- Feb 21, 2006
- 20,735
- 19,581
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Turtles, NYJets, Celtics, Tottenham
I struggle to understand some of the decisions made these days. Not just the decisions but the commentary around it.
Am I just looking at this through red and blue lenses? How did it get to the stage where a bump like that is given a weeks holiday? Surely the impact was not severe enough as to warrant a suspension? There was no concussion, no injury, it's not even clear that he got him high. Basically it seems May was suspended for being bigger and stronger than his opponent. Yeah the bump probably shook Berry up but that's because he's such a lighter frame than May.
Christian said part of the consideration in making the decision was the "look". So now decisions are made not just based on intent or even outcome but the "look" of it even if it wasn't in reality that bad? I'm pretty shocked at the commentary around this, not the fact he got a week because Michael Christian is an idiot, but the talking heads agreeing that it's deserving of a week. Look at it in real time in the context of the play, not just the slowmo gif. Yeah he initiated contact and put Berry on his arse but I didn't think it deserves a free kick let alone a suspension. Umpires didn't either as it was just called play on.
What do you guys think? Am I just biased? I'm expecting Brisbane and Port supporters to be in agreement that it deserves a penalty but what do the rest of you think?
Am I just looking at this through red and blue lenses? How did it get to the stage where a bump like that is given a weeks holiday? Surely the impact was not severe enough as to warrant a suspension? There was no concussion, no injury, it's not even clear that he got him high. Basically it seems May was suspended for being bigger and stronger than his opponent. Yeah the bump probably shook Berry up but that's because he's such a lighter frame than May.
Christian said part of the consideration in making the decision was the "look". So now decisions are made not just based on intent or even outcome but the "look" of it even if it wasn't in reality that bad? I'm pretty shocked at the commentary around this, not the fact he got a week because Michael Christian is an idiot, but the talking heads agreeing that it's deserving of a week. Look at it in real time in the context of the play, not just the slowmo gif. Yeah he initiated contact and put Berry on his arse but I didn't think it deserves a free kick let alone a suspension. Umpires didn't either as it was just called play on.
What do you guys think? Am I just biased? I'm expecting Brisbane and Port supporters to be in agreement that it deserves a penalty but what do the rest of you think?