Moved Thread Zac Williams bump

[Lip Gallagher]

What was I wrong about?

Intentional.

I didn't see much in it TBH.

 

[telsor]

Intentional.

I never said it would be classified that way.

 

[Lip Gallagher]

It was....but they'll call it reckless because intentional is considered a slur. (sniper, dirty, etc) while reckless is just considered 'hard' (and maybe a bit clumsy).

Both mean he meant it.

Ok.

 

[telsor]

Ok.

Exactly.

Which part of "they'll call it reckless" are you having trouble with?

 

[THE_GUN]

$1500 fine is what it should be but most likely get a week due to the recent attention to head knocks specially with the shane tuck

Shane Tuck

Age

43

Ht

189cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.4

5star

K

11.4

4star

HB

12.0

5star

M

4.5

4star

T

3.7

5star

CL

5.0

5star

No current season stats available

D

14.8

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

5.6

4star

M

2.4

3star

T

1.4

4star

brain revelations recently they may decide to take a harder stance in the future.

 

[Lip Gallagher]

Exactly.

Which part of "they'll call it reckless" are you having trouble with?

You said it was intentional, it's there in black and white, you said intentional was the same as reckless, i for one didn't see a great deal of malice in his action, he certianly had no intention of ironing him out, he was following the ball and didn't have time to pull out IMO.

 

[Lip Gallagher]

Was it even called a free kick?

 

[Lip Gallagher]

Maybe he should have opened both arms and copped the hit himself.

The the MVP could rub him out for hurting himself.

 

[Taylor]

Was it even called a free kick?

Downfield free called and play on.

 

[Lip Gallagher]

Downfield free called and play on.

That's all it deserved IMO, i copped bigger hits warming up in the change rooms.

 

[Do the Dew]

I see Shiels as very similiar to trent Cotchins in the 2017 prelim. Taylor wasnt even injured. He played the game out, no concussions and scans revealed no injury. Williams 'if' Hunter Clark was injured would be considered a dog act. He'd just finished disposing of the ball so Williams was late to the contest. And he jumped off the ground to make contact with Clarks head. I think the only reason its being debated is because Clark is ok. What im saying is that Taylor was ok as well, so if the match review is only going off injury report rather than the act itself, they are proven to be all over the shop either way.

Shiel ran past the ball to deliver the bump. Cotchin collected Shiel high as he grabbed the ball. Two completely different events.

Also to spread awareness, it was the Dave Astbury shirtfront on Shiel later that quarter that put him out of the game, despite what the media and BF troglodytes say.

 

[NeutralFan]

Should be a week but will probably either be $1k fine or 3 weeks knowing the AFL.
But seriously, it's a dumb act to leap and bump knowing you'll be late and potentially cause a head injury that're in high conversation the past few years.

 

[Lip Gallagher]

Should be a week but will probably either be $1k fine or 3 weeks knowing the AFL.
But seriously, it's a dumb act to leap and bump knowing you'll be late and potentially cause a head injury that're in high conversation the past few years.

Here's the thing, he didn't choose to jump and hit high, he was following the ball IMO, there was no malace in his action, game has gone insane, he simply protected himself from damage which IMO he is entitled to do in a contested situation.

 

[telsor]

You said it was intentional, it's there in black and white, you said intentional was the same as reckless, i for one didn't see a great deal of malice in his action, he certianly had no intention of ironing him out, he was following the ball and didn't have time to pull out IMO.

He intended to make hard contact, he didn't jump in the air to tickle him. I doubt he intended to hit him in the head (unless he's really stupid), but there is no doubt he intended the contact.

I said it would be called reckless because of the implications calling it 'intentional' hold (such as you ascribing malice to it).

This is the same reason for 99% of 'reckless' calls.

 

[Lip Gallagher]

He intended to make hard contact, he didn't jump in the air to tickle him. I doubt he intended to hit him in the head (unless he's really stupid), but there is no doubt he intended the contact.

I said it would be called reckless because of the implications calling it 'intentional' hold (such as you ascribing malice to it).

This is the same reason for 99% of 'reckless' calls.

He's allowed to protect himself though surely?

 

[telsor]

He's allowed to protect himself though surely?

Sure.

But I'm not sure how that is relevant to a late hit where he jumps into someone.

 

[NeutralFan]

Here's the thing, he didn't choose to jump and hit high, he was following the ball IMO, there was no malace in his action, game has gone insane, he simply protected himself from damage which IMO he is entitled to do in a contested situation.

We're watching different vision then.

 

[Malifice]

Shiel got 2 weeks for this, upheld at tribunal. Taylor played out the match and scans revealed no damage. Shiels feet never left the ground shoulder tucked in and it was in general play when the ball was up for grabs.

The AFL graded the impact as 'high'.

Specifically it was a charge of (rough conduct) careless, high contact, high impact. Which is two weeks.

He was hard done by re the 'high' impact. While Taylor was taken off for a concussion test, and had scans for a facial fracture (so was in some discomfort) I'm fairly certain they cleared him of any damage. To me that sounds like 'medium' impact (1 week).

 

[Lip Gallagher]

Sure.

But I'm not sure how that is relevant to a late hit where he jumps into someone.

He jumped whilst the player had the ball, he was looking to smother, he tucked the shoulder to protect himself, there was no malice involved IMO.

 

[Malifice]

With the new rule of '2 weeks out if you fail a concussion test' and the focus on concussion long term impacts, I would not be surprised to see the AFL really crack down on head high contact, and grade 'impact' higher than it appears to be.

The Dylan Shiel

9

Dylan Shiel

Age

31

Ht

182cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

24.6

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

12.2

5star

M

3.1

3star

T

3.9

5star

CL

4.9

5star

D

23.4

5star

K

13.6

5star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.2

2star

T

3.4

4star

CL

6.4

5star

D

19.8

5star

K

8.4

4star

HB

11.4

5star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.6

4star

CL

3.8

5star

hit is a good example.

I still think it's 'low' impact, but if they want to set a standard for the year (and its a textbook case to do it here) then they'll grade it as medium, meaning he misses a week.

 

[Malifice]

He jumped whilst the player had the ball, he was looking to smother, he tucked the shoulder to protect himself, there was no malice involved IMO.

The jumping action might be enough to change the grading from careless (late hit, clumsy, collected him high) to intentional (you leapt in the air when bumping FFS, of course you collected him high).

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

Carlton in for a reality check against Richmond.

They needed Williams and he really let them down in the first 10 seconds of a practise match.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

Exactly.

Which part of "they'll call it reckless" are you having trouble with?

How can they call it reckless when it doesnt exist under the tribunal guidelines?
They only use intentional or careless.

 

[blitzer]

Who knows what they'll actually evaluate it is but to me jumping and catching a bloke high is a lot more intentional than when your feet never leave the ground and your contested a ball. If you want to try to minimise head knocks then clamping down on guys who jump and then collect guys high seems like a no brainer.

Mind you it still looks like low impact. So intentional and low impact - whatever that evaluates to.

 

[Chism]

Carlton in for a reality check against Richmond.

They needed Williams and he really let them down in the first 10 seconds of a practise match.

We were never a chance of winning regardless what Williams gets.

We won’t kick enough goals and are carrying to many injured players. Tigers will win by 40+ in a canter.