Whitecross offered a week for having Selwood run into his shoulder

[deluge99]

We can just hope that common sense prevails at the Tribunal because the MRP decision has to be one of the worst on record and that is saying something as it is a pretty impressive list of stuff ups over the past few years.

It is midway through the final quarter so a fatigued Selwood runs straight into Whitecross who just hops up off the ground a second earlier and braces himself still half crouched over. This looking at impact in slow motion has got to stop because it distorts the reality of the what actually happens in real time. Look at it in real time and think how little time Whitecross has to adjust his body position to Selwoods front on charge.

Incredible stuff that some clown on a panel would see this as anything other than an accident and it is a real concern if the appeal is dismissed that players wont put their bodies on the line, both players here should be applauded for the courage they showed not one being rubbed out.

 

[Bingle_21]

That's fine, but by lowering his shoulder, indeed moving acroos and towards the oncoming player slightly, he impacts another blokes head with considerable force.

Just reading your next post, fair comment, agreed entirely.

Think a lot of people here would disagree with this. By where both players ended up most would say the force was genereated/inflicted by Selwood. If it was generated by WC he would have ended on top of Selwood.

 

[Collingwoodity]

Is anyone actually looking at how reckless and/or deliberate selwood was in this?

I mean what the hell was he doing?

Did he run into whitecross not knowing he was there?

Or he knew he was there but proceeded to ram his head full throttle at whitecross knowing that either:

a. whitecross could move out of the way in time or
b. whitecross could not move out of the way and selwood would get the free kick.

Selwood should be accountable for this reckless act.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Is anyone actually looking at how reckless and/or deliberate selwood was in this?

I mean what the hell was he doing?

Did he run into whitecross not knowing he was there?

Or he knew he was there but proceeded to ram his head full throttle at whitecross knowing that either:

a. whitecross could move out of the way in time or
b. whitecross could not move out of the way and selwood would get the free kick.

Selwood should be accountable for this reckless act.

Selwood was focussed on the football and the would-be tackler he was evading, and was unaware Whitecross was there.

 

[Thommo 42]

Geez I wish it wasn't Selwood in this incident, it is clouding the issue completely.

Nobody was at fault, it was accidental contact on behalf of both players!

 

[Collingwoodity]

Selwood was focussed on the football and the would-be tackler he was evading, and was unaware Whitecross was there.

So he ran at whitecross as if he wasnt there?

then it must be accidental contact and whitecross could not be liable

 

[Collingwoodity]

Geez I wish it wasn't Selwood in this incident, it is clouding the issue completely.

Nobody was at fault, it was accidental contact on behalf of both players!

It is less likely to be another player running full pelt into a player.

selwood, whilst courageous, is reckless.

 

[Testekill]

It is less likely to be another player running full pelt into a player.

selwood, whilst courageous, is reckless.

Exactly. Head high contact that was initiated by Selwood and was completely accidental on Whitecross's part. The only option WC had was to brace himself for impact instead of lying down and letting Selwood continue without being put under any pressure.

I swear, it's open and shut and yet some Geelong supporters act like it's a conspiracy against them.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

It is less likely to be another player running full pelt into a player.

selwood, whilst courageous, is reckless.

This is nonsense, several times a game you will see a player tackled by someone they weren't aware was there.

 

[flyinghi64]

An absolute joke. After watching the incident several times my only conclusion is the MRP expected Whitecross to De-materialise and let Selwood run through him, head-first, then Re-materialise seconds later. This is the only way contact would have been avoided.

Actually Whitecross did have another option, lie on the ground and wait for Selwood to run pass and be ridiculed all week by the whole football fraternity and earning a spot Spud's Coachkillers.

MRP rules are soften our game and crucifying blokes by playing the way 99% of us excpect them to play.

BTW Waters was stiff, even though it was only a reprimand he now has carry over points. If head high contact was made at that force there is no way Grimes would have got up, let alone play out the game.

 

[MattyB_76]

Selwood was focussed on the football and the would-be tackler he was evading, and was unaware Whitecross was there.

Yep, Selwood must have missed WC tackle Christianson just moments before, and never saw him on the ground, just behind the ball he was picking up, and was definitely never looking at WC before the tackle.

I mean, he's got to be the most unaware footballer if you honestly believe that, Doris.

 

[Thommo 42]

It is less likely to be another player running full pelt into a player.

selwood, whilst courageous, is reckless.

don't agree at all.

Selwood is reckless, but in this case it was just a series of unavoidable events that lead to contact.

Whitecross tackles Christenson who fails to execute his handball back over his head correctly, and Whitecross earns the free kick.

Whitecross had made a lunging tackle and was getting to his feet, when Selwood legitimately gathered the ball not knowing a free kick had been paid and cannoned into Whitecross as he had stood up.

Neither player is at fault. Selwood being a chronic stager has zero to do with this particular incident.

 

[Patronus]

What I don't get is why the blame is being put on Selwood. It was an accident between two players. Selwood was concentrating on Rioli behind him and did not see Whitecross pop up in front of him before they collided.

He had only just picked up the ball and moved a few strides forward when he was hit. He did not put his head down and make the choice to run strait into whitecross like some are trying to claim.

Also the other who are going on about it being a free and a dead ball and should result in a 50 m penalty it is not like there was much time between the whistle being blown and Selwood being hit. If it was as clear cut as people are going on about why would white cross even need to try and stop Selwood going past if he already knew he had the free kick?

 

[Thistle]

My guess is that once again due to public outcry the MRP will clear Whitecross (which they should) and make themselves look like heroes for doing so.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

What I don't get is why the blame is being put on Selwood. It was an accident between two players. Selwood was concentrating on Rioli behind him and did not see Whitecross pop up in front of him before they collided.

Can't disagree with any of this. It was an accident and hence ludicrous that it even was looked at by MRP. Totally agree the Selwood bashing is stupid - just as stupid as the report in the first place.

 

[Andrew Mc]

My guess is that once again due to public outcry the MRP will clear Whitecross (which they should) and make themselves look like heroes for doing so.

The MRP and the Tribunal are two different entities. I really wish people would understand that. The MRP have done their job (and honestly, I can see why they did choose to, even though I think he should get off), now it's up to the tribunal to do theirs. Just like sometimes the umpires will put someone on report and the MRP will dismiss it.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Yep, Selwood must have missed WC tackle Christianson just moments before, and never saw him on the ground, just behind the ball he was picking up, and was definitely never looking at WC before the tackle.

I mean, he's got to be the most unaware footballer if you honestly believe that, Doris.

Whatever champ, what I said is correct. Watch it, you will see.

 

[mollyfud]

The MRP and the Tribunal are two different entities. I really wish people would understand that. The MRP have done their job (and honestly, I can see why they did choose to, even though I think he should get off), now it's up to the tribunal to do theirs. Just like sometimes the umpires will put someone on report and the MRP will dismiss it.

Couldn't agree more! I think the system works well with the Umps reporting on what they see, the MRP using the reports from medicos, investigation and video to do their jobs and if players/clubs wanting to argue the case and maybe bring evidence that isn't available to the MRP, they can go to the tribunal. Even the fact that if there has been an error of law at the tribunal, clubs can then go to appeals.

 

[MattyB_76]

Whatever champ, what I said is correct. Watch it, you will see.

Ok, so we'll agree that Selwood is completely unaware of someone on the ground in front of him, who is about to stand up, someone who was on the ground before he picked up the ball, and didn't move (except to stand up) from that position for about 5 seconds of play.

 

[Grade_Zero]

Having watched the incident several times, there was clearly nothing that could be done to avoid the contact. Dropping the shoulder is nonsense, that was just the position he had reached on his way back to upright when the contact occurred (and on another note, would lowering your shoulder not be an ideal way to try and avoid contact with the highest part of the body?). Staying down was also not an option, as he had sprung to his feet immediately after the prior tackle. And of course keeping in mind that all this happened in a split second. It's unfortunate that his shoulder happened to line up with Selwood's head at the point of contact, but that was pure luck (or lack thereof), and not worthy of any sort of reprimand.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

For the record, Selwood supposedly rang Whitecross to let him know that he's upset that a report actually occurred. Reported on SEN about 15 minutes ago.

 

[kickazz]

Accident.

The recent trend is to dish out penalties based on the injury and not the action. (Consequense vs Intent if you like). This is another example.

My thinking is that the AFL are scared of getting sued by someone who one day suffers a really serious injury. By constantly penalising this sort of thing they hope to absolve themselves of blame and say "they did everything they possibly could" to create a safe workplace.

I don't like it, but having said that, the game is just getting more and more brutal (legally!) and I think there does need to be a strategy to protect players' welfare, just don't know how it should be done, but it should not be like this.

 

[red+black]

Justice served

 

[Scooter#10]

Got off

 

[buddyhawks23]

Whitecross Cleared..

Thank-You common sense.