Roast The AFL aren't taking concussion and head trauma seriously enough. Lalor/Ginbey incident.

[EagleMan87]

Hopefully the AFL changes the rules, so that incidents like this are punished.

And, hopefully the first player suspended is a Tiger. The melts on BF alone would be enough to power the entire state of Victoria.

 

[Greggy]

Will the action be penalised from now on? Or is it only outcome? A WC player pushed a Docker into the legs of a WC player today and it could’ve broken his own players legs or caused a head injury to the Freo player.

Huge can of worms open here, pushing a player from behind into a marking contest happens every week. The precedent has been set I guess.

 

[Greggy]

From today

IMG 4062

Image IMG 4062

gifyu.com

 

[Timothy Luncheon]

Because after the Curtin incident, the AFL sent a warning out to the clubs.

Except there have been multiple pushes of a similar nature to the 11 they cited during pre season and said would be hit with rough conduct in the season, and yet literally none of them have gotten a rough conduct charge. I previously never understood why fans hated WC fans. I understand now

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

It’s weird to me that this wasn’t a green kick.

Surely the high contact supersedes the hold, even if the hold comes first?

 

[Shueygod]

Where are all the Richmond fans calling Mansell a thug and dirty player?

Think the clearest difference between this and the Ginbey incident is intent, It is very easy to work out Ginbey is likely to do more harm to his teammate going back with the flight than anyone else in the situation and thus would not intentionally push Lalor into him.

Mansell has no such excuse, the only thing that could have been accomplished with that push is injury.

 

[Obeanie1]

Troll, hypocrite or both?

Id say the OP is both sure.

Add one eyed as well.

 

[Obeanie1]

If there truly has been a "we're gonna crack down on this now" notification sent out to clubs.....then sure it's inconsistent, but nobody can say they weren't warned.

Not all pushes are illegal and dangerous.

But some on here think they are and they all should be treated the same way.

Which is clearly not correct.

Sev3rql of rhe other instances were between two players c9ntesting marks or on the lead. S9me had rucks wressling and shoving in marking contests.

This instance the players were watching an oncoming lead and marking contest. One player shoved his opponent into two players leading and jumping to contest a mark. Not a legal football act gone slightly wrong. And nothing like the others including Ginbey.

But lets not have truth or logic interupt an ax gringing session.

 

[BF Tiger]

Not all pushes are illegal and dangerous.

But some on here think they are and they all should be treated the same way.

Which is clearly not correct.

Sev3rql of rhe other instances were between two players c9ntesting marks or on the lead. S9me had rucks wressling and shoving in marking contests.

This instance the players were watching an oncoming lead and marking contest. One player shoved his opponent into two players leading and jumping to contest a mark. Not a legal football act gone slightly wrong. And nothing like the others including Ginbey.

But lets not have truth or logic interupt an ax gringing session.

And let's not have you being drunk at 6am on a Monday morning (assuming you are in Perth) interrupt you posting on the internet.

 

[Whiskers]

3 weeks????
Changed the rules already so this is a suspension so why can’t we line up the chart Michael Christian uses to determine what the acts deserves?
1 week is debatable but 3 is ridiculous.

 

[thistimeforsure]

They deemed Ginbey was looking at the ball, same with Curtin.

Mansell wasn't looking at the ball at all when he elected to push, he was looking at the oncoming players, so the only intention he could've possibly had was to push the Saints player into them.

I have to admit I haven’t seen the Curtain one but both Mansell and Ginbey shoved the player into the oncoming contest to try to disrupt it and get an easy ground ball

No difference at all from what I’ve seen , except they were facing in different directions

 

[bzparkes]

I have to admit I haven’t seen the Curtain one but both Mansell and Ginbey shoved the player into the oncoming contest to try to disrupt it and get an easy ground ball

No difference at all from what I’ve seen

Well, that's not what the AFL said in regards to Ginbey's action. They said his eyes were on the ball.

Mansell's is totally different, because he looks at the oncoming players before shoving O'Connell directly into them. This being after the AFL sent a memo warning clubs that players would be punished for shoving players into contests from now on, which happened after the Curtin incident which concussed Starcevich in the preseason, I think it was.

 

[thistimeforsure]

Well, that's not what the AFL said in regards to Ginbey's action. They said his eyes were on the ball.

Mansell's is totally different, because he looks at the oncoming players before shoving O'Connell directly into them. This being after the AFL sent a memo warning clubs that players would be punished for shoving players into contests from now on, which happened after the Curtin incident which concussed Starcevich in the preseason, I think it was.

Lol Ginbey was running towards the ball

Mansell was running with the ball

I had a look at Curtains

Ginbey 2
Curtain 1
Mansell 3

Purely differentiated on likelyhood of the action causing serious injury or even though no one wants to say it …DEATH

 

[bzparkes]

Lol Ginbey was running towards the ball

Mansell was running with the ball

I had a look at Curtains

Ginbey 2
Curtain 1
Mansell 3

Purely differentiated on likelyhood of the action causing serious injury or even though no one wants to say it …DEATH

Mansell looks straight at the oncoming players, then pushes O'Connell into them, his intent was never to contest the ball, that's why the AFL is coming down on this incident, especially since they sent a memo after the Curtin incident saying they would.

 

[thistimeforsure]

Mansell looks straight at the oncoming players, then pushes O'Connell into them, his intent was never to contest the ball, that's why the AFL is coming down on this incident, especially since they sent a memo after the Curtin incident saying they would.

All of them pushed the player into the contest to create some chaos and get an easy kick

Which way they were facing had **** all to do with it

Anyway I’m glad sanity has prevailed….. eventually

 

[bzparkes]

All of them pushed the player into the contest to create some chaos and get an easy kick

Which was they were facing had **** all to do with it

Yes and 2 of them were positioning to contest, and had eyes on the ball and one(Mansell) was not.

Now if the AFL had've sent the memo before the Ginbey incident, both he and Curtin possibly get suspended.

They didn't, so now we're here.

 

[thistimeforsure]

Yes and 2 of them were positioning to contest, and had eyes on the ball and one(Mansell) was not.

Now if the AFL had've sent the memo before the Ginbey incident, both he and Curtin possibly get suspended.

They didn't, so now we're here.

Ginbey should have BEEN the memo

 

[bzparkes]

Ginbey should have BEEN the memo

Actually, Hopper should've, when his push on Newcombe broke Day's collarbone.

 

[thistimeforsure]

Actually, Hopper should've, when his push on Newcombe broke Day's collarbone.

Fair enough

 

[yeahmate]

They should all be zero weeks fck me the game is getting so soft and over officiated

 

[Off Tap]

Richmond supporters - Ginbey incident





Richmond supporters - Mansell incident

 

[Scotland]

If "severity of outcome" of a collision is to take precedence over "intent", then players must also be suspended for recklessly causing head injuries to teammates.

Matthew Lloyd wiped out Blake Caracella back in the day. He should get weeks today. Would he? No, the AFL would call it a 'football incident'.

The AFL are trying to go down the same path as rugby in turning every on field incident into a legal proceeding. Rugby referees actually say 'mitigation' when they are handing out yellow and red cards.

The problem the AFL have is they totally ignore contributory negligence. 'Protect the head' 'The head is sacrosanct' is nonsense when players go looking for high contact. We used to laud the bravery of players who put their head over the ball, backed back into packs etc. because they prioritised winning the ball over their own safety. Now we are trying to turn every contest into a prosecution.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Matthew Lloyd wiped out Blake Caracella back in the day. He should get weeks today. Would he? No, the AFL would call it a 'football incident'.

The AFL are trying to go down the same path as rugby in turning every on field incident into a legal proceeding. Rugby referees actually say 'mitigation' when they are handing out yellow and red cards.

The problem the AFL have is they totally ignore contributory negligence. 'Protect the head' 'The head is sacrosanct' is nonsense when players go looking for high contact. We used to laud the bravery of players who put their head over the ball, backed back into packs etc. because they prioritised winning the ball over their own safety. Now we are trying to turn every contest into a prosecution.

Good post.

They're also having 50 cents each way when it comes to marking contests too, as they wish to preserve the Jezza high mark, often at the expense of the Jerka Jenkins head.

I love a good hanger as much as the next guy, and it would be a travesty to have it be removed due to the potential brain trauma it may cause.

But they can't go on about the head being sacrosanct, yet legitimise, endorse and promote the big knee to the back, side or front of the head, all in the name of preserving the highlight reel.

 

[Obeanie1]

And let's not have you being drunk at 6am on a Monday morning (assuming you are in Perth) interrupt you posting on the internet.

Your assumption is wrong. Again.

I'm not West Australian nor live there.

As for your reply. It's a reply when you have nothing meaningful to add.

So you believe all pushes are the same then?

No difference at all with the three instances?

 

[Greggy]

The idea that a player leading at the ball behind a forward isn’t also looking at what’s in front of him is absurd.