The Association Football AFL Thread 3.0

[TheGreatBarryB]

Don’t think the Sydney lawyers put a great case forward. Getting it downgraded on force would have been their best bet.

Isn't intentional + low impact = one week? Intentional was never going to be downgraded as it's in the rules. that's why we didn't appeal Redman

 

[SM]

Isn't intentional + low impact = one week? Intentional was never going to be downgraded as it's in the rules. that's why we didn't appeal Redman

It's negligible impact which is below low impact and isn't a week.

Also on intentional, I think the whole point we tried to argue (I thought quite reasonably) is that Webster is stooped over and unless Heeney has eyes in the back of his head has no reasonable way of knowing that Webster's head would be where it was.

 

[TubbsFarquhar]

Would be good trivia. Without looking it up to guess the wins.

Working backwards: Melbourne, Freo, Richmond, Bulldogs, North and Giants.

Wins against Collingwood and Essendon in 2022.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

It's negligible impact which is below low impact and isn't a week.

Also on intentional, I think the whole point we tried to argue (I thought quite reasonably) is that Webster is stooped over and unless Heeney has eyes in the back of his head has no reasonable way of knowing that Webster's head would be where it was.

So he shouldn’t be swinging his arm back in that manner ..and the Chairman did say it was more than just trying to lose an opponent. Redman tried to push his opponent in the chest but he hit the shoulder and hit guys face. Bad luck ..don’t push or throw your arm back. Don’t necessarily agree with it but that’s the intent of the rule

 

[SM]

So he shouldn’t be swinging his arm back in that manner ..and the Chairman did say it was more than just trying to lose an opponent. Redman tried to push his opponent in the chest but he hit the shoulder and hit guys face. Bad luck ..don’t push or throw your arm back. Don’t necessarily agree with it but that’s the intent of the rule

Based on? This is the point of contention I'm saying was argued. We talking about the Redman v Hawthorn incident? Where he was looking at Newcombe and struck him? I really don't see the comparison to this incident at all.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Based on? This is the point of contention I'm saying was argued. We talking about the Redman v Hawthorn incident? Where he was looking at Newcombe and struck him? I really don't see the comparison to this incident at all.

Responsibility for your action ..whether trying to push an opponent front or swinging your arm back as Heeney did. There’s a good chance you may hit someone on the face ..didn’t swing that low.

 

[SM]

Responsibility for your action ..whether trying to push an opponent front or swinging your arm back as Heeney did. There’s a good chance you may hit someone on the face ..didn’t swing that low.

If you swing (which it really wasn't, it was a brush, but we'll go with your language) your arm back into a player's chest at the level of your own chest and they have bent over and you instead collect them in the head, you should not be held responsible for the head contact. It's accidental contact not intentional head high contact. Redman was looking at Newcombe and hit him in the upper chest, slipping high, which is part of the action he committed to. That's the difference to me.

We're appealing anyway.

 

[gaskin]

Rankine's I just completely disagree with on every level. Should've been no more than 1-2.

There's an accidental head knock, he needed something. But 4 weeks for the below?! That's insane to me. His shoulder is basically at his midriff ffs.

The headknock being accidental is irrelevant and has been for years. The AFL's mantra is if you choose to bump and there is head high contact (especially contact that concusses) then you are sitting for a while whether accidental or not. Rankine lined him up off the ball and took him out because he is a petulant twat who couldn't handle the tag. He rightly copped a long ban and it always was going to be a long one.

 

[DBAH0]

Pack of assholes.

The sport editor's twitter is rather something.

 

[Jatz]

The headknock being accidental is irrelevant and has been for years. The AFL's mantra is if you choose to bump and there is head high contact (especially contact that concusses) then you are sitting for a while whether accidental or not. Rankine lined him up off the ball and took him out because he is a petulant twat who couldn't handle the tag. He rightly copped a long ban and it always was going to be a long one.

I get it, I just completely disagree.

Should've been 1-2 weeks for me.

 

[Jatz]

Simmo tells the WCE hierarchy to get ****ed. Got to respect it.

Simmo to pay respect to fans

Premiership coach Adam Simpson has declined an invitation to coach the West Coast Eagles for one final match

www.westcoasteagles.com.au

Also, the first part of the first sentence reads terribly. Whoever is in charge of these statements has been doing a terrible job.

After stepping away as senior coach for the last 11 seasons, Simpson has opted against any match day coaching role, leaving Jarrad Schofield

Jarrad Schofield

Age

49

Ht

178cm

Wt

80kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.0

4star

K

10.5

4star

HB

5.5

4star

M

3.4

3star

T

1.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

6.0

2star

K

3.4

2star

HB

2.6

3star

M

1.6

2star

T

0.8

3star

the responsibilities as interim coach.

 

[Kram]

Heeney is very lucky to get just 1 week and the Swans still not happy haha.

 

[Jaymin]

It's negligible impact which is below low impact and isn't a week.

Also on intentional, I think the whole point we tried to argue (I thought quite reasonably) is that Webster is stooped over and unless Heeney has eyes in the back of his head has no reasonable way of knowing that Webster's head would be where it was.

They didn’t argue that it was negligible impact did they? They only argued that it was careless rather than intentional which was going to be hard to beat given the rewording of the law.

 

[Kram]

Unsurprisingly suspension stands.

 

[Kram]

‘Worst ever’: Journo slams Eagles’ ‘ridiculous’ gesture for Simpson after farewell game rejection

‘Worst ever’: Journo slams Eagles’ ‘ridiculous’ gesture for Simpson after farewell game rejection

www.foxsports.com.au

wtf haha.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Tribunal had two opportunities to arrive at the right call and kicked an own goal twice. Utter garbage suspension.

Will open the door for dual Cripps or triple Neale brownlow's which only baffles the footy world more as Bont will again miss out. That bloke deserves a Brownlow at some point.

 

[RPCB]

‘Worst ever’: Journo slams Eagles’ ‘ridiculous’ gesture for Simpson after farewell game rejection

‘Worst ever’: Journo slams Eagles’ ‘ridiculous’ gesture for Simpson after farewell game rejection

www.foxsports.com.au

wtf haha.

I hope Simmo agrees, the club makes a big deal of it and then he doesn’t turn up.

One of the worst handing of a sacking I can remember. Clubs and coaches usually go their seperate ways quickly. Not West Coast, they are trying to milk this. Weird.

 

[Jatz]

Tribunal had two opportunities to arrive at the right call and kicked an own goal twice. Utter garbage suspension.

Will open the door for dual Cripps or triple Neale brownlow's which only baffles the footy world more as Bont will again miss out. That bloke deserves a Brownlow at some point.

Last night's tribunal wasn't the problem at all. If you actually look at the criteria for overturning, there was no reason they would/should.

The problem lies with the initial decision and then the first tribunal hearing.

I said to SM last night, what's sad is he's essentially been rubbed out because his lawyers had a really poor time of it at the first tribunal appearance.

 

[gaskin]

The appeals board is not the tribunal. The only way to get a verdict overturned on appeal is to prove that the laws of the game have no been followed. The MRO and tribunal followed the guidelines set out by the AFL so there was nothing there for Sydney to successfully argue.

 

[TubbsFarquhar]

I hope Simmo agrees, the club makes a big deal of it and then he doesn’t turn up.

One of the worst handing of a sacking I can remember. Clubs and coaches usually go their seperate ways quickly. Not West Coast, they are trying to milk this. Weird.

Ah, classic Don Pyke. Glad we got rid of him, he was an OK matchday coach, but his people skills are deplorable.

Who we replaced him with though...

 

[Jatz]

The appeals board is not the tribunal. The only way to get a verdict overturned on appeal is to prove that the laws of the game have no been followed. The MRO and tribunal followed the guidelines set out by the AFL so there was nothing there for Sydney to successfully argue.

Clearly someone should've told Sydney's lawyers. Got to be honest, they've come out of this looking incredibly inept.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Clearly someone should've told Sydney's lawyers. Got to be honest, they've come out of this looking incredibly inept.

Why didn't they use the lawyers that got Rampe off a head high bump 30 yards behind play?

 

[SM]

The sad (?) thing is, we flagged this in pre-season as an outcome from this rule change and now we're the ones who've copped it. I have no doubt it will be altered in the off-season, as well, I'm sure, the Brownlow eligibility criteria.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Chris Grant lost a Brownlow for less.

 

[Jatz]

I don't think they'll change the eligibility unless he 'wins'.

If/when it turns out he wasn't winning anyway, they'll be able to ignore the whole thing.