Can the AFL appeal?
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Toby Greene boot to Luke Dahlhaus face.
- Thread starter BG32
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
They could appeal houli's one because the process was incorrect (2 weeks despite the grading system saying 4 weeks). In this case, the process is again incorrect. If Greene's boot was both reasonable and necessary, he has not committed any misconduct. If not, it's a classifiable offence and can't be misconduct. I think if it was made public that the process was incorrect, they'd have no choice but to appeal.
Smartest Brain
Premiership Player
Lol at the flowers in here wanting blood for a cut lip. Grow up boys and girls. Greene is one of the best players in the afl. The Giants era is beginning.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Aug 12, 2013
- 10,124
- 11,377
- AFL Club
- GWS
Everybody who knows the game seems to understand.
Those who are just "followers" dont seem to understand.
- Aug 12, 2013
- 10,124
- 11,377
- AFL Club
- GWS
Waite and Daniher would beg the differ.
But thats just and example of outside your 175 years.
The MRP deemed it "in his own space" so as no deliberate action taken by Toby to hurt another player.
Most posters on here cant seem to understand that part of the equation.
Hopefully the Giants appeal the unjust and illegal fine handed down which muddied the outcome for all.
Last edited:
But according to all the rulings these days, the head is not considered an acceptable 'contact' in this contact sport is it.
LOL.
Eliteflyboy
All Australian
- Aug 2, 2015
- 609
- 744
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Banned
- #1,184
Huh? So some of the legends of the games such as Matthews and Roos are just "followers" and don't understand?
I know you're taking the piss, but I hope they appeal too. He was either "innocent" because you can defend your own space or guilty because you can't.
Well, the precedent has been set. You can bring your foot up as high as it can go and fend off a player with a boot to the face. Awesome.
Take away the fact that it was as dirty as it gets, it was a pretty effective move. Greene would've been caught otherwise. Every player in the comp would've seen the incident by now and how effective it was and now that they know that it's perfectly legal it could very well become a regular thing now. A high fend off with your hand is a free kick to the opposition. Fend an opponent off with the stops of your boot? Play on!
The precedent has indeed been set and I can't wait to see how it backfires!
The "nuffin' in it!" tools in this thread will be singing a different tune the day such a move knocks one of their teams players out.
How there isn't already a rule that you can't stick your f'ing foot out in the first place is beyond me.
Funny how it wasn't play on at all, wondering if you even seen the incident.
You want to know whats ****ed? I gurantee Greene will not change his behaviour in the slightest as he hasn't been suspended. He will cop the free kick and fine, just to piss off the other team and possibly make them play worse. Book mark it - we will see Greene do this in the next 2-3 yrs.
Well done. Gosh he's a dirty player. But he gets away with it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Nov 23, 2016
- 10,558
- 7,070
- AFL Club
- GWS
No and he didn't rob a bank on the way to the game either.
In fact if course no one ever said it eas accidental. He had eyes on the ball and stuck out his leg to protect himself, this is common. At issue is whether it was reasonable in the circumstances.
You can get really angry, you can even whinge and whine all you wish. It changes nothing.
I wouldn't worry too much about it, all the so called experts in here, thinking they know the rules and got it wrong, they are a little hurt.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
When it comes to protecting your space, the old dont argue reigns supreme alongside running straight thru someone coming back at you.
The simple fend off can go horribly wrong, resulting in eye injuries and often something that simply "looks bad" to the throat.
Then what will you argue about ?...after lets say, Eddie Betts has a detached retina from a Dustin Martin fend off. Did he mean it ? Looked bad.
A foot that isnt a kick is worse than a hand that isnt a punch ?
I for one STILL wont see anything more than an accident and/or part of footy...a contact sport with a few idiosyncracies that do not need to be justified to the eternally outraged.
If you are desperate to be outraged about something...look at the number of man buns going around. Thats a true phukkin disgrace.
Correct decision on Greene.
The simple fend off can go horribly wrong, resulting in eye injuries and often something that simply "looks bad" to the throat.
Then what will you argue about ?...after lets say, Eddie Betts has a detached retina from a Dustin Martin fend off. Did he mean it ? Looked bad.
A foot that isnt a kick is worse than a hand that isnt a punch ?
I for one STILL wont see anything more than an accident and/or part of footy...a contact sport with a few idiosyncracies that do not need to be justified to the eternally outraged.
If you are desperate to be outraged about something...look at the number of man buns going around. Thats a true phukkin disgrace.
Correct decision on Greene.
- Nov 23, 2016
- 10,558
- 7,070
- AFL Club
- GWS
Jack Gun Cyril Stun
Club Legend
- Oct 5, 2012
- 1,237
- 1,505
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
That's a marking contest, different rules apply and Dogs player has to be expecting foot contact if Greene about to mark and is basically stationary waiting for the ball. You learn know that from early junior days or at least most do. The onus is on the dogs player in that situation not Greene.
The one from last week was not a marking contest so different rules apply and duty of care was on both players contesting ball which I thought Greene clearly failed once high contact was made (like choosing to bump) so he was in trouble but MRP wriggled out of it by not having to grade it and used misconduct which made little sense.
It also failed the Leigh Mathews test which usually is a fair benchmark for most afl things but not so this time.
Look forward to next week when MRP stump everyone again.
Last edited:
Mutt
Moderator
- Moderator
- #1,199
It is not ok, and has never been ok, to strike a player head high with your boot and especially with your stops. In a marking contest you get more leeway and can use a bent knee, or even a straight leg which strikes another player below the shoulders. But it is not, and never has been acceptable to strike/kick another player above the shoulders with your boot, whether in a marking contest or not.
Why Toby Greene's actions were virtually unheard of in the past is that the players enforced their own code of conduct. Toby would have been dealt with on the field and he soon would have learned that kicking another player in the head brought consequences that were too severe to contemplate ever doing it again. Those days when players self-regulated certain unacceptable behaviour are long gone, and the game is better for it.
Now we expect the umpires and the Tribunal/MRP to protect players and discourage unacceptable behaviour by meting out severe penalties to ensure players don't infringe. The AFL needs to take a stand to eliminate this kicking action - but once again the AFL has failed to protect the players in the contest and so Toby, and perhaps others, will continue to strike opponents in the face with their boots until someone is seriously injured. Then of course the AFL will over-correct and make an example of someone who was merely doing what the AFL had previously been soft on.
- Nov 23, 2016
- 10,558
- 7,070
- AFL Club
- GWS
Actually it's clear that isn't the case. Nobody can look at what happened and make a credible case Toby struck anyone.
