- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #3
MRP / Trib. 2024 - MRO Chook Lotto - Carlton Tribunal News & Reports
- Thread starter Aphrodite
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Agreed on Hogan incident. He had to be suspended. Crazy decision.
I think the Wright and Greene incidents were very different. Not just the outcome. Greene initially had a play at the ball. Realised he wasn't going to get there, turned to protect himself. Arm is tucked in against the body. Wright never really had a chance and his arm was raised slightly which caused the collision. Wright didn't have to leave the ground. Greene had already commited
Fair call, that’s a great picture. I thought he braced because he was fractionally second to the contest without a chance to mark it. But with arms stretched to mark it like Boyd has, it would have been just about a dead heat. They were there at the same time and only Boyd was attempting to mark at the critical stage.
heardofhubris
Debutant
- Jul 27, 2013
- 115
- 110
- AFL Club
- Carlton
To paraphrase Tina Turner, what's Gaelic Football got to do with it?
- Mar 19, 2014
- 3,583
- 8,020
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Denver Broncos
Precedent has now been set.
Ok to whack someone & get away with it
Unfortunately the precedent was set in round 0 with George and Neale, both punched, both got off which now allows this crap to happen. If they suspended those 2 in round 1, the standard would have been set, you punch you have a week end of story.
This was off the ball so should have been a suspension anyway.
Touch footy, nothing hard about Gaelic football.
Skilful yes, tough absolutely not
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
- Mar 19, 2014
- 3,583
- 8,020
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Denver Broncos
There's a lot of ex players coming out and backing Green and I can understand it, it is a newish rule to the game that you have a duty of care in a contest. A lot of what is happening is instinctive as this is the way these guys have played all their lives. It will take time to turn this around as it needs to be be played out during junior football even though a contest will always be a contest.
Now, taking Green out of the equation, what the AFL are trying to implement is not really logical as accidents will still happen in a contact sport, players will still get concussed accidentally in a marking contest as all players are not created equally in weight and height.
I understand what they are trying to do but the player needs to be suspended for the action not the outcome and players will always protect themselves first as it is instinctive to do so.
Yes, Green should have got a week for the action to try and remove it from the game but it has to be one of the toughest suspensions for them to get right
Now, taking Green out of the equation, what the AFL are trying to implement is not really logical as accidents will still happen in a contact sport, players will still get concussed accidentally in a marking contest as all players are not created equally in weight and height.
I understand what they are trying to do but the player needs to be suspended for the action not the outcome and players will always protect themselves first as it is instinctive to do so.
Yes, Green should have got a week for the action to try and remove it from the game but it has to be one of the toughest suspensions for them to get right
heardofhubris
Debutant
- Jul 27, 2013
- 115
- 110
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The object of the exercise (Australian Rules Football) is to score goals (and points).
I think the AFL is just trying to stipulate that if you leave the ground (go airborne) towards another player you are legitimately going the contest. I can't fathom how some don't see Toby's action.
Go into your backyard and imagine you're in Toby's position now and think about the action you are going to take to either mark or punch the ball. Note what your arms do. As you lift off the ground your arms raise almost instantaneously in preparation for the action. Toby is all nicely safely tucked in from the onset, he was going the hip and shoulder/collision which the outcome has been on the onus of the offender for a while now.
OldBlueFan
Premiership Player
- Sep 23, 2009
- 3,028
- 3,143
- AFL Club
- Carlton
It's not really that tough, it's just that the AFL insists on not defining things explicitly. That way they can control outcomes according to their own desires, and not based on the facts of any given case.
I would have thought that the wording for rule determining these suspensions is something like:
"In a contested situation where one player is likely to make forceful contact with another, once either player chooses not to contest the ball, they then have a duty of care toward the other player. If they fail in this duty of care by causing - or potentially causing - serious injury to the player contesting the ball, then they have committed a reportable offence."
What gets me about all of the debate around cases like this is that no-one will acknowledge that it's always the same players that end up in these situations. The Toby Greens, Kosi Picketts et al, are somehow always the ones who are involved. People talk about a player's "instincts" - but I would argue that for some players their instincts are toward the man, and further, they are toward hurting the other player. Whereas genuine ball players, eg, Crippa, Fyfe, Bont etc, do not find themselves in these situations.
- Mar 26, 2015
- 11,945
- 22,037
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Melbourne Tigers, Bendigo Braves, OKC
Never said the ball was in play, just that it wasn't off the ball.
It was at a stoppage and the AFL has said that players are allowed to jostle, wrestle for position and niggle each other in on ball situations (ie: a stoppage), but that it's not acceptable off the ball.
Young gave him a couple of shoves. Hogan could've just shoved him back, but he chose to go the whack and it resulted in a head punch.
- Mar 26, 2015
- 11,945
- 22,037
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Melbourne Tigers, Bendigo Braves, OKC
In your view.
That's fine to view it that way, but the AFL doesn't, so it's a conversation about how it should be vs how it is. I was discussing the differences between the incidents based on the way it's actually adjudicated.
Anyway, the AFL has trouble applying its own rules consistently, so it doesn't really matter what the rules are apparently.
- Nov 27, 2016
- 17,580
- 33,992
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Not surprising to have three of Alister "Coward Punch" Clarkson's proteges in the top five
On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app
- Jun 4, 2016
- 12,096
- 36,701
- AFL Club
- Carlton
You can make front on contact if you get there first and mark the ball. It came off Toby's shoulder...
- Nov 27, 2016
- 17,580
- 33,992
- AFL Club
- Carlton
What a woman. Hell of a voice. Huge energy in her performances.
On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app
Les Grossman playaaaa
Senior List
Watched the start of the show and saw that as he said it last night. Jay Clark was trying his best to not call him a complete *wit on live tv but his face said it all.
Spoke to few people with me last night and 8 out 10 pretty much had the same opinion about the Lansberger comments with only 2 being different.
Opinions below....
- May 1, 2002
- 11,240
- 17,944
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I'm actually surprised they didn't report Boyd for running into poor Toby. I mean the media has really just stopped short in reporting it that way (even Timmy was implying he had no right to go back with the flight of the ball) - well except for Sam it seems. 
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #393
Bit of a change of pace away from Toby ...
heardofhubris
Debutant
- Jul 27, 2013
- 115
- 110
- AFL Club
- Carlton
What an extraordinary woman she was, to be sure and I just watched a couple a games a Gaelic and it is rather exciting and such, i must say.
I get what you're saying, but I feel like the "front-on contact" rule is more designed for players that are a fraction late to the contest and don't have a genuine chance to mark - they are just going to spoil/kill the contest.
In this case Boyd absolutely had a play on the mark, in fact he was in the better position to take the mark - as seen by Toby having to brace once he realized he was second to the ball.
The idea that a player can be the most likely to take the mark, but shouldn't engage because they're going back with the flight and may cause front-on contact, seems a bit off to me.
Last edited:
Dramoth
Premium Platinum
And that's just the charge sheet.5 pages on Toby Greene!
It wasn’t introduced for late contact, and that’s not the rule. You’re not allowed to make front-on contact in a marking contest, late or early.
If Toby didn’t turn his body, and kept his arms out going for the mark, that’s what would have happened.
- Aug 16, 2009
- 7,124
- 10,059
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- North Ballarat
Agree - I know the MRO/Tribunal setup is slightly shambolic but ultimately, striking is striking, I'm not sure being further away from the ball makes it any better or worse given it's a reportable offence either way.
- Aug 16, 2015
- 11,022
- 18,521
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
I really can’t understand the pissing and moaning from people like Jonathan Brown in relation to the Greene suspension and saying stuff like, we are turning in to Gaelic football before our eyes.
The footage is clear and the still images damming, one player goes for the mark and the other bumps him in the head, one has is arms out stretched contesting the ball, knowing a player is most likely coming and the other tucks the arm and bumps the other in the head.
It was laughable when Brown brought up the still frame on, on the couch to show that Greene only had eyes for the ball, but didn’t realise he had already tucked the shoulder in for a hip and shoulder at over a metre away, Buckley even pulled him up and said why is his arm tucked then.
I dont get the excuse from past players saying players are allowed to protect themselves, it doesnt make any sense, when have you been able to just jump in to a marking contest with a hip and shoulder and not make an attempt to mark or spoil?
The footage is clear and the still images damming, one player goes for the mark and the other bumps him in the head, one has is arms out stretched contesting the ball, knowing a player is most likely coming and the other tucks the arm and bumps the other in the head.
It was laughable when Brown brought up the still frame on, on the couch to show that Greene only had eyes for the ball, but didn’t realise he had already tucked the shoulder in for a hip and shoulder at over a metre away, Buckley even pulled him up and said why is his arm tucked then.
I dont get the excuse from past players saying players are allowed to protect themselves, it doesnt make any sense, when have you been able to just jump in to a marking contest with a hip and shoulder and not make an attempt to mark or spoil?
- Aug 16, 2009
- 7,124
- 10,059
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- North Ballarat
Exactly.
A player pulling out of contesting the ball to protect themselves (and clatter into their opponent) is the soft part.
What risk was there ever to Greene or Wright? sfa..
Similar threads
- Locked
