Barlow Bumped By Baguley

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

You really don't want suspensions for smaller incidents but when similar bumps can result in a 1000 dollar fine in one case and 3 weeks down to 2 for a similar incident, something just stinks. I know there is no way to hold the MRP to account but frankly, its past time these inconsistent ruling were held against them. Normally people who perform that poorly get sacked and that is clearly what it will take to lift their performance to acceptable levels.
 
Why don't we just stop the players from moving altogether? It's bad enough players have to stand there and watch their opponent mark the ball. Some of us want to see SOME sort of physical contest.

True, he could have at least made it look like he was attempting a spoil - but probably would have gotten the Lewis treatment by the MRP
 
You really don't want suspensions for smaller incidents but when similar bumps can result in a 1000 dollar fine in one case and 3 weeks down to 2 for a similar incident, something just stinks. I know there is no way to hold the MRP to account but frankly, its past time these inconsistent ruling were held against them. Normally people who perform that poorly get sacked and that is clearly what it will take to lift their performance to acceptable levels.

There is a difference between someone electing to bump and a collision.
 
There is a difference between someone electing to bump and a collision.

True but in both cases the player elected to bump.

In Baguley's case he had no play on the ball and had eyes only for Barlow. It fitted in with what appeared to be Essendon's game plan of constant hits on players after marks and was the cause of a number of frees given against Essendon. It was clearly worth a fine and should have been worth a 50 meter penalty. Ballantyne's bump was very similar with the exception that Ballntyne didn't leave the ground to make the bump where Baguley did.

You can dress it up anyway you like but Baguley never had a play on the ball. He chose to bump and took him high. Even the MRP didn't describe it as a collision
 
The player left the ground the ground, used the shoulder (not his 2 hands) to 'brace' for impact and connected his opponents's chin....
I was worried about the potential injury that may or may not have been inflicted.
Seriously though....meh
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

As a freo supporter we cop our fair share of unreasonable MRP decisions. That said if Baguely went for that it would've just added to a growing list of ridiculous decisions. The MRP have this one correct and good on them. Collisions happen in football and to be honest if he wanted to he could've just about destroyed Barlow. He came in hard, he was a split second behind him and he attempted to pull up and the contact was inevitable. He could've perhaps pulled up sooner but then he'd have looked soft.

It's an incredibly fine line and sadly if Barlow gets knocked out Baguely probably cops 2 weeks.

There is still too much grey area and this is because the outcome still dictates the punishment. It's a flawed system and only intent should be taken into account.
 
You can dress it up anyway you like but Baguley never had a play on the ball. He chose to bump and took him high. Even the MRP didn't describe it as a collision

Agree to disagree - he was always endeavouring for the ball and only braced at the very last second when a collision was likely.
 
Agree to disagree - he was always endeavouring for the ball and only braced at the very last second when a collision was likely.

Well you must have watching a different game then.

He never had any play on the ball and he never attempted any play on the ball. Tell me why you would leave the ground and lead with a shoulder if you are just bracing for an unavoidable collision. Its a bull**** call. It was a late and cheap shot and worth a 50.
 
Didn't think the May bump deserved anything, bit thought this was actually worse.

Which brings us right back to my original point that the MRP is a low rent version of chook lotto.

The determinations that are reached contradict each other from week to week. There is no consistency. There is nothing here that can be regarded as a hallmark of a professionally run organisation. It is a corrupt element of a corruptly run organisation. There is no ethical standard at play here except what can earn the most money and the clubs, members and supporters are held in pure contempt and treated as fools when there is a dollar at stake.

However I'm the first to admit that cricket and soccer are equally as devoid of integrity as the AFL and I have no idea how it can be addressed.
 
Agree with Brown on this one. Either Baggeley got off light, or May got dealt with harshly, or somewhere in between, but there is no way there is 2 weeks difference between the two. Very very similar.
 
It's not inconsistent it's totally consistent the issue isn't with the outcomes it's with the system. It's a system that punishes the outcome rather than the crime. Punch someone in the mouth but if he walks off fine then it's ok but if you bump and the guy gets accidently knocked out your screwed
 
It's not inconsistent it's totally consistent the issue isn't with the outcomes it's with the system. It's a system that punishes the outcome rather than the crime. Punch someone in the mouth but if he walks off fine then it's ok but if you bump and the guy gets accidently knocked out your screwed

Tell that to Luke Hodge

Swallow got up and was fine,
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top