Should a suspension rule a player ineligible for the Rising Star award?

[big_e]

I really dont care that much because there are other awards sure.

And its not all about Harley. It is just another annoying outcome from poor management of the game.

The game has changed. AFL House makes so many errors they compound and the game is worse off for it. This is just another example.

Poor management? The AFL understands that the impact of a head hitting the ground in a tackle has potentially disastrous consequences, and have changed the rules around tackling to protect players.

I'd say that's good management.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

What is stupid bycalling it high impact is that both players were cleared of injury and returned to the field and played out the game.

That isnt the same as if a player was seriously injured, stretchered off the ground not to return.

So how does the system punish a legitimatly higher impact that results in a much worse injury?

It's probably borderline and it's why WCE are challenging. Was it medium impact or high, probably on the fence myself, but it isn't as if Harley was trying to protect the bloke when the tackle went out of hand. I can see why they went with the high grading but at the same time I won't be shocked if it's downgraded to medium (resulting in a week not 2).

Should be all about the action not the consequence even though the AFL is very flimsy at this and can pull the 'potential to cause injury' out of thin air.

Gut feeling is he gets the downgrade and I'll be fine with him copping a week that seems right

 

[HairyO]

What is stupid bycalling it high impact is that both players were cleared of injury and returned to the field and played out the game.

That isnt the same as if a player was seriously injured, stretchered off the ground not to return.

So how does the system punish a legitimatly higher impact that results in a much worse injury?

Severe.

The AFL applying an additional penalty for potential to cause injury isnt new.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Severe.

The AFL applying an additional penalty for potential to cause injury isnt new.

Yep. They just pick and choose when to apply it that's the sort of annoying thing. Every tackle or whatever has the potential to cause injury

 

[HairyO]

Yep. They just pick and choose when to apply it that's the sort of annoying thing. Every tackle or whatever has the potential to cause injury

Agreed. Its heavily impacted by media focus and Brownlow votes.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Agreed. Its heavily impacted by media focus and Brownlow votes.

Yeah we won't talk about how Rozee doesn't cop that line but Reid does, or from your club the yearly Sicily charge including at least a weeks loading for 'potential' too. I just wish they would show an ounce of consistency

 

[Joffaboy]

Yep. They just pick and choose when to apply it that's the sort of annoying thing. Every tackle or whatever has the potential to cause injury

Exactly, Ben Long missed a final in 2020 for 'potential to cause injury' and then it was shelved for two seasons.
Suddenly they have dusted it off in the past couple of seasons.

Anyway everyone knows Reid is the best new player, he doesn't need an award.

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Exactly, Ben Long missed a final in 2020 for 'potential to cause injury' and then it was shelved for two seasons.
Suddenly they have dusted it off in the past couple of seasons.

Anyway everyone knows Reid is the best new player, he doesn't need an award.

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

The Long decision was a shocker at the time and probably isn’t even that long now.

 

[Jibroni]

You can't deny Reid is a very special talent and I look forward to seeing him play for many years.

I am surprised that the usual preferential treatment handled out to AFL golden children didn't occur this time and perhaps the incompetent reputation of the AFL PR couldn't survive another bad decision.

I also believe this decision will serve Harley well in his maturity and development. Sure, it's a shame that it will cost him the Rising Star but he is also subject to the same rules as everyone else.

 

[Jibroni]

I 100% agree that the media need to cut their shit out about him so much .

Simpson has already asked the media to stop especially the 'West' and that Muppet editor of theirs who is actually a freo supporter.

On our board their is a huge discussion about the media around him and how its unfair on the kid getting so much publicity.

He doesn't go out of his way to do publicity its just following him .

Also you can't ask fans to stop idolising him the kid is a star .

In 9 games he has already had perfect 10 coaches votes , rising star nominated, Mark of the week , goal if the week .

Has hayden young done that yet ?

Have to say I am surprised with the superstar treatment he receives from the WA media. Do you think Cousins or Judd received this much attention? Or has Social media amplified this?

From a SA perspective the only player that would come close to this attention is when Wayne Carey joined the Crows which was naturally a unique set of circumstances. But I could not imagine this kid being on the back page every other week here.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

I posted in another thread that it's a really simple fix. You have two suspension types, intentional acts and careless acts.

If you're suspended for an intentional act, you are ineligible. If you are suspended for a careless act, you're eligible.

Make it this way for the brownlow as well and we won't have a situation where someone loses a brownlow because of a tackle.

Laura kane made it clear they have zero intention on changing it. Very typical of top level management with poor understanding of the floor level. The reality is Fairness cannot be aligned with non intentional incidents. The game is so heavily officiated with more rules than ever before and so much easier to be involved in a reportable incident. The fairness in Brownlow used to be only applicable to thug acts. Now reportable incidents are split second non intentional incidents that werent previously reportable.

How many incidents in the last 2 years would have been reportable in 1980.

I can assure you its only a mattrr of time until a player unfairly misses out on a Brownlow and even a GF.

We need to draw separation between deliberate acts and the rest

 

[bzparkes]

I am surprised that the usual preferential treatment handled out to AFL golden children didn't occur this time and perhaps the incompetent reputation of the AFL PR couldn't survive another bad decision.

He plays for WCE mate. If North ended up with him, he 100% gets let off, because the AFL would want to manufacture positivity for the club.

 

[Jibroni]

He plays for WCE mate. If North ended up with him, he 100% gets let off, because the AFL would want to manufacture positivity for the club.

Reid will either be the face of the AFL or a WA Mining Company in 3 years hence he will be looked after. If they can protect his image I think they will.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

the game is different now to what it was before. What can get you suspended these days would be laughed at 5 years + ago. let alone even further back.

I think the suspension requirement should be removed from all aspect of awards including the Brownlow. Or at least have an intentional and careless separation.

 

[bzparkes]

the game is different now to what it was before. What can get you suspended these days would be laughed at 5 years + ago. let alone even further back.

I think the suspension requirement should be removed from all aspect of awards including the Brownlow. Or at least have an intentional and careless separation.

Let's not forget a player ended another's career last year and was let off scot free.

The MRP and Tribunal punishes whatever takes their fancy, with zero consistency. Reid was done for 'High' impact, yet the player was completely fine. It was judged 'high' because of the potential to cause injury, despite their own rules stating high impact is adjudged if the player cannot take any further part int he game, not 'potential'.

Meanwhile, Cameron gets off for a dangerous tackle on Lever because he's a 'good guy' and Barrass gets 1 week for the same action on Walters but has to serve his suspension.

The tribunal needs to be put into a canon and fired into the sun.

 

[Get_The_Gaff]

The AFL let's cripps win the browlow after a blatant hip and shoulder that would receive 4 weeks this year .

They let Maynard off with a bump that ended a career because it was finals

The change of CEO was almost a wipe of the hands with the old bias and now they have gone too far the other way .

But..... as long as the afl are consistent from here and other players receive high impact when there is no concussion then that's fine .

They have also established that it doesn't matter who you are , what award is at stake or what final is about to be played the same rules apply .

I'll believe it when I see it

 

[skinnyP]

So does Dusty Martin and Corey McKernan get retrospective medals if you change the rules?

Yes please

 

[fusion]

Yes please

I think his 3 Norm Smith and premiership medals are enough sign of his greatness!

 

[greatwhiteshark]

That players are now suspended for things 20 years ago that would not even attract a free kick says that of course it should be changed.
Brownlow also should change.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

Someone answer this question please.

Name me any incidents in the last 5 years that would have resulted in a suspension in 1980

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Someone answer this question please.

Name me any incidents in the last 5 years that would have resulted in a suspension in 1980

Gaff I reckon, but that was 6 years ago

 

[Purple7x08_24]

Gaff I reckon, but that was 6 years ago

And Tom Jonas. Both rubbed out, now I think it's fair to say those are worth being illegible for a Brownlow right. And that's what fairness is about, not this garbage their spewing about now. Remember the Cotchin bump in the prelim? That would almost certainly be a report now but he was simply going for the ball.

AFL needs to relax this because the game HAS evolved as Laura Kane said but she only acknowledged that to suit her own agenda.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Someone answer this question please.

Name me any incidents in the last 5 years that would have resulted in a suspension in 1980

That it’s so hard to find any tells you how much they have sanitised the sport.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

And Tom Jonas. Both rubbed out, now I think it's fair to say those are worth being illegible for a Brownlow right. And that's what fairness is about, not this garbage their spewing about now. Remember the Cotchin bump in the prelim? That would almost certainly be a report now but he was simply going for the ball.

AFL needs to relax this because the game HAS evolved as Laura Kane said but she only acknowledged that to suit her own agenda.

Changing the rules is not evolution, it’s simply changing the rules of the sport. There has been way to many to call it evolution.

 

[Engimal v3]

He plays for WCE mate. If North ended up with him, he 100% gets let off, because the AFL would want to manufacture positivity for the club.

I don't know how to break this to you, but your club is also bottom 4