Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Wellingham: How many weeks?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

How many "Intentional" have there been?
I have seen much worse than Wellingham's be classified as Reckless

An intention is a Barry Hall king hit
 
Watching that last angle on the replay it does look as though his eyes were on the ball right up until the very last moment when he looked forward and saw Simpson there. From that point he obviously had nowhere to go, it was too late to stop or change direction, so he instinctively protected himself by turning his shoulder into the collision. His only other option was to be absolutely clobbered in a head on head collision.

Seems reckless to me. He does wear a black and white guernsey though so it's anyone's guess.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Mobbsy said:
Did anyone see Wellers on GameDay ? I missed it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I watched his two sessions, he couldn't say much on the incident but did say he didn't mean to hurt Simpson and that's why he went up to him after the game was finished.

Maxy was on the panel too, but he couldn't say much on it either thanks to the communist regime of the AFL that allows no talk on anything important.:cool:
 
Bummer about the no clean record discount not applying. He'll end up with 3 weeks with an early. The MRP have to have no doubt in their mind that Wellinghams only objective at the contest was to cause harm to Simpson for it to be charged as 'intentional'. Wellingham clearly has eyes for the ball from the best camera angle and changes his mind very late in the piece to Simpson. That is reckless, not intentional. Front on bumps when guys lined up a bloke were only ever graded as reckless from memory. As BJ has said above, a Barry Hall king hit is intentional. Most punches are classed as intentional.

Crameri reportedly broke Addison's jaw. Graded as high impact. Goddard charged with intentional contact, punched Wright, medium impact.

I'm still yet to see or hear of any incident labelled severe for a comparison. The Crameri result appears the closest.

That means reckless conduct, high impact and high contact. 425 points less 25% for early plea is a 3 week ban.
 
will get 4-5 weeks in the end after the early plea and good record.

Deserves that, but he is no thug.

If you watch the footage he decides to go from 20 meters back going for the mark, and he got there about 1 second late and couldn't mark it, so he had to bump. If he didn't contest he would have been labeled a squib.

Ideally for us it is 3-4 weeks. Which wouldn't be a bad result.
 
SwanBet said:
will get 4-5 weeks in the end after the early plea and good record.

Deserves that, but he is no thug.

If you watch the footage he decides to go from 20 meters back going for the mark, and he got there about 1 second late and couldn't mark it, so he had to bump. If he didn't contest he would have been labeled a squib.

Ideally for us it is 3-4 weeks. Which wouldn't be a bad result.
Click to expand...
Freshen him up for the finals.;):thumbsu:
 
kade simpson is off for 4 weeks due to the wellingham bump for a broken jaw

if wellingham gets less then 4 then the sentance hasnt fit the crime now has it

why should the victom get more then the attacker

yes i am a carlton supporter , but i just think that knock didnt need to happen

4 weeks minum for wellingham should be fair thing nothing less

yes i dont think wellingham was setout to break a jaw or concuss anyone but he did set out to make that high bump
 
ozdevil said:
kade simpson is off for 4 weeks due to the wellingham bump for a broken jaw

if wellingham gets less then 4 then the sentance hasnt fit the crime now has it

why should the victom get more then the attacker

yes i am a carlton supporter , but i just think that knock didnt need to happen

4 weeks minum for wellingham should be fair thing nothing less

yes i dont think wellingham was setout to break a jaw or concuss anyone but he did set out to make that high bump
Click to expand...

That logic works sometimes and fails at other times. If a player hits a player late, and that player unfortunately falls awkwardly and fractures a vertebrate and can never play again, should the offender be banned for life too? In 999 other cases out of 1,000, the player get's straight back up with no injury.

In this case, I agree Wellingham should get 4 weeks but that's not related to the injury. If Simpson was uninjured and playing next week, I still think Wellers should serve 4 and not fewer weeks because there was no injury.
 
Captivating said:
That logic works sometimes and fails at other times. If a player hits a player late, and that player unfortunately falls awkwardly and fractures a vertebrate and can never play again, should the offender be banned for life too? In 999 other cases out of 1,000, the player get's straight back up with no injury.

In this case, I agree Wellingham should get 4 weeks but that's not related to the injury. If Simpson was uninjured and playing next week, I still think Wellers should serve 4 and not fewer weeks because there was no injury.
Click to expand...


i am probably speaking a bit harshly but however though i'll be honest i thought wellingham would get 4 and good behaviour point system he would get likely 3 week and possibly 2..

i think after reading about simo having his jaw broken and missing 4 weeks has made my blood boil abit

so if the sentence is fair then so be it
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Bay Pie said:
The MRP have to have no doubt in their mind that Wellinghams only objective at the contest was to cause harm to Simpson for it to be charged as 'intentional'.
Click to expand...

That is not correct. The actual test is more accurately described as thus:

"The MRP have to be able to draw a reasonable inference that Wellinghams intent at the contest was to engage in the offence of rough conduct against Simpson for it to be charged as 'intentional'"

Wellinghams intent to harm is not relevant, only his intent to commit the offence at the time the offence occurred.

Wellingham clearly has eyes for the ball from the best camera angle and changes his mind very late in the piece to Simpson. That is reckless, not intentional.
Click to expand...

Err, no; thats intentional. If he admits to changing his mind to lining up Simpson (i.e. forming the intent to engage in rough conduct), he is in strife.

If he gets off on reckless it will be because the MRP cannot reasonably draw the inference from the video replays that he was intentionally engaging in rough conduct when the impact occurred and the offence was committed.
 
Malifice you need to take those blinkers off. It was a marking contest and there is no swinging arm or raised elbow. If the elbow was raised or he had an arm swinging at Simpson, then no doubt intentional. You are going to be disappointed when this gets graded as reckless as it will. It's high contact and the only contentious part is whether it's classed as high or severe impact which is why I've requested if anyone knows of any other cases of severe contact. I think the only one has been the Barry Hall king hit. This was nothing like that.

If you are hoping for a severe charge, have a look at Beau Waters bump again. That was graded as low impact.

Reckless/high/high and 425 points. 3 weeks with an early plea. Seems fair.
 
Bay Pie said:
Malifice you need to take those blinkers off. It was a marking contest and there is no swinging arm or raised elbow. If the elbow was raised or he had an arm swinging at Simpson, then no doubt intentional.
Click to expand...


I agree; if the elbow was raised there would be no doubt it would be graded intentional.

The AFL inserted this line at the start of the year into MRP guidelines:

Change to Tribunal guidelines around intent to ensure that any striking action with a raised forearm or elbow will be classified as intentional, unless there is clear evidence the strike was not intentional.

That doesnt mean that this precludes findings of intentionality in other circumstances though.

Reckless/high/high and 425 points. 3 weeks with an early plea. Seems fair.
Click to expand...

Im going with Reckless/severe/high. But I wouldnt be surprised if he went for intentional/severe/high before arguing it down to 'reckless' at the tribunal.

Again, it will only be graded 'intentional' if the MRP can draw a reasonable inference that Wellinghams intent at the contest was to engage in the offence of rough conduct against Simpson. Enter expert evidence, testimony etc.

Re impact/severity:

In determining the level of impact, regard will be had to the extent of force and in particular, any injury sustained by the player who was offended against. Regard will also be had to the potential to cause injury. For example, contact to the head will generally have more impact than contact to the body if the force used is similar... In addition to the effect on the victim player, the body language of the offending player in terms of flexing, turning, raising or positioning the body to either increase or reduce the force of impact, will be taken into account.

Putting aside intent for the moment, if this isnt 'severe' impact, what (in your opinion) is?
 
mattys123 said:
Judge for yourself;



The more you watch it the worse it gets.:oops:

Am I allowed to say I enjoyed it, just a little bit.:p
Click to expand...


The replay at 0:26 is a the best view of the hit. Wellingham actually had eyes for the ball until he was in the air then he looked at Simpson he was just attacking the contest.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Malifice said:
Re impact/severity:

In determining the level of impact, regard will be had to the extent of force and in particular, any injury sustained by the player who was offended against. Regard will also be had to the potential to cause injury. For example, contact to the head will generally have more impact than contact to the body if the force used is similar... In addition to the effect on the victim player, the body language of the offending player in terms of flexing, turning, raising or positioning the body to either increase or reduce the force of impact, will be taken into account.

Putting aside intent for the moment, if this isnt 'severe' impact, what (in your opinion) is?
Click to expand...

As I've asked previously there seems to be little recollection of any other 'severe' contact. Beau Waters hits Grimes and sends him flying just as hard as Wellinghams hit only it doesn't make high contact. Nick Maxwell cleaned up McGinnity last year and got charged with high impact which broke his jaw and saw him miss sometime.Maxwell obviously got off that charge but rules have now been changed.

I would think 'severe' impact would have to see the opponent needing a mini cab to get off the ground. There was a hit many years ago by Jess Sinclair on Lance Piccione using an elbow and leaping into him getting him in the head when using a shepherd. That was graded high impact.

I would think severe is only used in extreme cases. This isn't one of those. It's unfortunate Simpson got hurt but it was. Marking contest that went wrong. There has been a few of these over the past few years with all being graded as high impact or less.
 
Vod Ka Nockers said:
The replay at 0:26 is a the best view of the hit. Wellingham actually had eyes for the ball until he was in the air then he looked at Simpson he was just attacking the contest.
Click to expand...

Looked like he had run off his line to impact on the contest with little other than malice in mind. The verdict does not soften on repeat viewing.
 
Footy is a tough contact sport. Injuries do happen.

But these days the players do have duty of care to each other. And what Wellingham did was, at a minimum, reckless. And that means that he failed in that duty of care.

A consequence of that there is a bloke with a sore face who can't go to work for the next 4 - 6 weeks. Of course Wellingham didn't intend for that to happen, but the fact is it did happen, and it happened as a consequence of his recklessness.

The honourable (and only) thing Wellingham can do is throw himself at the mercy of the MRP and cop it on the chin. just like Simpson did. And if he ends up returning to the field before Simpson does (which seems likely) then he should consider himself very fortunate.
 
The thing that makes it look worse was that he didn't get his arms up for the contest. If he had turned around at the last second and put his arms up he would have been okay and it would have just been a free for front on contact.

I don't think there was any malice in it, Wellers has been a fair and courageous player in all the time I've watched Collingwood, it was more a case of him overestimating his ability to impact the contest, he jumps to try and mark the ball I think but the ball is already in Simpson's arms leaving wellingham just to fly into Simpsons just a fraction of a second after being able to influence the marking contest. He doesn't put the elbow out or anything, he just jumps into him really and catches him square in the face.

It still doesn't look good on replay no matter which way you swing it, you have to get hands to the ball in that situation otherwise you are in strife. I don't think it's as bad as what a lot of people in the media are making out, asking for 6 or 7 weeks puts it in line with stuff like Barry Hall's whack and Solomon's flying elbow hit on Ling. Will probably get a month off considering Simpson's injury.

The worst part of it was that it seemed to stun Carlton into action. We had all the momentum at that stage, really disappointing all round.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Wellingham: How many weeks?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top