Review Round 17, 2024 - Brisbane Lions vs. Adelaide

Who were your five best players against Adelaide?


  • Total voters
    137
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

I am coming around to the red card. As the rule currently stands, it benefits (potentially) only the teams that play the suspended players team afterwards. The impacted team is still down one man.

My only issue with the red card is the AFL ****s up just about everything and red cards will be given in the wrong circumstances within the first week of a red card system being in place.
Yep. Definitely has to be done via video review. Say they have 15 minutes after the incident to make a call. Not the umpires, somebody off field. Not fair on the umpires to expect them to make a call in real time - the game is hard enough on them as it is.

My view is it would only be for blatant dirty acts. So Jimmy Webster in preseason gets it. Sam Powell-Pepper in preseason line ball. But Peter Wright and Toby Greene who both were (clumsily) contesting a mark are ok to play on, as is Callum Brown who collected McCartin in a contest for the ball and I feel more of a big deal was made about that than warranted because of who he ran into.
 
I don't know what penalty Rankine should get and in no way is Starcevich even minutely responsible but Rankine (imo) expected Starcevich to turn towards him as he usually would and got a bit of a shock at the consequence of what he did. He was about to put his arm out as if to take it all back and thought OMG he's not getting up.

The calls that Rankine is a dog and a grub and whatever else is way off the mark. On anything else I've seen he's a fair player who cops more than his share himself.

People get horribly judgemental about in the game decisions made by players that misfire. In this instance Rankine broke the rules and someone got concussed. He's copped 4 weeks. He'll be more careful in future.

As far as red cards go I can see the point except if Starcevich had got up there'd just be a push and shove and not even a free seeing the ump didn't see it. So you'd have to hand out the red card on the basis of the consequence ?? In our game it would likely mean another ump in the stands with vison access ?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Richmond won a flag because Balme knocked Southby out.

Incredibly even though you can still put the vision up and it's plainly one of the most brutal acts I've ever seen on a footy field there wasn't even a free paid let alone a report.
 
I don't know what penalty Rankine should get and in no way is Starcevich even minutely responsible but Rankine (imo) expected Starcevich to turn towards him as he usually would and got a bit of a shock at the consequence of what he did. He was about to put his arm out as if to take it all back and thought OMG he's not getting up.

The calls that Rankine is a dog and a grub and whatever else is way off the mark. On anything else I've seen he's a fair player who cops more than his share himself.

People get horribly judgemental about in the game decisions made by players that misfire. In this instance Rankine broke the rules and someone got concussed. He's copped 4 weeks. He'll be more careful in future.

As far as red cards go I can see the point except if Starcevich had got up there'd just be a push and shove and not even a free seeing the ump didn't see it. So you'd have to hand out the red card on the basis of the consequence ?? In our game it would likely mean another ump in the stands with vison access ?
If Team A player causes a concussion and the player from Team B is out for the game.

Team A lose the player and he goes off the field until an umpire has checked to see what intent their was.

If no intent he can rejoin the game, if intent he's off for the remainder.

Still should always pay 18 on 18.
 
If Team A player causes a concussion and the player from Team B is out for the game.

Team A lose the player and he goes off the field until an umpire has checked to see what intent their was.

If no intent he can rejoin the game, if intent he's off for the remainder.

Still should always pay 18 on 18.
Too hard to be adjudicated upon . Nightmare for the ump.

Has to be someone with clear access to the vision, contact with Team B to see the consequence which sometimes takes up to 20 minutes.

Most of the time also very difficult to judge intent. It can take 3 hours of evidence and submissions at the Tribunal to go through it all sometimes and even then that gets appealed.
 
Richmond won a flag because Balme knocked Southby out.

Incredibly even though you can still put the vision up and it's plainly one of the most brutal acts I've ever seen on a footy field there wasn't even a free paid let alone a report.
I’d argue Richmond got a flag or won a game when Cotchin ironed at Shiel I think it was in the first quarter of the PF when Shiel was at his height and left GWS a player down (before subs). It certainly had a massive bearing on the game and what was more incomprehensible was that the MRO predictably let the AFL darling off.
 
I didn't think there was that much in it but he caught Starcevich completely off guard and obviously in a vulnerable spot.
He flushed him or split him right down the middle with a cowardly act; you can’t sugarcoat that it wasn’t a dangerous unprovoked hit designed to seriously hurt an unsuspecting and vulnerable Starcevich. It was cowardly the sort of hit that Cameron did on Andrews and May on Martin.
 
I’d argue Richmond got a flag or won a game when Cotchin ironed at Shiel I think it was in the first quarter of the PF when Shiel was at his height and left GWS a player down (before subs). It certainly had a massive bearing on the game and what was more incomprehensible was that the MRO predictably let the AFL darling off.
Sheedy was well educated in the violence of the game and brought it to Essendon via Merrett

It's been part of the Tigers DNA ever since Graeme Richmond and Hafey came to the club and that's over 50 years ago.
 
He flushed him or split him right down the middle with a cowardly act; you can’t sugarcoat that it wasn’t a dangerous unprovoked hit designed to seriously hurt an unsuspecting and vulnerable Starcevich. It was cowardly the sort of hit that Cameron did on Andrews and May on Martin.
Don't agree at all. Rankine isn't that kind of player. It was just a conglomeration of circumstances that looked bad but really wasn't his intention.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He flushed him or split him right down the middle with a cowardly act; you can’t sugarcoat that it wasn’t a dangerous unprovoked hit designed to seriously hurt an unsuspecting and vulnerable Starcevich. It was cowardly the sort of hit that Cameron did on Andrews and May on Martin.
McIvor, Cameron on Andrews was an absolute clunker, one of the worst ever seen.. Harris was out for 7 or 8 weeks. Just flushed him on the jaw 9 feet off the ground with his Elbow against the flight of the play.

Not even a remote comparison.
 
Last edited:
I’ll be really disappointed if the Tribunal caves on the grading. You only have to look at the vision to know it was intentional and more so that he intended to hurt Starc; every talking head has said his hit was intended to hurt even if he didn’t mean to hit him in the head so the incident can’t be careless but like you said expect they’ll fold like they always do.
Fully agree with you but there is a precedent where the player can argue they did not mean to hit them in a certain spot/high etc

Has happened multiple times this year where an off the ball hit has slipped high and they’ve escaped suspension because they ‘didn’t mean to hit them high’. Crazy defence when you think about it but it seems to work for some!
 
I am coming around to the red card. As the rule currently stands, it benefits (potentially) only the teams that play the suspended players team afterwards. The impacted team is still down one man.

My only issue with the red card is the AFL ****s up just about everything and red cards will be given in the wrong circumstances within the first week of a red card system being in place.

Yer can't lump this responsibility on the umpires. Make the decision off field, like the HIA. Does not have to be immediate.
 
You speak in absolutes about someones intention. In the heat of the moment, he may or may not have intended to do that. No one but Rankine knows that
Well, yes.

To rephrase just from the body language and how the incident evolved my interpretation is that it wasn't his intention.

And if it was it'd be a really silly thing to do , out of character with anything else he's ever done on he field.
 
Fully agree with you but there is a precedent where the player can argue they did not mean to hit them in a certain spot/high etc

Has happened multiple times this year where an off the ball hit has slipped high and they’ve escaped suspension because they ‘didn’t mean to hit them high’. Crazy defence when you think about it but it seems to work for some!
It is crazy because as if a player is ever going to say they did mean to hit an opponent. Lunacy in fact.
 
Why should Starcevich have protected himself running back to his position given it was a stoppage to man up Rankine.

Don’t know why people are having such a hard time calling out Rankine’s gutless sniping act and putting any of this on Starcevich which your post and Whitings pathetic summation are attributing some of this back on Brandon.

Call Rankine’s act for what it is, simple.
I'm not down playing rankines act but everone on the field has to be aware that at any moment contact can happen......legally and illegally. Starce was completely unaware....you just can't do that on a footy field.
 
I'm not down playing rankines act but everone on the field has to be aware that at any moment contact can happen......legally and illegally. Starce was completely unaware....you just can't do that on a footy field.
Fages should have eyes on the back of his head during his quarter time address. I think Chris Scott wants to coward hit him :O

Come on fages, you gotta be aware.
 
What made it worse was Rankine, instead of getting out of the way or bracing for contact. He instead choose to jump into Starc.

You see this all the time, players are looking to hurt players if given an opportunity.

Sometimes it comes off. Other times you FAAFO.
Just reverse things.

Do you think Linc McCarthy( one of the toughest and fairest players in the league) wouldn't have put a solid bump on an unsuspecting, unaware backman is just wrong. The difference is Linc would have bumped fairly.....low and guarding his space whereas Rankine launched himself off the ground and high. Rankines bump was illegal but Starce has been bumped like this before and it shows his unawareness and his lack of defensive self preservation.
 
Back
Top