Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Have to say it looked blatantly intentional to me..
Something the MRO didn't likeDo we know what smith actually did?
Yeah I knew it was misconduct but have no idea what that even means to be honestSomething the MRO didn't like
(C) MISCONDUCT
Misconduct has a wide meaning and generally is any conduct which would be reasonably regarded as unacceptable or unsportsmanlike or where it had the effect or potential to prejudice the reputation of any person, club or the AFL or to bring the game of football into disrepute.
Acts of Serious Misconduct will be referred directly to the Tribunal. However any other act of Misconduct will be subject to a fixed financial sanction to be determined by the MRO in his absolute discretion.
Astounding that it has been graded careless. Hawkins leaps, takes the mark at full stretch and lands before Hartigan swings his arm. Absolutely nothing about it was “in play”.
View attachment 1096203
Basically anything the MRO don't like but they don't know how else to categorise it - "you did something wrong, but we're not exactly sure what you did wrong, so we'll classify it as misconduct"Yeah I knew it was misconduct but have no idea what that even means to be honest
I recall the commentators said "he (Tom) was made to earn it". I don't see that all. Just someone who wasn't in the marking contest from the start.Astounding that it has been graded careless. Hawkins leaps, takes the mark at full stretch and lands before Hartigan swings his arm. Absolutely nothing about it was “in play”.
View attachment 1096203
Just can't see the difference between intent and impact to Rohan's hit on Neale, personally. Except he got him squarely in the head from behind, Hawkins didn't flop and pretend he had a broken jaw, and it wasn't a glancing blow off the shoulder.While I think suspension might be a bit strong, a citation at least surely. Show that they have an awareness of the issue and its not just lip service.
That one still image of Toma marking the footy (showing Hartigan trailing in without even a hint of an arm up to spoil) screams 'intentional'. In case anyone is wondering, the AFL has made it abundantly clear again in 2021 that the head is 'sacrosanct'. Until, just two weeks later, it quite clearly isn't.
This mob is an entirely risible and transparently partisan collective of arrogant and unaccountable scoundrels, only rivalled for unconscionable conduct by the appalling chicanery of the likes of FIFA and the IOC. And the deafening silence from virtually all and sundry in the media about this reinforces everything we already know about where our club sits within the popular narrative.
If only Hartigan could muster the 'courage' to produce this kind of wistful reminder of the 'good old days' against someone like Daniher for the Lions. Then we'd still be hearing about it a season down the track.
Still, carry on, AFL, nothing to see here...
They can argue it was done during play, not well away from it.Just can't see the difference between intent and impact to Rohan's hit on Neale, personally. Except he got him squarely in the head from behind, Hawkins didn't flop and pretend he had a broken jaw, and it wasn't a glancing blow off the shoulder.
I don't care if they don't cite him, but I'm getting a bit sick of the obvious double standards.
How? Where it happens isn't part of the determination.They can argue it was done during play, not well away from it.
Here...They can argue it was done during play, not well away from it.
Whenever there are these situations, that seems to get trotted out as part of the argument. Called in play the scope of careless or reckless or whatever they want to call it widens.How? Where it happens isn't part of the determination.
Yeah, I found itWhenever there are these situations, that seems to get trotted out as part of the argument. Called in play the scope of careless or reckless or whatever they want to call it widens.
Personally it was just another cheap shot that need to have heavy consequences.
lots of room for interpretation there, how long is 'just' after? 'Examples' aren't exact, etc.Here...
"An example of careless conduct would be where a Player collides with another
Player who has taken a mark and where contact occurs just after the mark
has been taken. The offending Player has a duty of care to avoid any contact
which would constitute a Reportable Offence by slowing his momentum as
much as he reasonably can and a failure to do so constitutes carelessness."