Search results for query: *

Sicily is a fool for that action. Opposition will keep targeting him, whilst he retaliates like this. But it's not worth a week - there's hardly any contact. Why don't they just give him a suspended sentence of 1 week. AFL is seen to be penalising the player, and he gets to play next week. If...

That needs to be 8 weeks. Everyone's been put on notice during the off season, and we've just had Brayshaw have to retire from concussions, and a Port player given 4 weeks for something what would have been 1 or 2 weeks last season. So everyone knows the rules, with that backgorund making this...

How long have you been watching footy? In that time how many attempted smothers have resulted in a concussion? I can understand it's not intentional and it might be 0 weeks or 3 weeks. I don't think the game is going to collapse if he is suspended - this is likely a rare event.

I think that's the key. If a defender starts out to spoil (a footy act) and misses the ball, and accidentally punches someone in the head and knocks them out, they get weeks for a "clumsy spoil". This is a smother that missed the ball and ended up as side on contact to the head. If this isn't...

Ok, I thought he said it was the official decision. Hope Siciliy gets off... the game is really heading in a direction where I'd prefer to watch something else.

It's on the TV broadcast. I'm just reporting what they said.

Wow, they just said he's been sent straight to the tribunal because it's severe impact and high. He's going to get 3 weeks, for something half of us don't think is reportable.

I'm just about done too... agree with your sentiments, plus my team has won bugger all games in 4 years. This is just an unfortunate accident - Blakey had no awareness, so didn't brace for impact. That's not the tackler's fault.

Need to post the next few frames to know if there was any contact to the head or not.

Agree. They are now penalising on potential to cause injury, which is why Logue got a week even when a free kick wasn't paid, and his opponent got straight up. This has even less force, but it's late and to the head. $1000 fine, and move on.

Some absolutely baffling decisions that all went against one team. Fortunately the result ended up being a blow out, so it didn't affect the result. In the end Carlton had two absolutely dominant forwards who did most of the damage taking marks between wing and CHF and moving the ball quickly to...

Deserves a week for stupidity. Why would anyone want to bump an opponent, when it could result in 3+ weeks if the opponent is knocked out? It's a lottery on whether this ends up a fine or 1 week... I don't care as long as the tribunal/MRP keeps it consistent throughout the year. We all know if...

I can't believe that in one round of footy, after all the media about Gary Ablett and other players revealing their problems, thay two players have tried to bump their opponent with moves that belong in the WWE.

This will be the last season with the bump being in the game. The cost of the class actions and the ex players coming out and revealing that football has left them with brain damage will force a change.

When did that happen? Was it straight after the Bailey Smith contact, or later in the game?

What does this have to do with it? Could also claim as an ex Hawthorn player and North coach he's further conflicted. But I can't see how that changes the decision Michael Christian has made to refer this to the tribunal and let them decide.

I wouldn't mind a red card system, that is adjudicated by league HQ for clear cut cases like this, or a Barry Hall/Andrew Gaff type incident. Run it like the NFL does with video review - have an ex senior umpire or MRP chairman watch every game live, and have the power to "call it in" so that a...

He was also robbed of a brownlow. One the greatest players I've ever seen, and could have been a triple brownlow medallist. Didn't help his cause that he was a bit of a mongrel on field, and was hated by all the opposition - so was harshly done by. Also seems to have an enormous opinion of...

I can't understand the debate in the media - it's clear that there is contact, and he will get 1-2 weeks. Hawkins contact with Dean Marghetts was likely an accidental or reflex action, and he got 1 week. This looks more deliberate - he's followed the umpire at the 3/4 time break, and then made...

Potentially very dangerous. They probably will look at this like Judd's pressure point and Lake v Petrie. That kind of crap needs to be thrown out of the game. It's off the ball, away from play, and intentional. It's time to give harsher penalties for these non-contest related incidents.

This is a really tough one. My first impression is that it was two players committed to get the ball, travelling at full speed towards each other. Sometimes accidents happen in contact sport. Bur there's zero chance he'll get off because it's what the AFL wants.

Don't think we even got a free kick for that, and it was in front of the umpire. Pay a free kick and that probably hurts more than a $1k fine, especially in a close game.

Can't agree with the plowman decision. I thought it was just an accident. 2 weeks very harsh.

I remember an interview years later, and I think he was still having effects from the Hall punch. At the time, some of our supporters who saw it couldn't believe how lightly Hall got off.

Can't agree with that, but I do feel sorry for May. It's an accident, I wouldn't be surprised if Hawkins didn't even realise there was contact made, given how quickly things happened. And less chance that I am biased, given Geelong is playing North this week, and a suspension would benefit us.

I thought I saw Laird grab his leg after the late bump. Umpire correctly paid a free kick, which cost us a goal. Gotta be the softest "high contact". And how is that medium impact?

That's probably what the afl want! I agree that in that split second he did what 99% of players would do. But blame the afl for the rules.

Spot on. The current rule interpretation means he should get 3. TEDDY24INC - not baying for blood, but just stating what the AFL rules have turned into. They do want a lawsuit like the NFL, so have basically outlawed the bump. Danger had no intention to injure his opponent, but he did. And the...

He'll probably get 2 weeks. Everyone should know the rules changed the season after Shaun Higgins was knocked out from a bump, and couldn't remember he'd become a father that day. Going by the grading system He should get 3 - giving his opponent a head injury, that requires him to be...

2 weeks would be fair. Only because the bulldogs play north in 2 weeks, not because of completely accidental collision.