MRP / Trib. Whitecross offered a week - But justice, nay commonsense, actually sanity prevails.

[savagelunchbox]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

I know this is stupid and i can't believe i'm saying this, but i wonder what the ramifications would be if Hawthorn said "**** it!" and played WX anyway?

 

[JustKickIt]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Well, yes, the Cats are assertive on the field and demonstrate good leadership skills by standing their ground with the umpires over puzzling, albeit ambiguous decisions. This means that we don't have to vent our spleens on such forums as this one.!

Why are you here doing it then???

 

[winty]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

I think almost all cat's supporters agree, it wasn't even a free kick. Accidental contact, nothing he could do.

and kudos to Whitecross for letting the trainer tend to Selwood before moving, bit of class there.

My sentiments exactly.

I think Whitecross' actions afterwards just epitomised the respect both teams have for each other, similar to when Luke Hodge ran into the fence in front of our cheersquad attempting to rush a behind a few years ago, and the Geelong cheersquad did their best to cushion his impact (Can you imagine Joffa and co. being so hospitable in the same circumstances?). The games might be played at a high intensity, but that's only because both teams are ultra-competitive. The way the game should be played IMO.

 

[JustKickIt]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Yes but when it results in a player getting concussed as a result then they will always look at it very closely.

A 'concussed' player doesnt instruct other teammates on the field, like you can clearly see him doing with Steve Johnson while play is held up. I dont know why you keep saying he was concussed when he was clearly not.

 

[David the Cat]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

I couldn't believe this when I heard of the MRP call. Totally accidental contact..no intent...these things happen in contact sport.

Very harsh on Whitecross but don't start me on the MRP.

I said it on the Cats Board...a " be more careful next time " would have been more than enough. Whether its worth an appeal or not is up to your hierarchy...worth a try I reckon.

You will want him for the game against WCE though....

 

[Roger Rogerson]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Been wanting to watch it all day.

Having seen it again, he stood up and Selwood ran at him. Contact to the head was unavoidable as Selwood had his head down and led head first.

Just a ridiculous decision by the MRP.

If common sense doesnt prevail here then I reckon I will walk away from the game.

It is ridiculous that the MRPs starting point is "was player X hit in the head?" If the answer is yes then regardless of the circumstances then the player who has created the hit is in trouble. IN this instance Selwood had his head down.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

People should get suspensions for things we don't want people to do.

Whitecross was low, stood his ground and had a guy charging at him.

He even showed a level of compassion on the field that you just don't see - clearly he wasn't out there to injure or cause harm.

But yeah - punish him for it. That sounds about right.

EDIT - just remembered when Lewis got cleaned up by Harbrow.

"play on - fair bump, no suspension, had eyes for the ball"

You ****in arseholes.

 

[neroblack]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Quite the opposite actually. THE MRP is a joke and I have absolutely zero confidence in the entire process, from the initial reviews to the appeal system and all the discouragements of further penalties should appeals fail.

I take your point..the fact the he was cited is disgusting enough. The simple fact is the whitecross was not in any way negligent with his actions. Hopefully that is enough.

 

[rooboy44]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

This is an absolute disgrace. If Whitecross had attempted to bump then I could see how they could have come to this conclusion, but he was low because he was just getting up from a tackle and Selwood fell on to his shoulder because he was being tackled. If anything they should be applauding this bloke for the amount of compassion he showed immediately after it had happened. I had little faith in the MRP before this, but this has just tipped me over the edge. I really hope Hawthorn give this guy the respect he deserves and appeal it, beacuse if this is what our game is coming to, then I'm jumping off. Absolutely disgraceful

 

[mainehawk]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Rooboy 44.....yes....yes...yes...hope sanity prevails

 

[The BIG X]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

People should get suspensions for things we don't want people to do.

Whitecross was low, stood his ground and had a guy charging at him.

He even showed a level of compassion on the field that you just don't see - clearly he wasn't out there to injure or cause harm.

But yeah - punish him for it. That sounds about right.

EDIT - just remembered when Lewis got cleaned up by Harbrow.

"play on - fair bump, no suspension, had eyes for the ball"

You ****in arseholes.

That was my 1st thought when I saw the Selwood/Whitecross hit.

AFL play the Lewis hit as a promo for the game

 

[wallyt99]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Pretty dissapointed.... on a side note it seems WhiteX has really come of age. He has been serviceable for a long time but IMO he was one of the best on ground on Monday.

Just wrapped with his effort and dedication. Probably wasnt always the most naturally gifted or athletic player but has just worked and worked and worked.... and is just bloody awesome.

Hope he is cleared.

 

[vinum coupe]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Well I'm being threatened with murder on the cats board for backing up wx. (not kidding)

I think I deserve a life long* moratorium on cards from the Hawks board

* not sure how long that will be.

 

[grizzlym]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

As long as you post in a respectful way, you've got nothing to fear around here.

I'm still utterly bemused by the report. Catching up with some Geelong 'people' tomorrow, so will be interesting to hear what they have to say about it.

The lack of remonstration would seem to be a handy pointer though.

 

[HawkGirl9]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

When I say contributed, I mean it was his shoulder which did the concussing, so his contribution was large as opposed to Rioli's which is less than minimal. As for why he was allowed back on the field, that is another issue which the AFL needs to look at. I don't think teams can be trusted to make that call when the game is on the line. I don't think he should have been allowed back on, he was clearly concussed.

Also you guys are taking your frustrations out on the wrong guy by blaming Selwood here. He didn't even see Whitecross and was only bent over because he had just picked up the ball and barely taken three steps before the contact with Whitecross.

You do realize that the whistle had already been blown. Whitecross braced - that's all he could do. As for causing concussion if Selwood had concussion and the Geelong doctors and the club has clearly overlooked their duty of care by putting him back on the field. At least when Selwood does himself some real damage he will have someone to sue.
Go whitey!

 

[vinum coupe]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

As long as you post in a respectful way, you've got nothing to fear around here.

I'm still utterly bemused by the report. Catching up with some Geelong 'people' tomorrow, so will be interesting to hear what they have to say about it.

The lack of remonstration would seem to be a handy pointer though.

This is how I saw it. In response to a poster saying WX meant it. etc.


Watch it at normal speed. Yes he contributed to the damage by a weight shift that created momentum.

But that is it.

He didn't mean to hit him.

The first thing you do in any sport is shift weight to react. He never even had a second to think about how best to apply that weight shift. Whether it be tackle or bump.

Someone in another thread suggested that if WX stood still Selwood would have run straight past him... ha ha ha ha. No he wouldn't have, he would have run straight over him.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

People should get suspensions for things we don't want people to do.

Whitecross was low, stood his ground and had a guy charging at him.

He even showed a level of compassion on the field that you just don't see - clearly he wasn't out there to injure or cause harm.

But yeah - punish him for it. That sounds about right.

EDIT - just remembered when Lewis got cleaned up by Harbrow.

"play on - fair bump, no suspension, had eyes for the ball"

You ****in arseholes.

Yep.
Left the ground, high contact, high impact = no case to answer. He also had many more options than Whitecross did.

Still doesn't make much sense, that one, and especially in the face of some of the things that get cited.

 

[Hawkas1988]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Well I'm being threatened with murder on the cats board for backing up wx. (not kidding)

I think I deserve a life long* moratorium on cards from the Hawks board

* not sure how long that will be.

I have seen the thread and would like to say, well done on being reasonable on the matter. Whitecross is a fair player and good to see some of the cats fans see that

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Yep.
Left the ground, high contact, high impact = no case to answer. He also had many more options than Whitecross did.

Still doesn't make much sense, that one, and especially in the face of some of the things that get cited.

Unfortunately, to the AFL it does. Lewis didn't have the ball, therefore he's fair game.

Surely if anyone was to be suspended for this contact it is Selwood?

He caused head-high contact with low-medium impact (any higher and the Geelong Dr is in trouble), and given his long and colourful history it was clearly intentional.

 

[grizzlym]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Yep.
Left the ground, high contact, high impact = no case to answer. He also had many more options than Whitecross did.

Still doesn't make much sense, that one, and especially in the face of some of the things that get cited.

You'll just do your head in looking for reason and sense in the Byzantine judgments of the MRP. They're beating their own tiny drum, while Adrian Anderson continues to write his petty, esoteric bi-laws.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

You'll just do your head in looking for reason and sense in the Byzantine judgments of the MRP. They're beating their own tiny drum, while Adrian Anderson continues to write his petty, esoteric bi-laws.

Yeah, I know.

But you just got to wonder....

 

[crazywildhorse]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

Aside from being utter crap, it is in the rule book and therefore I can't see this being contested. According to their dodgy interpretations this is illegal and the 'Duckwood slip' is a free kick.

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

I'd challenge it on principle and risk the carry over points.

 

[Adebisi]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

I think its important to take out the fact that Whitecross was compassionate after contact (anyone can be, even after a clean punch in the face theoretically).

Also take out that players didn't remonstrate with him, (as we don't know how many saw the contact properly, especially as it was after the whistle and players may have been running to position.

Also take out the umpires first judgement, as that doesn't mean much with 10 angles of slow motion video replay for the MRP to decide from.

The only thing that matters is the incident. And from watching that on replay, (especially in full speed) it seems obvious that Whitecross braces for impact and nothing more. If Selwood was upside down flying with a leg towards Whitecross' face, he would still have braced for contact. Its a human instant reaction.

 

[Painman]

Re: Whitecross offered a week

This is the first time in 18 months I have felt a need to make a comment on BF.
It should be appealed on the following grounds.
1. WhiteX had no opportunity to bump OR tackle. He was not aware Selwood was still in motion until Selwood was about 1/2 a metre away. All he did was brace his body for contact. No opportunity to tackle.
2. WhiteX had no influence on where the contact occurred to Selwood as it was Selwood's bent body position that caused contact to be to the head. Even if WhiteX could have attempted a tackle, it would have still resulted in headhigh contact.
It was not Selwood's fault either. He had just picked up the ball when he cannoned into WhiteX.

The tribunal occasionally overturns the MRP and I am sure they will on this one.