserved three weeks, there’s been some interesting discourse emerge in the aftermath about the suitability of big penalties for AFLW players. Collier, in her first game since recovering from an ACL injury, was flattened by White after disposing of the ball in the third quarter and missed the remainder of the game with concussion. Collingwood failed to overturn White’s three-match ban at the tribunal and she will now miss upcoming more than a quarter of the 11-game season. A three-week suspension is essentially equivalent to six in the AFL given the shorter season length and it’s had some questioning whether bans, like fines, should be scalable in the AFLW. The grading system is the exact same between the men’s and women’s competitions.
White’s bump was graded careless conduct, severe impact and high contact and therefore received the same penalty as Kysaiah Pickett’s collision with Darcy Moore in round 24. Using the scaling logic, if Collier misses one game with concussion, that’s equivalent to two in the AFL or four if she misses the next fortnight, point being that a shorter season doesn’t lessen the severity of concussions. There’s also the added complexity of a compressed fixture this season, meaning players could be automatically ruled out for two games if they both fall within the 12-day concussion protocol. Would it feel right if an AFLW player lays a Jimmy Webster style hit and only gets three weeks? It’s a valid argument that AFLW bans are disproportionate but scaling would make an already perplexing MRO system even more confusing. This is why we need a longer season.
Regardless of what you thought about Tarni White’s bump on Maddy Collier and whether it deserved three weeks, there’s been some interesting discourse emerge in the aftermath about the suitability of big penalties for AFLW players. Collier, in her first game since recovering from an ACL injury, was flattened by White after disposing of the ball in the third quarter and missed the remainder of the game with concussion. Collingwood failed to overturn White’s three-match ban at the tribunal and she will now miss upcoming more than a quarter of the 11-game season. A three-week suspension is essentially equivalent to six in the AFL given the shorter season length and it’s had some questioning whether bans, like fines, should be scalable in the AFLW. The grading system is the exact same between the men’s and women’s competitions.
White’s bump was graded careless conduct, severe impact and high contact and therefore received the same penalty as Kysaiah Pickett’s collision with Darcy Moore in round 24. Using the scaling logic, if Collier misses one game with concussion, that’s equivalent to two in the AFL or four if she misses the next fortnight, point being that a shorter season doesn’t lessen the severity of concussions. There’s also the added complexity of a compressed fixture this season, meaning players could be automatically ruled out for two games if they both fall within the 12-day concussion protocol. Would it feel right if an AFLW player lays a Jimmy Webster style hit and only gets three weeks? It’s a valid argument that AFLW bans are disproportionate but scaling would make an already perplexing MRO system even more confusing. This is why we need a longer season.
Similar threads
