Review Round 18, 2024 - West Coast vs. Brisbane Lions

[martinson]

I wonder what Cameron would get for his assault on Harris today.

Have to be 15 weeks wouldn't it ?? At least.

 

[Grasshopper17]

I wonder what Cameron would get for his assault on Harris today.

Have to be 15 weeks wouldn't it ?? At least.

Plays for Geelong so probably gets Dangerfield to argue for him and gets off.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

So you don’t agree that most of these players bringing lawsuits against the AFL aren’t facetious knowing there is a pot of gold on the offering when they all knew the risks of playing the game, that is, the same game suburban footballers with the same symptoms will never see a dime?

I do agree somewhat with that, but that wasn't the part I was objecting to. You've basically just slandered Duggan with no evidence.

That said, the way concussion was mismanaged 20+ years ago was pretty ordinary when there was plenty of evidence of the dangers so maybe they do have a point.

 

[martinson]

So you don’t agree that most of these players bringing lawsuits against the AFL aren’t facetious knowing there is a pot of gold on the offering when they all knew the risks of playing the game, that is, the same game suburban footballers with the same symptoms will never see a dime?

It's exactly an interesting issue because the world is now littered with people jumping on the litigation bandwagon of whatever the flashpoint of the industry or endeavour they were involved in is and the multitude of complexities in working out whether these claims are legit or the extent of them is making lawyers filthy rich. So much so that they tout for the business.

Sadly this makes it more difficult for the genuine self evident cases who have to go through the same rigmarole as someone just having a shot at it.

 

[Elixuh]

I refuse to read the Tribunal guidelines, are our only realistic grounds for appeal something like failure to properly consider evidence and/or reasonableness of the decision relative to the evidence?

I'd just spin the wheel and see what happens. The Tribunal's reasoning around the momentum and foot etc is very janky so you never know.

 

[luthor]

I wonder what Cameron would get for his assault on Harris today.

Have to be 15 weeks wouldn't it ?? At least.

I was of the view at the time that the 7 he got was manifestly inadequate and I still am of that view.

What he did to Harris was one of the worst dog acts I think I've ever seen.
Cameron should have got at least 12.

I still can't cop a bar of Cameron or of this "just a good old country boy" image that he has somehow managed to cultivate.

I can't stand him


On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[DERRINALPHIL]

Oscar had 9 clearances, our 2nd most behind Neale, and I'm sure I'll be corrected if need be, but I don't think any of his hack kicks forward resulted in intercept marks as was happening a lot earlier in the year.

Without seeing any down-the-ground footage you would like to think that our forwards have learned the importance of playing in front at centre bounces. Particularly in those slippery conditions.

What playing in front in slippery conditions?

Next you will be recommending long sleeves!

 

[McIvor]

It's exactly an interesting issue because the world is now littered with people jumping on the litigation bandwagon of whatever the flashpoint of the industry or endeavour they were involved in is and the multitude of complexities in working out whether these claims are legit or the extent of them is making lawyers filthy rich. So much so that they tout for the business.

Sadly this makes it more difficult for the genuine self evident cases who have to go through the same rigmarole as someone just having a shot at it.

If courts actually saw through it though and dismissed the cases then where are these gold diggers going?

I don’t buy that EVERYONE playing the game doesn’t know the risks of playing footy. With the exception of what constitutes a criminal act such as hitting, biting, head butting or what Rankine did in Starc or Cameron on Andrew etc then people who’ve been concussed due to that sport’s rules such as being tackled, accidental knees to the head in a marking contest etc really should have no avenue to sue the sport when they knew the rules. Those that don’t are happy to put themselves before the 150 year old sport and its rules and what makes the game great all because of their selfishness for a payday. How anyone can’t see that is beyond me and what is also wrong with society that so many are that self centred that provided they get a payday then who cares about the sport particularly when park footballers face the same risks and will never have that ability for a pay day.

 

[NewkTheLot]

Commiserations all.

It’s a dark night for the game with both the Charlie and Bedford bans being upheld.

 

[martinson]

I refuse to read the Tribunal guidelines, are our only realistic grounds for appeal something like failure to properly consider evidence and/or reasonableness of the decision relative to the evidence?

I'd just spin the wheel and see what happens. The Tribunal's reasoning around the momentum and foot etc is very janky so you never know.

I think we owe it to Charlie to get it out there and make a big deal of it.

But ffs get a decent beak.

I wonder what it costs ? I know what a QC costs but does the club wear any other costs ?

 

[FeastOrFamine]

Good stuff from the Giants

How Rosas manages to only get one week for an elbow to the head that's off the play whilst Bedford and Charlie get three each is astounding. Absolute circus at the moment.

 

[McIvor]

I think we owe it to Charlie to get it out there and make a big deal of it.

But ffs get a decent beak.

I wonder what it costs ? I know what a QC costs but does the club wear any other costs ?

Absolutely, Anderson has like a 1 out of 7-8 strike rate representing our players yet this Carlton guy goes at like 100%.

Surely we need to look elsewhere. Ben Ilhe KC would be my go if he’s not conflicted with the AFL.

 

[Elixuh]

I think we owe it to Charlie to get it out there and make a big deal of it.

But ffs get a decent beak.

I wonder what it costs ? I know what a QC costs but does the club wear any other costs ?

There is a cost to the soft cap isn't there

 

[Dalions]

 

[Schache_off]

So essentially you can tackle a player as hard as you want without slinging as long as you release one of their arms at some point before they hit the ground and that's what a reasonable player will do. It's reasonable for any player that is trying to contest a ball will have someone bump or tackle him, therefore a reasonable player trying to escape a tackle should understand that they might put themselves in a risky position so should just accept the tackle.

Reading some of these arguments by the AFL are all over the place and insulting to fans of the sport in trying to say that any act that results in a concussion is worth a suspension. I've always thought the way the game has moved to protect the players has been generally sensible but this really doesn't sit right. I feel the same frustration at Bedford's suspension as Charlies. The only alternative is either no tackles or the umpires have to blow the whistle even earlier for a ball up or holding the ball than they are now.

 

[martinson]

There is a cost to the soft cap isn't there

I think I read somewhere it was 10k. But unsure.

Doubt it'd be more than that.

 

[martinson]

So essentially you can tackle a player as hard as you want without slinging as long as you release one of their arms at some point before they hit the ground and that's what a reasonable player will do. It's reasonable for any player that is trying to contest a ball will have someone bump or tackle him, therefore a reasonable player trying to escape a tackle should understand that they might put themselves in a risky position so should just accept the tackle.

Reading some of these arguments by the AFL are all over the place and insulting to fans of the sport in trying to say that any act that results in a concussion is worth a suspension. I've always thought the way the game has moved to protect the players has been generally sensible but this really doesn't sit right. I feel the same frustration at Bedford's suspension as Charlies. The only alternative is either no tackles or the umpires have to blow the whistle even earlier for a ball up or holding the ball than they are now.

Maybe the AFL needs to start with the Players Association re contracts and the acceptance of risks that aren't a result of extreme negligence . With the sweetener to look after players who are inhibited to a certain extent in their post AFL careers.

Nah . Just take the cowards way out and start dishing out suspensions without any consistency, clear guidelines or enforceable changes to the rules of the game and hope that fixes the issue or at least you can sheet the blame to whoever was involved in the incident.

 

[Ceebee]

I was of the view at the time that the 7 he got was manifestly inadequate and I still am of that view.

What he did to Harris was one of the worst dog acts I think I've ever seen.
Cameron should have got at least 12.

I still can't cop a bar of Cameron or of this "just a good old country boy" image that he has somehow managed to cultivate.

I can't stand him


On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app

I was in tears after what he did , I didn’t think Harris would get up , I thought he had paralysed him . It was a shocking incident and I can’t stand the sight of Cameron .

 

[martinson]

I was in tears after what he did , I didn’t think Harris would get up , I thought he had paralysed him . It was a shocking incident and I can’t stand the sight of Cameron .

I can remember the game when it was a brutal sport and this was up there with anything from those days.

Cameron was just lucky Harris was able to get up eventually. Thank God. For a little time I was fearful of what had occurred.

He should have got a much longer stretch. It was unforgivable.

 

[Darren Downunder]

I can remember the game when it was a brutal sport and this was up there with anything from those days.

Cameron was just lucky Harris was able to get up eventually. Thank God. For a little time I was fearful of what had occurred.

He should have got a much longer stretch. It was unforgivable.

I agree… but in my opinion it was no worse than what Maynard did to Brayshaw.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Davies suspension upheld.

 

[Dalions]

Davies suspension upheld.

Fine with that one.

 

[Hollow Knight]

GWS still killing it.

 

[McIvor]

What hope have you got when this lady

says

“The AFL’s lawyer Lisa Hannon said Cameron could have released Duggan’s right arm as they began falling to ground, and argued the Lions star didn’t need to drive his Eagles opponent into the Optus Stadium turf with force.

“The fact Cameron's foot may've become entangled with Duggan's was entirely foreseeable and not an exceptional circumstance in a close up tackle,” Hannon told the Tribunal.

And then the Tribunal Chair Lady



rules

"Contrary to Cameron's evidence, we consider the vision clearly captures Cameron taking Duggan to ground forcefully," Tribunal chair Renee Enbom said.

"It is the combination of the excessive force used in driving Duggan backwards with both of his arms pinned that makes the tackle unreasonable in the circumstances.

"Those two features put Duggan in a highly vulnerable position."

Both of these learned women who i bet barely watch the game no less have played it or understand the nuances of the game are setting an extremely high bar on any player not to mention are blind because you can clearly see in the side on vision that Duggan is clearly trying to pull and twist Charlie around him but due to Charlie’s strength was unable to do causing said injury.

These two imbeciles is what is wrong with the game because both seem to think you can make all sorts of decisions in millisecinds and people like this and they aren’t the only ones who are ruining the fabric of the game.

 

[p4p1]

Fine with that one.

Two guys going for a loose ball, one guy protects himself, the other doesn’t. Not sure why you would be fine I with that being upheld.