MRP / Trib. Mansell Suspended 3 Weeks - Suspension Upheld

[DickieKnee]

The AFL are shit scared of lawsuits due to concussions. So now any contact that results in a concussion will result in a suspension even if the contact is fair and legal. Then the AFL can say look we tried to stamp it out. To avoid concussion completely in our game there'd be zero contact. It would be like telling boxers they can't punch.

 

[lllscroatlll]

the litigation mitigation agenda the cfl has chosen to run with will destroy what is left of the game, as run by this league.

why the **** don't we sign a ****ing waiver that we will not be entitled to sue over injuries occurring as a result of playing footy?

if you take the inherent risk of shit happening out of the game, what is left?

I've never met anyone who takes the field at any level who is not FULLY AWARE that coming off on a stretcher is a possibility.

mansell played that as true and clean as you can get. shit happens.

 

[G String]

I hope it gets judged in a similar manner to the Van Rooyen - it was a football accident while contesting the ball, as Goodwin said at the time, if he is found guilty it will affect the fabric of the game.

In fact there was another similar incident yesterday in the Blues/Ess game - where both players were sprinting at the ball on the wing - there was a big collision and it was play on. I hope both these incidents are used as examples.

 

[G String]

The AFL are s**t scared of lawsuits due to concussions. So now any contact that results in a concussion will result in a suspension even if the contact is fair and legal. Then the AFL can say look we tried to stamp it out. To avoid concussion completely in our game there'd be zero contact. It would be like telling boxers they can't punch.

Yep - the AFL are stuck because if you take the physicality out of footy it will lose its niche and audience. Irony is that they'll show this incident in their promos

 

[SavDog23]

can we just **** off this christensen campaigner already

he's completely useless

 

[lllscroatlll]

can we just **** off this christensen campaigner already

he's completely useless

cfl find him very useful for pushing their agendas. total puppet

 

[Yappie dribbles]

shoulder to shoulder no footage of head contact

txt book bump

in saying that will get 12

 

[Triggering Tiger]

I think it was a little clumsy but not intentional but more of a reflex action.

 

[sportshow]

Everyone - everyone - associated with the game should be shieting themselves about the result of this case .... this more than almost any other could change the whole fabric of our game .... and i don't at all trust "them"

 

[DickieKnee]

Dangerfield's hit on Vlastuin in the granny wasn't even worthy of a free kick according to umps never mind a report. It would be interesting to watch if someone could post both incidents back to back.

 

[TheOptimum18]

You can't accept 3 and be considered sane though.

I agree, but based on the current tribunal system, there would be 3 different outcomes:

1. We plead guilty to all charges, and get the minimum ban of 3 weeks
2. We challenge an aspect of the charge, win, and Mansell gets off with no punishment
3. We challenge an aspect of the charge, lose, and AFL will argue that because we didn't plead guilty and decide to fight the charge, Mansell will be given 4 weeks.

 

[energyquant]

Hmmm, I just went back and had a closer look. He glanced off the shoulder and caught him on the chin/cheek. He's gone.

 

[k31th]

I can slow that down if people want to analyse it (damn imgur doesn't have frame-by-frame playback, but the old gfycat service I used (seems dead now ) did support it.

 

[Groupie_]

Dangerfield's hit on Vlastuin in the granny wasn't even worthy of a free kick according to umps never mind a report. It would be interesting to watch if someone could post both incidents back to back.

how the fu*k did he not get anything for that * spits *

 

[Stars align]

I agree, but based on the current tribunal system, there would be 3 different outcomes:

1. We plead guilty to all charges, and get the minimum ban of 3 weeks
2. We challenge an aspect of the charge, win, and Mansell gets off with no punishment
3. We challenge an aspect of the charge, lose, and AFL will argue that because we didn't plead guilty and decide to fight the charge, Mansell will be given 4 weeks.

Just watched it again the violently changes direction at the last minute hopefully this is used to downgrade the charge
Mansell probably gets to ball first if it goes straight on

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

The AFL are s**t scared of lawsuits due to concussions. So now any contact that results in a concussion will result in a suspension even if the contact is fair and legal. Then the AFL can say look we tried to stamp it out. To avoid concussion completely in our game there'd be zero contact. It would be like telling boxers they can't punch.

As Jordan Lewis pointed out on 360 , what they are actually doing is encouraging players to take measures ( lead with head ) to get free kicks .
If they were serious they’d be educating players how to avoid injury to the head , not encouraging being injured .

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

how the fu*k did he not get anything for that * spits *

How is Tom Stewart able to ran past the footy to collect blokes regularly , including in last years grand final ?

 

[Wallaby]

In fact there was another similar incident yesterday in the Blues/Ess game - where both players were sprinting at the ball on the wing - there was a big collision and it was play on. I hope both these incidents are used as examples.

The one yesterday was quite interesting - the Collingwood clearly just 'pulls out' and tries to do a front-on tackle because he's worried about the possible 'illegal' bump. He makes no effort to 'protect' himself.
So he's trying to tackle, with arms only, a player who is running full-tilt straight at him.
The Melbourne player, who has the ball, sees the collision, and clearly (unconciously) braces himself for the bump - an absolutely normal action. But he definitely chose to 'go the bump' - so, are players allowed to bump if you have the ball?

I add, that I think the Melbourne player did everything right and nothing unfair.

 

[DickieKnee]

The one yesterday was quite interesting - the Collingwood clearly just 'pulls out' and tries to do a front-on tackle because he's worried about the possible 'illegal' bump. He makes no effort to 'protect' himself.
So he's trying to tackle, with arms only, a player who is running full-tilt straight at him.
The Melbourne player, who has the ball, sees the collision, and clearly (unconciously) braces himself for the bump - an absolutely normal action. But he definitely chose to 'go the bump' - so, are players allowed to bump if you have the ball?

I add, that I think the Melbourne player did everything right and nothing unfair.

If they penalise a player with the ball who braces for contact then it's gonna lead to a situation where players don't brace and leave themselves open for more injuries.

 

[robin kennedy]

how the fu*k did he not get anything for that * spits *

I agree re the incident but it was 3 seasons ago now and would possibily be judged differently today. Do we, the AFL and or the football communtiy, still consider, promate our game as a contact sport? If so accept that is what it is nad the fact that there are going to be collisions and consequences as such. As stated in another post, get the guys to sign a waiver accepting the risk that is inherent if you choose to play the game, particually at this level where by you are well rewarded financially for what you do and as such live a life most would otherwise never experience. Either that or declare it a non contact sport and change the name of the game to "Shocking" as that is what the product does become. (I am not implying I am against proetction of the players, ie: the stance on sling tackles is fine, but if we are going to remove contests like this the game is in trouble.)

 

[energyquant]

The one yesterday was quite interesting - the Collingwood clearly just 'pulls out' and tries to do a front-on tackle because he's worried about the possible 'illegal' bump. He makes no effort to 'protect' himself.
So he's trying to tackle, with arms only, a player who is running full-tilt straight at him.
The Melbourne player, who has the ball, sees the collision, and clearly (unconciously) braces himself for the bump - an absolutely normal action. But he definitely chose to 'go the bump' - so, are players allowed to bump if you have the ball?

I add, that I think the Melbourne player did everything right and nothing unfair.

I think you are talking about this clash.

Bone-crunching crash sends 'G wild

A massive collision between Lachie Hunter and Will Hoskin-Elliott gets the stadium buzzing

www.afl.com.au

That was brutal - tackling a charging player front on is one of the hardest things to do. I agree. Almost every player in that circumstance would choose to bump.

 

[jc12]

This shits me, careless, severe and high it's classified. We have no chance contesting high because it was a head knock and severe because he was concussed. Our only way to beat the charge is challenging the classification of careless.
AFL tribunal states
View attachment 1710130
The key part being "a Player will be careless if they breach their duty to take reasonable care to avoid acts which can be reasonably forseen".
We need to successfully argue that Mansell only had eyes on the ball, both players did, both players were within their rights to contest the ball together and the time taken to avoid contact was unreasonable to expect Mansell to slow down or stop.

I can't see the AFL over turning it because they are assholes but if this is considered as bad as what Degoey or Pickett did then the AFL can GAGF.

If that's careless then what is what Dangerfield did in the 2020 gf ? Pretty careless to leave your elbow out like that. It's basically a lottery

 

[SunshineBoy]

Dangerfield's hit on Vlastuin in the granny wasn't even worthy of a free kick according to umps never mind a report. It would be interesting to watch if someone could post both incidents back to back.

 

[Groupie_]

View attachment 1711563

he raises the elbow and hits him in the farrken jaw lol

 

[SunshineBoy]

he raises the elbow and hits him in the farrken jaw lol

According to w***er whateley footy action