You are far from the only one - any of us posted about this fact at the time - and I actually posted this on the Maynard thread in the Umpires & Tribunal sub-forum just a copulent of weeks ago (post # 5,569)Finally, I thought that I was the only person who had that opinion. Probably doesn’t help that I live in WA. Phantom I believe you are perfectly when you say that he swerved but it was left had he swerved right there actually been no serious damage. I’m not saying that I know what his reasoning was, I believe that he not Bruzzy was responsible for the collision being high impact. Thank you Phantom.
Old news - This was all fully covered way back in this thread (first raised by a Carlton supporter) even before it became an important part of the facts presented at the tribunal hearing
And followed up a couple of posts later -
Very true … that’s why it was the step after he kicked when he veered suddenly and unexpectedly to the right towards Maynard, with his left leg crossing over to the right before the impact …. Again, all this was covered comprehensively back in this thread and at the tribunal. Just keep your eye on Brayshaw here -
Just as the duty of care was on Brayshaw with his wayward golf shot that left his victim bloodied. As was pointed out in the tribunal hearing, once Maynard jumped for the smother he effected, he couldn’t change direction. But Brayshaw could …. and he did, unfortunately right into Maynard - but all this has also been covered in depth in this thread and at the tribunal.