Danger hit on de Boer

[Woody15]

So what your condoning is a massive elbow being thrown back at an unsuspecting opponent? Okay then. And the follow up blind fist that could of hit him anywhere is ok as well. Yeah, no probs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Come on now

 

[Smedts_2]

What’s funny is you think you know what your on about, yet you don’t. What stuffed Shiel was a second hit by Astbury about 10 minutes after the Cotchin hit. A massive bump. But you clearly didn’t watch the game. I was there and have watched it as well. So, at least get it right when you’re having a crack.

So I’ve been trying to restrain myself from commenting on this thread even after the false equivalence of the Dusty to Danger actions that many clowns are trying to argue, but then I came across this bit of gross stupidity.

Absolute revisionist history bullshit.

The desire of many of you muppets to whitewash 2017 as the second coming of Jesus, without blemish, is as tiresome as your incessant moaning about anti-Richmond bias now that you’re just a good ordinary side again.

You deserved to win in 2017, you had some luck with Cotchin, and Dusty had an awesome season. That should be enough.

 

[Smedts_2]

View attachment 655396

Wow. Care to explain the relevance of the free kick against Mirra to this discussion...?

 

[Foley#41]

Wow. Care to explain the relevance of the free kick against Mirra to this discussion...?

Well given the penalty is a done deal, I sense that this thread has devolved to banter, so....
It’s a good headline though. I plan on using it often, especially after your use of ‘wow’.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Nah. You csnt throw elbows and punches. Fines make sense. But make them bigger for players beyond the 2 year controlled salary.

One of the more sensible ideas surrounding the fine system.
I'd instead make fines a fixed % of a players income, and the same flat rate $2000 for the base salary guys.

Players on 300-400k would have to think long and hard about doing something if it cost them 6k or 7k or 15k as a % instead.

 

[captain blood 17]

Come on now

So DeBoar didn’t go down when struck? Are we looking at the same footage?


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

 

[captain blood 17]

So I’ve been trying to restrain myself from commenting on this thread even after the false equivalence of the Dusty to Danger actions that many clowns are trying to argue, but then I came across this bit of gross stupidity.

Absolute revisionist history bullshit.

The desire of many of you muppets to whitewash 2017 as the second coming of Jesus, without blemish, is as tiresome as your incessant moaning about anti-Richmond bias now that you’re just a good ordinary side again.

You deserved to win in 2017, you had some luck with Cotchin, and Dusty had an awesome season. That should be enough.

Lol, so you come in over the top and don’t know either. Brilliant.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

 

[Hodge1]

Nah. You csnt throw elbows and punches. Fines make sense. But make them bigger for players beyond the 2 year controlled salary.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a clean game in rubbing out clear punches and elbows.
However I've seen more contact than that around stoppages, ruck contests and defenders making them 'earn it' in most games.

Love your idea where fines are warranted, current system is neither here nor there for cashed up players.

 

[Woody15]

So DeBoar didn’t go down when struck? Are we looking at the same footage?


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

I don't think we are. I am yet to see something that resembles a "massive elbow".

I have seen footage of Dangerfield throwing an elbow back getting de Boer in the guts. Not a whole lot in it though. Certainly not a massive elbow. There was probably 20-30 more powerful elbows thrown in that game than the one Dangerfield threw. A fine is probably fair enough.

The comparisons between this and Martin's strike I've been reading in here are rather laughable to be honest.

 

[captain blood 17]

I don't think we are. I am yet to see something that resembles a "massive elbow".

I have seen footage of Dangerfield throwing an elbow back getting de Boer in the guts. Not a whole lot in it though. Certainly not a massive elbow. There was probably 20-30 more powerful elbows thrown in that game than the one Dangerfield threw. A fine is probably fair enough.

The comparisons between this and Martin's strike I've been reading in here are rather laughable to be honest.

There’s no difference in a hard elbow to the shoulder/back or a hard elbow to the chest. I’m gonna assume you have played or are playing so you would know that. Both were hard hits.
So how is one worse than the other? They aren’t. And the MRP once again sends a mixed message. You can get suspended for a tackle, yet throw a hard elbow back and a blind fist - fine. It’s just crazy.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

 

[Woody15]

There’s no difference in a hard elbow to the shoulder/back or a hard elbow to the chest. I’m gonna assume you have played or are playing so you would know that. Both were hard hits.
So how is one worse than the other? They aren’t. And the MRP once again sends a mixed message. You can get suspended for a tackle, yet throw a hard elbow back and a blind fist - fine. It’s just crazy.


Sent from my iPad using righteous Bhodi manpower

Well there is a difference - One was to the head and one was to body.

Dangerfield's was not a hard hit.

Someone running at another player and striking them high with an elbow will always get a higher penalty than someone throwing an elbow back that occurs many times a game.

I think its time to let the Martin incident go hey captain? It was incorrectly graded by MC and subsequently amended at the tribunal. That is what the system is for. You challenged an unfair grading, and a fair punishment was handed out. Richmond then won against Port and now get Martin back.

 

[captain blood 17]

Well there is a difference - One was to the head and one was to body.

Dangerfield's was not a hard hit.

Someone running at another player and striking them high with an elbow will always get a higher penalty than someone throwing an elbow back that occurs many times a game.

I think its time to let the Martin incident go hey captain? It was incorrectly graded by MC and subsequently amended at the tribunal. That is what the system is for. You challenged an unfair grading, and a fair punishment was handed out. Richmond then won against Port and now get Martin back.

You’re right, Danger did hit DeBoar in the head after the elbow. Martin hit Kennedy in the shoulder as is on record by the player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Woody15]

You’re right, Danger did hit DeBoar in the head after the elbow. Martin hit Kennedy in the shoulder as is on record by the player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Martin hit Kennedy in the head as reported by an umpire standing 20m away. Kennedy also said he hit him in the head.

Dangerfield hardly hit him in the head. The force was not deemed forecful enough to warrant a suspension.

Is it not possible in your opinion that Kennedy was simply trying to get Martin off by stating it got him in the shoulder originally? Is it possible you’re taking Kennedy’s word as gospel and the absolute truth so that it suits you’re narrative that Martin was hard done by? I mean, you have stated tht Martin copped a fair suspension 1 week but here you are complaining again?

Its very simple - one was high, one was not. One player ran at another player from a couple of paces away with a raised elbow. One has carelessly/recklessly thrown an elbow back at a player standing immediately behind him and got him low.

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

So who was right smart guys. Lol at all the campaigners comparing danger to dusty incident.

 

[captain blood 17]

Martin hit Kennedy in the head as reported by an umpire standing 20m away. Kennedy also said he hit him in the head.

Dangerfield hardly hit him in the head. The force was not deemed forecful enough to warrant a suspension.

Is it not possible in your opinion that Kennedy was simply trying to get Martin off by stating it got him in the shoulder originally? Is it possible you’re taking Kennedy’s word as gospel and the absolute truth so that it suits you’re narrative that Martin was hard done by? I mean, you have stated tht Martin copped a fair suspension 1 week but here you are complaining again?

Its very simple - one was high, one was not. One player ran at another player from a couple of paces away with a raised elbow. One has carelessly/recklessly thrown an elbow back at a player standing immediately behind him and got him low.

Nah, he didn’t. You better read the statement Kennedy action stated in the challenge to the ban. You’re actually incorrect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Woody15]

Nah, he didn’t. You better read the statement Kennedy action stated in the challenge to the ban. You’re actually incorrect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

INITIAL contact to shoulder. Then stated he wasn't expecting contact to his head and was in shock when it occurred. Pretty clear he isn't denying contact was made to the head.

But as I have mentioned several times, I guess you only read into that how you want to see it.

 

[captain blood 17]

View attachment 655679

INITIAL contact to shoulder. Then stated he wasn't expecting contact to his head and was in shock when it occurred. Pretty clear he isn't denying contact was made to the head.

But as I have mentioned several times, I guess you only read into that how you want to see it.

So the initial force of the blow was to the shoulder and glanced up to the head. Danger threw a strong elbow to the chest and then glanced the head in an intentional second go. What’s the difference?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[justlookingaround]

Who will be next to hit de Boer

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

Who will be next to hit de Boer

He's turning into Ballyntine.. holding people's arms and being annoying as possible.. wouldn't surprise me if he pinches his opponent and pulls their arm hairs lol...

 

[Woody15]

So the initial force of the blow was to the shoulder and glanced up to the head. Danger threw a strong elbow to the chest and then glanced the head in an intentional second go. What’s the difference?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The difference is Martin made contact to the head forceful enough to warrant a suspension. Graded low by the tribunal resulting in a 1 week suspension. The fact Kennedy claims it hit his shoulder first is irrelevant. It resulted in a strike to the head that was forceful - a claim supported by the umpire.

Dangerfield made contact to the body where the impact was not worthy of a suspension. Elbows like that occur frequently in games - in ruck contests or general push and shove. The hit to the head was also deemed not hard enough to suspend Dangerfield.

Can I ask captain - you seem to be taking Kennedys word as the absolute truth? Is there a chance he was trying to help Martin out?

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Who will be next to hit de Boer

Should be good this week. He's a class act as a person and I cant see his ex teamates targeting him.

Following we have the Swans and they always pick on someone they think they can bully, and that's not him. So a couple of low key weeks I'd expect.

 

[Corkintheocean]

Not sure how McDonald gets a week for a play on the ball.

Danger gets nothing for a strike 150m away from it.

A clear example of why the result of any injury to the victim should not be so highly rated in the verdict.

 

[Chocoholic]

So the initial force of the blow was to the shoulder and glanced up to the head. Danger threw a strong elbow to the chest and then glanced the head in an intentional second go. What’s the difference?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The force used and the fact Danger had 2 seperate actions.

Your player ****ed up, accept it and move on.

 

[captain blood 17]

The force used and the fact Danger had 2 seperate actions.

Your player ****** up, accept it and move on.

Yep. Strick him with an elbow and then flew a blind fist that just clipped his head. 2 seperate actions. And i’ll post what i want thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[telsor]

So I’ve been trying to restrain myself from commenting on this thread even after the false equivalence of the Dusty to Danger actions that many clowns are trying to argue, but then I came across this bit of gross stupidity.

Absolute revisionist history bullshit.

The desire of many of you muppets to whitewash 2017 as the second coming of Jesus, without blemish, is as tiresome as your incessant moaning about anti-Richmond bias now that you’re just a good ordinary side again.

You deserved to win in 2017, you had some luck with Cotchin, and Dusty had an awesome season. That should be enough.

The revisionism is the belief that Cotchin's bump was the one that concussed Shiel.

The notion that he played on, quite well, for ~10mins afterwards, and then 'just happened' to suddenly notice the concussion effects after contact with Astbury is where the "gross stupidity" comes in.