Ginbey/Lalor incident

[tigersnag]

When Mansell appeals and gets off it will only highlight what a farcical organisation the AFL is, and how inept and ineffective the MRP system is. It's laughable.

 

[HTPunter]

Not saying I agree but the AFL definitely didn’t just change the rules “mid year” like everyone is carrying on about. There were reports pre season post a run of these incidents that they would now consider them rough conduct.

Do I think Mansells case is particularly egregious, or did it have any dirty intent behind it? No, not at all.

But there’s no chance he’s getting off. It’s the exact scenario the AFL warned against pre-season - if you physically contribute to a player being concussed, they will punish you. Ironic considering the club involved but it won’t matter - the rules have been changed since the Lalor incident & considering media reported on it, I’d say the clubs were aware too.

 

[HTPunter]

Just noted that it was opening round that the memo came out. Easy to get confused with pre season with that round. Still think it applies. Mansell didn’t do anything that 100% of players wouldn’t do, but he’s gone.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

It always happens. The media make a fuss over a few incidents, afl change the rules, then the team that was impacted by injury first as a result of the conduct is the first to have a player suspended

 

[tiger_tough]

Not sure why I wasnt getting notifications for a thread I started.

I wonder if all the posters saying Ginbey would get off because a push isn't a reportable offence still think the same.

Mansell isn't getting off.

 

[G String]

Yep. I wonder who they are going to pick win this year's premiership.

Just think of the AFL of a mix of traditional football and WWF - it helps make it possible for me to watch without putting my foot through the TV

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Shouldn't be a suspension and I expect Richmond to appeal this

 

[THECHIEFTON]

Not saying I agree but the AFL definitely didn’t just change the rules “mid year” like everyone is carrying on about. There were reports pre season post a run of these incidents that they would now consider them rough conduct.

Do I think Mansells case is particularly egregious, or did it have any dirty intent behind it? No, not at all.

But there’s no chance he’s getting off. It’s the exact scenario the AFL warned against pre-season - if you physically contribute to a player being concussed, they will punish you. Ironic considering the club involved but it won’t matter - the rules have been changed since the Lalor incident & considering media reported on it, I’d say the clubs were aware too.

Did he contribute at all? It's pretty clear his light push didn't force the player into the contact. The saint player took 3 big steps back with the flight, eyes on the ball the whole time to try contest the ball.

 

[tigs2010]

Shouldn't be a suspension and I expect Richmond to appeal this

Our lawyer is a ****ing imbecile so I hope the other 17 clubs aren't relying on us to set the marker for what is and isn't allowed

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Our lawyer is a ****ing imbecile so I hope the other 17 clubs aren't relying on us to set the marker for what is and isn't allowed

I raise you our one mate, it's like we have the clown from the Simpsons

 

[stavro#4]

Did he contribute at all? It's pretty clear his light push didn't force the player into the contact. The saint player took 3 big steps back with the flight, eyes on the ball the whole time to try contest the ball.

His “light” push put him in the way of danger. Mansell isn’t even looking at the ball when he decides to push. So his intent is evidently to move O’Connell into that contest.

That’s the issue and I suspect if Ginbey had of been suspended. There wouldn’t be a tiger fan arguing otherwise about this.

 

[kane249]

His “light” push put him in the way of danger. Mansell isn’t even looking at the ball when he decides to push. So his intent is evidently to move O’Connell into that contest.

That’s the issue and I suspect if Ginbey had of been suspended. There wouldn’t be a tiger fan arguing otherwise about this.

 

[Cam Payne]

Ginbey gunna get away with this but the next player who does it will get a month.

I was right for a change.

 

[THECHIEFTON]

His “light” push put him in the way of danger. Mansell isn’t even looking at the ball when he decides to push. So his intent is evidently to move O’Connell into that contest.

That’s the issue and I suspect if Ginbey had of been suspended. There wouldn’t be a tiger fan arguing otherwise about this.

If the push put the player into danger. Why did he take three big steps, eyes on the ball the whole time and try contest the ball? IMO the player wanted to go for the ball. He didn’t try protect himself, he didn’t change his mind. His intent the whole time was to go for the ball.

The Lalor incident is different. He clearly is trying to hold his ground and is pushed from behind into the player backing back to take a mark. He tries to protect himself but it didn’t help.

 

[Simche]

I'm entirely conflicted about this for a range of reasons, but mostly related to the way the game is headed. Consequence based punishments are ridiculous.

Should Ginbey have been suspended if they wanted to set the precedent? Absolutely.

Mansell isn't looking to hurt his opponent. Eddie Betts summed it up yesterday that as part of small forward craft you're trying to move your opponent past the contest, create separation and go front and centre for the crumb. Its pretty standard.

There's incidents like this in almost every match and we're now in the space where if someone gets injured then someone clearly has to pay the price because of a supposed 'duty of care' for something that is getting extremely remote from a forseeable incident.

The way this is playing out in terms of dumb journos parroting things like causation, forseeability of harm, standard of care required etc. like they're actually trying a tort case of negligence in a real court just builds my frustration around where the game is going.

Mansell will get 3, Richmond and their supporters will feel justifiably feeling wronged given the Lalor incident and in a years time we'll be finding something else to rub people out for. I reckon knees to the head/back for a high mark must be high up the agenda next if we're going to take 'duty of care' to its logical extremity?

 

[Pomsta]

Never thought I'd hear myself say this but I am really looking forward to Ray Chamberlain's view of this on AFL360. His insights are actually really good.

 

[Whiskers]

If the push put the player into danger. Why did he take three big steps, eyes on the ball the whole time and try contest the ball? IMO the player wanted to go for the ball. He didn’t try protect himself, he didn’t change his mind. His intent the whole time was to go for the ball.

The Lalor incident is different. He clearly is trying to hold his ground and is pushed from behind into the player backing back to take a mark. He tries to protect himself but it didn’t help.

100% correct.
I do enjoy Richmond fans looking hypocritical and all usually but I’m siding with you on this. This suspension is utterly ridiculous.

This ‘push’ had no impact whatsoever. He isn’t falling or flailing around. O’Connell is brave/stupid, puts himself in a dangerous position. Players need to be looking after themselves aswell.
He took a courageous mark against us last week, this kid has no fear it seems. He was going back with the flight anyway.
It’s very disappointing Mansell pays the price and people cannot see this incident for what it is.

 

[G String]

100% correct.
I do enjoy Richmond fans looking hypocritical and all usually but I’m siding with you on this. This suspension is utterly ridiculous.

This ‘push’ had no impact whatsoever. He isn’t falling or flailing around. O’Connell is brave/stupid, puts himself in a dangerous position. Players need to be looking after themselves aswell.
He took a courageous mark against us last week, this kid has no fear it seems. He was going back with the flight anyway.
It’s very disappointing Mansell pays the price and people cannot see this incident for what it is.

Yeah I agree - the AFL have been pretty keen to find a scape goat for this but have chosen the wrong incident. I think O'connel was going to end up in that situation whether he was pushed or not.

They really missed the boat on this - there were many incidents during the pre-season (and even last year) where they could've made a stand but didn't. They've waited until the media jump on board and been forced to be reactive - again!

 

[smasha]

When Mansell appeals and gets off it will only highlight what a farcical organisation the AFL is, and how inept and ineffective the MRP system is. It's laughable.

Christian "I hate the Richmond Football Club"
That is all he has to say and we dismiss this farcical case and move on.

 

[tigersnag]

Christian "I hate the Richmond Football Club"
That is all he has to say and we dismiss this farcical case and move on.

There's still an avenue to appeal, that was just the tribunal.

I hope they do it just to show what a farcical organisation the AFL is. A clown show run by highly paid lazy morons

 

[Vikingnz]

This is probably a homer take, but what I'm seeing is:

1. Richmond player gets pushed and fractures jaw - no issue
2. Richmond player gets pushed and hits someone else high (no impact) - suspended
3. Richmond player pushes and other player concussed - suspended 3 games

 

[TwiggleyFanClub]

Pushing people headlong into a contest as a tactic is just a cheap act. A more opportunistic and sniping version of tunnelling.
I'm glad this is finally a reportable offence: it's overdue.
We've seen any number of incidents as bad or worse than this one lately, but there had to be a first.

 

[two blue tiger]

I'm ok with this suspension so long as EVERYONE gets treated the same. Unfortunately though, we all know that that simply won't happen.........

 

[LongSerong]

This is the most confusing part for me. How are that not comparable? Lalor got a bloody broken jaw which is arguably worse

 

[TheOptimum18]

Looking back on it after a couple of hours, I think a crucial mistake in our appeal was arguing that Mansell couldn't forsee Lynch and Caminiti coming out to contest the mark.

If I remember correctly, it was a clearance from the middle into an open forward line with 6-6-6. Any key fwd worth their salt would be going for that mark.

I'm disappointed we didn't go down the route of "is it reasonable for Mansell to forsee the hold on Lynch that places Lynch's arm where it was that resulted in O'Connell's concussion".

Imo, I think it's easier to argue that its unreasonable for players (Mansell in this case) to foresee an illegal act in a marking contest that leads to a concussion than arguing it's unreasonable for players to expect a marking contest.

Looking at the video, I think it's easy to make the case that if Lynch wasn't held in the marking contest, then he's able to raise his arms up to try and take the mark, meaning that O'Connell would've been pushed past the Lynch and Caminiti contest injury free.

You could make the case that Mansell was doing his duty of care by pushing O'Connell away from the contest rather than into the contest, but Caminiti's illegal hold on Lynch meant the contest didn't pan out in a foreseeable manner for Mansell to predict.

Clearly Mansell doesn't know about the hold on Lynch, since he is the one that actually starts to go back on the mark and ask for the ball, presumably thinking that the umpire has given the holding freekick against O'Connell for holding him.