Search results for query: *

It may have. But that’s the interpretation.

Yeah they are separate considerations and I don’t disagree. I dont agree with the afl that he should be suspended even if the ball is his sole objective.

I’m more interpreting the rules for myself. I think that if your sole objective isn’t deemed to be the footy, then copping someone high is a potential suspension, if the impact is sufficient. He got him high, accidentally, while not looking at the ball. I’d say that’s careless.

I think if he’d been looking at the ball there is no chance he should or would have been suspended.

I’m just pointing out how sole objective is interpreted by umpires. You have to have your eyes on the ball for it to be your sole objective, according to how the front on contact rule is applied.

Sole objective is interpreted for front on contact as eyes on the ball. If he’d missed head in his spoil attempt it still would have been a free against for front on contact because he wouldn’t have been deemed to have made the ball his sole objective.

The AFL prosecutor is going to push for 5 you’d think. The impact doesn’t get much worse but the level of intent is pretty low.

So not even a teammate can be 20 metres from goal on the boundary line for kick ins...

The new laws are out: https://sanfl-content.imgix.net/content/uploads/2021/02/18144238/2021-Laws-of-the-Game-WEB.pdf They have changed the protected zone for kickins (in addition to extending the mark). So now no one can be within 24m of goal all the way to the boundary. And the wording...

He pushed him into a chair. Not into the fence. Anyway, I’m not surprised he didn’t get off it. Concussion equals suspension.

Interestingly, the official match report doesn't list concussion. Maybe that's just because it wasn't picked up until he was tested for it at the hospital?

Will we see the plastic chair called to give evidence? "I put it to you plastic chair, that you were in fact responsible for deflecting Mr Guelfi into the fence head first, when he otherwise would have hit the fence with his body. Your silence says it all. I rest my case."

I reckon his head did hit the fence. But those stills certainly don't show it. Could have been his left shoulder. Or perhaps his left shoulder bounced off the chair, then his head went into the fence as a result. I guess we will only know if the eagles appeal. I don't think he would get off...

Do they show head high impact into the fence? I couldn’t see it. Be interesting if anyone could provide a screenshot that shows the high contact.

Time will tell I suppose. I doubt we don’t appeal.

He only got injured because of the chair. You can’t suspend someone on that basis.

The pyramid is against the rules. Climbing the goal post should be as well.

I think he was climbing up to block a goal. If his intention was to shake it, why didn’t he just shake it?

I think his intention was to climb the post to block a kick, not to shake it. A poorly written rule. If climbing is banned it should just say it. No free kick IMO.

When the AFL got rid of the discount for the early plea, did they move to the pre-discount penalty or the post-discount penalty?

I don’t think they knew the full details of what happened.

His level of dogness comes down to the intent. If he meant to punch him in the head then 100% dog. If he meant to punch him on the body then just as much a dog as everyone else who had done this. This is separate to the punishment though. You punch someone high you do the time.

Yeah. He will get 6+ though surely. I genuinely believe he didn’t try to hit him in the face (in just guessing here like everyone is) but if you intentionally punch someone and break their jaw then you are gone for a long time.

I just watched it for the first time. On the rules - it's 100% a kick and therefore a goal. But I'm not sure if this angle has been discussed, at what point does it become kicking in danger? If someone throws the ball up and then fly kicks it the same time that someone else tries to grab it...

A fitting post. Sums up this incident perfectly.

I just want to base my opinion on what the rule changes look like in reality. Is that too much to ask?

Best crowd in the business.

I got in a debate about holding the ball. As a result I tried to educate myself as best as I can. I feel like I understand it now, but just throwing this out there so I can be corrected (or to confirm that this is accurate). The rules are here...

A-boom-boom-boom-booom Let me hear you say MAYO!

I know. I guess that was my point.