Webster wasn’t to contrite when Clarko gave him a serve.
Grinning, spat, and the subsequent SM posts by his family.
Confirms s**t bloke really.
Grinning, spat, and the subsequent SM posts by his family.
Confirms s**t bloke really.
MRP / Trib. Webster KO's Simpkin - Update 7 week penalty
- Thread starter tangolikelama
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- May 29, 2013
- 3,859
- 9,320
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
I think everyone is in agreeance that Clarkson is a below average hypocritical bogan campaigner
Yep, and seems like Webster and his family are cut from the same cloth
SammyRoo
Club Legend
- Aug 15, 2020
- 1,611
- 5,112
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
I understand that…but an argument can be made about “head intent” on a bump …
One may still reject that argument … and say “ he intended to bump his head! ” but equally a counter argument can be made imo.
If a player walks up and “punches” the head … Its hard to make any argument that anything else was intended other than head contact ?
God help us all if Clarko is the benchmark for football morality.
angrynaut
Team Captain
- Apr 25, 2009
- 374
- 192
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Would anyone on the planet be contrite when confronted by Alastair Clarkson, of all people?
That's true, and for bumps where there's some mitigating circumstances I agree.
This isn't one though. Jimmy very clearly intended to hit Jy in the head IMO.
- Feb 14, 2014
- 5,274
- 12,750
- AFL Club
- Richmond
I think we are past those days now. I bang on about it but part of the grading of instances should be whether or not the action taken would be "legal" if there was no head high contact.
So for Webster it looks like he comes I. Late after Simpkin had kicked the ball which would be a down field free. Because the action, even without head high contact, would constitute a free then it should be weighted more.
- Feb 14, 2014
- 5,274
- 12,750
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Yeah you don't jump up to make contact with someone's shoulder unless you are Liam Baker trying to bump Sandilands.
ferball
desperately terminally-contrarian
North Melbourne - 2024 Hugh Greenwood Player Sponsor
Veteran
North Melbourne - 2023 Ailish Considine and Bella Eddy Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2023 Aaron Hall and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
10k Posts
30k Posts
North Melbourne - 2022 Aaron Hall and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2022 Kaitlyn Ashmore and Aileen Gilroy Player Sponsor
- Jul 24, 2015
- 43,017
- 86,603
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
I reckon we'd all hope people in the AFL media are of strong enough character to call it out then.
If this sets the precedent for the season for attacks on the head, lets see how it pans out across the whole season for all of the players each week.
The BS meter has now been calibrated.
The BS meter has now been calibrated.
ElliottsMaggies
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 28, 2023
- 7,868
- 15,502
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Well it's set the precedent for a non football act of lining players up & charging at them whilst leaping off the ground & hitting them high after they've disposed of the ball.
Something which has never been allowed.
But its an illegal bump, even if he didnt get him high, it would still be a free kick down the ground. In another scenario If he was trying to put on a legal bump and attempting a sheppard, then it could be considered a footy action. This should be considered a non footy action as he is deliberately giving away a free kick even if not trying to get him high.
Ry009
Moderator
- Aug 26, 2002
- 22,236
- 28,600
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- MMA
- Moderator
- #865
AFL seem to ride the wave of public opinion. This one was widespread in its condemnation of Webster.
Cripps, Lynch, Maynard while all not intentional trying to take someone out - lacked duty of care and weren't suspended the last couple of years.
While there is no conspiracy - little doubt that the decision makers are heavily influenced by public opinion.
Cripps, Lynch, Maynard while all not intentional trying to take someone out - lacked duty of care and weren't suspended the last couple of years.
While there is no conspiracy - little doubt that the decision makers are heavily influenced by public opinion.
7 really is lucky for some
Should have been 10-12
Should have been 10-12
Not at a workplace I haven't! Wouldn't dream of it!
jdeezy
Premiership Player
- Jul 6, 2013
- 4,377
- 11,522
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
100% agree the AFL leans heavily into the public opinion which is heavily swayed by media opinion. Which is exactly why your Cripps, Lynch and Maynard didn't get reprimanded. It's not they weren't intentionally trying to take someone out, like they're some absolute angels. It's that those 3 are either in the boys clubs or big names / big teams. And the media didn't go hard at them because of that, so the AFL didn't have to either. We all knew at the time if Maynard was a fringe Freo player in Round 5 he would've gotten weeks for the same action.
I'm fine with this being set at a 7 week precedent (probably would've gone a couple more honestly) and the SPP one being set at 4, if both stay consistent through the year. Will we see the same penalty for Sam Walsh doing this on the eve of the finals though? I doubt it. And AFL hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt when it comes to these sorts of things.
- May 8, 2014
- 976
- 1,239
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Ah, the old 'it's not what I stand for' stock standard BS statement. Time for a new script, I think.
Yep- that will be the litmus test. Maynard should have missed time and didn’t and now this year, it's been ramped up. Let’s see how it goes- if they apply tough penalties consistently- most of us will be happy.
Would be absolutely insane in the workplace.
Mind you though, if I saw a colleague knocked clean out by someone that looks like they should live in a cave I probably would make some off colour remarks
- Apr 13, 2009
- 572
- 1,313
- AFL Club
- Richmond
I get the feeling the tribunal would have been happy to give more had the charge been intentional instead of careless. He got lucky there because it was definitely intentional.
3207
All Australian
- Jan 28, 2024
- 911
- 1,020
- AFL Club
- GWS
And the problem with the gradings - they are subjective.
This is not to excuse Webster at all - 7 weeks feels about right to me.
I am curious though - are there any good examples where a player has been running full tilt in an attempt to catch the player (tackle/smother etc), realised that they weren't going to get there, and found a way to avoid or change how they hit the player rather than turning the body for a bump? I'm sure there are plenty out there.
Some players, Webster included, very much are "see ball get ball" players who will never shirt a contest, and pride their game around this. Obviously he got it completely wrong, but it would be interesting to see some direction/education from the AFL showing the viable alternatives (even if it results in a free kick) than turning the body and bumping. For years players have learnt this behaviour as a way of protecting themselves but it puts the opposition player in way too much danger.
I am curious though - are there any good examples where a player has been running full tilt in an attempt to catch the player (tackle/smother etc), realised that they weren't going to get there, and found a way to avoid or change how they hit the player rather than turning the body for a bump? I'm sure there are plenty out there.
Some players, Webster included, very much are "see ball get ball" players who will never shirt a contest, and pride their game around this. Obviously he got it completely wrong, but it would be interesting to see some direction/education from the AFL showing the viable alternatives (even if it results in a free kick) than turning the body and bumping. For years players have learnt this behaviour as a way of protecting themselves but it puts the opposition player in way too much danger.
Similar threads
