Enough Cheap Shots

[ShanDog]

Gibson got off again for swinging a punch at a player well off the ball. Wasn't a "left-arm jab" as described by the imbeciles at AFL.com, but a full blooded left hook to the stomach of an unsuspecting player.

How is it that players can get away with a fine for this, especially for a second occurrence? The MRP decision on Gibson is made to look even worse when a third gamer for Carlton, Holman, was given two weeks (down to one for an early plea) for a late spoil that left the player nothing more than a little rattled.

Some might say the game has gone soft and this is an example, but there's nothing 'hard' about punching someone off the ball and this rubbish should be treated harsher than incidents during the play.

The AFL need to address these off-the-ball indiscretions. My suggestion would be to introduce an added 25% weighting on penalties if its an off-the-ball incident.

 

[Mister B]

Gibson got off again for swinging a punch at a player well off the ball. Wasn't a "left-arm jab" as described by the imbeciles at AFL.com, but a full blooded left hook to the stomach of an unsuspecting player.

How is it that players can get away with a fine for this, especially for a second occurrence? The MRP decision on Gibson is made to look even worse when a third gamer for Carlton, Holman, was given two weeks (down to one for an early plea) for a late spoil that left the player nothing more than a little rattled.

Some might say the game has gone soft and this is an example, but there's nothing 'hard' about punching someone off the ball and this rubbish should be treated harsher than incidents during the play.

The AFL need to address these off-the-ball indiscretions. My suggestion would be to introduce an added 25% weighting on penalties if its an off-the-ball incident.

Funny that people were offended when Barry Hall used a loophole in terminology to avoid suspension for this sort of thing and people are still whinging about it, yet those same people accept Gibson's repeated antics of the same thing and laud him as a hero. These are the same people that "boo Adam Goodes for his cheap shots".

 

[Sixpence]

I agree that it should be cracked down on. I think very few fans like seeing that crap. You can still be physical without resorting to cheap shots.

 

[Pusswah]

Funny that people were offended when Barry Hall used a loophole in terminology to avoid suspension for this sort of thing and people are still whinging about it, yet those same people accept Gibson's repeated antics of the same thing and laud him as a hero. These are the same people that "boo Adam Goodes for his cheap shots".

Do we really have to drag him in here as well?
Nonsense.

 

[milhouse1]

I agree also they should be harsher on this. Hits like that off the ball or during the reset after goals should be penalized, surely players shouldn't have to look over their shoulder constantly in case they are about to get whacked in the stomach or wherever. Its just such a weak act.

 

[HairyO]

When players are getting fines for punches and shoulders to the head are we really that precious that we focus on stopping gut punches???

How about fixing the real problems with the MRP then worry about fluff like this afterwards.

Breust got clotheslined and the guy got 1 week. Is a gut punch really deserving of the same penalty?

 

[masai]

When players are getting fines for punches and shoulders to the head are we really that precious that we focus on stopping gut punches???

How about fixing the real problems with the MRP then worry about fluff like this afterwards.

Breust got clotheslined and the guy got 1 week. Is a gut punch really deserving of the same penalty?

Gut punch in play is one issue, gut punch 50+ metres off the play is another issue.

Why do you need to gut punch someone off the play ?, it is an unwarranted striking offence.

 

[HairyO]

So a gut punch behind play should be more / less / equally punished than a punch to the head in play?

So a gut punch behind play should be more / less / equally punished than an elbow to the head in play?

So a gut punch behind play should be more / less / equally punished than a clothesline in play?

 

[ShanDog]

So a gut punch behind play should be more / less / equally punished than a punch to the head in play?

So a gut punch behind play should be more / less / equally punished than an elbow to the head in play?

So a gut punch behind play should be more / less / equally punished than a clothesline in play?

Black and white doesn't exist in this stuff and it is silly to suggest otherwise.

How do YOU think a gut punch behind the ball that forces a player to slowly leave the field, vomit and take several minutes to recover from compares to a late spoil/swinging arm that is penalised on-field with a 50, the player never leaves the field, takes their kick and is fine? Who should receive the harsher punishment?

 

[HairyO]

I think there is a specific rule dealing with elevating the penalty due to the potential to cause injury which has only been used twice this year, but should have been used at least a dozen times.

I think if a clothesline to the head is only worth a week, then a punch to the guts is only worth a fine.

However, if the clothesline was properly punished with 2 or 3 weeks, then Im more than happy to say that a gut punch which forces a player from the ground should be worth a week.

Dont fix a problem by focussing at the lower end. Fix the serious ones first. Shoulder charging through the ball to deliberately take out another player is not worth a week (Buddy on Edwards). Punching a player in the back of the head deliberately is not worth a fine (Firrito on Buddy). Punching a guy in the head behind play is not worth a week (Weller on ... I cant recall). Calling a sling tackle which knocked a player out okay because there was only 1 motion was disgraceful and Evans should never have said it was a good call by the MRP.

So yes, fix them evil gut punches, but can we fix the really dangerous ones first? I dont recall ever hearing that the gut was sacrosanct. I do recall hearing it about the head a few times.

 

[Whiskers]

Funny that people were offended when Barry Hall used a loophole in terminology to avoid suspension for this sort of thing and people are still whinging about it, yet those same people accept Gibson's repeated antics of the same thing and laud him as a hero. These are the same people that "boo Adam Goodes for his cheap shots".

Accept? Laud Gibbo as a hero?
Who are these people?

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Black and white doesn't exist in this stuff and it is silly to suggest otherwise.

How do YOU think a gut punch behind the ball that forces a player to slowly leave the field, vomit and take several minutes to recover from compares to a late spoil/swinging arm that is penalised on-field with a 50, the player never leaves the field, takes their kick and is fine? Who should receive the harsher punishment?

Same thing happened to Langford last year. Not even a fine. His breakfast was seen again too. At least now if Gibbo does it again it's a week, not like last year where the MRP gave whoever whacked Langford the green light to ke doing it every week.

 

[ShanDog]

I think there is a specific rule dealing with elevating the penalty due to the potential to cause injury which has only been used twice this year, but should have been used at least a dozen times.

I think if a clothesline to the head is only worth a week, then a punch to the guts is only worth a fine.

However, if the clothesline was properly punished with 2 or 3 weeks, then Im more than happy to say that a gut punch which forces a player from the ground should be worth a week.

Dont fix a problem by focussing at the lower end. Fix the serious ones first. Shoulder charging through the ball to deliberately take out another player is not worth a week (Buddy on Edwards). Punching a player in the back of the head deliberately is not worth a fine (Firrito on Buddy). Punching a guy in the head behind play is not worth a week (Weller on ... I cant recall). Calling a sling tackle which knocked a player out okay because there was only 1 motion was disgraceful and Evans should never have said it was a good call by the MRP.

So yes, fix them evil gut punches, but can we fix the really dangerous ones first? I dont recall ever hearing that the gut was sacrosanct. I do recall hearing it about the head a few times.

Rubbing argument. More than one thing can be done at once, so it doesn't make a difference in what order.

Denying punches behind the ball, regardless of where they hit, needs addressing is dumb.

 

[HairyO]

Rubbing argument. More than one thing can be done at once, so it doesn't make a difference in what order.

Denying punches behind the ball, regardless of where they hit, needs addressing is dumb.

Where did I say it doesnt need to be addressed? All I said is fix the system starting with the dangerous stuff first.

But if you address these gut punches first you are rubbing players out for more time than the actual dangerous stuff, which is ridiculous.

 

[Cynic]

I don't mind the idea of punches, including jumper punches, getting a week.

Yes it is harsh but as opposed to bumps and other actions there really isn't a grey area, you don't need to do it.

 

[ShanDog]

Where did I say it doesnt need to be addressed? All I said is fix the system starting with the dangerous stuff first.

But if you address these gut punches first you are rubbing players out for more time than the actual dangerous stuff, which is ridiculous.

Again, there's no rule that says 'one change per season - choose wisely'.

 

[blue harvest]

Gibson got off again for swinging a punch at a player well off the ball. Wasn't a "left-arm jab" as described by the imbeciles at AFL.com, but a full blooded left hook to the stomach of an unsuspecting player.

He didn't get off, he was found guilty and got the punishment as per the rules for that offence.
As for being unsuspecting, if you hold someone 'well off the ball' (it was about 5m) then you should expect a reaction. You make it sound like he was hit up the other end of the ground whilst minding his own business.

I don't like cheap shots either, but if players wan't to niggle and hold then they can cop their whack.

 

[ShanDog]

If you argument is based on pedantry, its a s**t argument.

He got off lightly compared to a lot of peoples expectations for that sort of act. Better?

It was a lot more than 5m away and there was no real niggle. Even if there was, so ******* what, mate?

Dumb.

 

[blue harvest]

If you argument is based on pedantry, its a s**t argument.

He got off lightly compared to a lot of peoples expectations for that sort of act. Better?

It was a lot more than 5m away and there was no real niggle. Even if there was, so ******* what, mate?

Yes, I would consider it getting off lightly, but they are the current rules, they probably need to be tightened up.
If you watch again you'll see it was about 5m, it was easily in the range where you could expect a shepherd.

 

[ShanDog]

Shepherd or a punch?

 

[smeltitdeltit]

If you argument is based on pedantry, its a s**t argument.

He got off lightly compared to a lot of peoples expectations for that sort of act. Better?

It was a lot more than 5m away and there was no real niggle. Even if there was, so ******* what, mate?

Dumb.

Pendantry?? His arguments is based off the rules and guidelines of the MRP.

If you base your argument off the vibe, it's a s**t argument.

 

[ShanDog]

Pendantry?? His arguments is based off the rules and guidelines of the MRP.

If you base your argument off the vibe, it's a s**t argument.

lol he was arguing based on the wording of my post and not the content. Pedantry, semantics, whatever you prefer, that's what it was.

We KNOW he was punished in accordance with the rules as they are. The argument is whether those rules are too soft.

 

[HairyO]

So Carlton fans think Gibbo should get the same punishment as the guy who clotheslined Breust?

Why didnt that guy get 2 weeks like Lewis? Where is the outrage?

Last week Breust was shouldered in the head by Jetta. Only a fine. Where is the outrage?

 

[smeltitdeltit]

lol he was arguing based on the wording of my post and not the content. Pedantry, semantics, whatever you prefer, that's what it was.

We KNOW he was punished in accordance with the rules as they are. The argument is whether those rules are too soft.

Last year this wouldn't have been deemed enough for a sanction. This year it's a fine and 3 strikes - you're out.
They have come down on it, perhaps not hard enough, but he didn't "get away" with anything.

 

[HairyO]

Last year this wouldn't have been deemed enough for a sanction. This year it's a fine and 3 strikes - you're out.
They have come down on it, perhaps not hard enough, but he didn't "get away" with anything.

This year Mitchell has been elbowed in the back at least 3 times. Not once was there a penalty. So there is still plenty of players getting away with it. None from Hawthorn though. The MRP are very quick to send out the $1,000 invoice.