AFL Player #20: Peter "Litre" Wright 🏅 - Pleads guilty at tribunal, 4 week suspension - 26/3

[Lore]

Contract Status: Free Agent (?) 2027
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 21, TheGrizz

 

[yodellinhank]

When you get graded the way Wright did then yes. Severe and high impact has no longer got any room to manoeuvre such nice they changed the rules after Maynard / Bradshaw .

Gradings determine the punishment length, not guilt.

 

[ant555]

Gradings determine the punishment length, not guilt.

Well watch this space . No one graded severe and high will be getting off .
Straight to the tribunal.

 

[Dons4days]

The sensible outcome here would be to ban either leading at the football or taking intercept marks. Both actions create too much risk for collisions.

 

[Squeaky]

The sensible outcome here would be to ban either leading at the football or taking intercept marks. Both actions create too much risk for collisions.

It's a collision risk minimisation sport

 

[yodellinhank]

Well watch this space . No one graded severe and high will be getting off .
Straight to the tribunal.

Gradings determine the punishment length, not guilt.

Maynard was charged with rough conduct, classified as careless conduct, high contact and severe impact.

Oh, but it's not rough conduct you say? Not guilty.

 

[Nicholas61]

Not enough initiative from the club - should have been truly groundbreaking and requested extra weeks once the 4 weeks was given.

 

[supportyourteam]

Not enough initiative from the club - should have been truly groundbreaking and requested extra weeks once the 4 weeks was given.

Not precisely. Gary Ablett senior broke that ground with a self report once.

 

[carloss]

AFL probably patting itself on the back today, but the suspension certainly sends a message to players. It will be interesting to see if it changes players attack on the ball in a marking contest. I think it will.

 

[Inspecta Gadget]

AFL probably patting itself on the back today, but the suspension certainly sends a message to players. It will be interesting to see if it changes players attack on the ball in a marking contest. I think it will.

Only the ones whose teams aren't continually kissed on the dick by the MRO and tribunal

 

[Dave]

Cmon guys, after the white line revelations this morning it’s clear Pete has something in his system that will take a month to clear out!!



For those with no sense of humour that was a joke.

 

[eighties_bomber]

2 weeks in a row this club has s**t on thier own players......no one should wonder ever again why this club sucks

 

[supportyourteam]

2 weeks in a row this club has s**t on thier own players......no one should wonder ever again why this club sucks

Well we do have a Dyson

 

[yodellinhank]

Not precisely. Gary Ablett senior broke that ground with a self report once.

They actually used to pump senior full of more drugs to get him on the field.

 

[sameolds33]

The sensible outcome here would be to ban either leading at the football or taking intercept marks. Both actions create too much risk for collisions.

or do we ban backing into a contest without looking - or do we still want that to be part of the game (so brave!) over attacking the footy that is being kicked to the leading player?

To me its like turning from a side street into the main intersection without looking. The duty of care is owed to the leading player by the defender. The defender doesn't have right of way in this situation - Cunningham should have pulled out instead of charging blindly into the contest.

 

[Cold Sober]

Badly advised.
King got one week for a past the ball elbow to the head.

 

[Saint]

Are you all kidding? Jumped, chose to bump (wasn't spoiling) and definitely wasn't defending himself. Can't see how it was anything other than carless.

Can't see anyone getting a bonus from pleading guilty so don't know why you wouldn't at least try to fight it.

He definitely didn't need to put his shoulder into the head.

Players need to learn that bracing with a shoulder might lead to hitting a head. Watch any other sport (i.e. basketball) and if they're going to make inadvertent contact upon landing, they put their arms out for a much softer brace than a shoulder. Outside a football field, this is human nature.

It's why Maynard should have got weeks too, for bracing for impact with his shoulder rather than with his arms out.

 

[brain taylor]

Can't see anyone getting a bonus from pleading guilty so don't know why you wouldn't at least try to fight it.

was gonna go up to 6 weeks if they fought it

 

[Chambo]

Piss poor from the club - To put up no defence and hoping by pleading guilty that they'd hand down 3 instead of 4 is laughable.

Even Gleeson admits that it was suprising that going for the mark wasn't even used

This club can't defend on the field and it can't defend off the field, continually rolling over to the AFL to get a belly scratch.

 

[boncer34]

https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2024/03/13/bfe20552-9e6a-4464-88b6-509b31d77ed8/2024-AFL-Tribunal-Guidelines.pdf

They use all of the below words to say "vibe". It's actually embarrassing they have put this to print.

Consideration will be given as to whether the Impact is Low, Medium, High or Severe. In determining the level of Impact, regard will be had to several factors.

Firstly, consideration will be given to the extent of force and in particular, any injury sustained by the Player who was offended against. The absence of injury does not preclude the classification of impact as Severe.

Secondly, the potential to cause injury must be factored into the determination of Impact, particularly in the following cases:

• Intentional strikes, such as those with a swinging clenched fist, raised forearm or elbow;
• High bumps, particularly with significant head contact and/or Player momentum;
• Any head-high contact with a Player who has his head over the ball, particularly when contact is made from an opponent approaching from a front-on position;
• Forceful swings that make head-high contact to a Player in a marking contest, ruck contest or when tackling;
• Any contact that occurs when the Victim Player should not reasonably be expecting or is not reasonably prepared for contact (i.e. contact off the ball); and
• Any dangerous tackle.

In the case of any intentional strike, strong consideration will be given to the distance the incident occurs from the ball and the expectation of contact of the Victim Player.

Thirdly, consideration will be given not only to the impact between the offending Player and the Victim Player, but also any other impact to the Victim Player as a result of such impact. By way of an example, where a Victim Player as a result of the impact from the offending Player is pushed into the path of a fast-moving third Player, the impact to the Victim Player may be classified as High or Severe, even though the level of impact between the offending Player and the Victim Player was only Low or Medium.

In addition, consideration will be given to the body language of the offending Player in terms of flexing, turning, raising or positioning the body to either increase or reduce the force of impact.

It should be noted that Low Impact is the minimum impact required for a Classifiable Reportable Offence and this requires more than just a negligible impact. The MRO may however consider the potential to cause injury to upgrade Impact from negligible to a higher level of Impact.



It's funny though, when you google it you actually also get this document from AFL Queensland which is actually written in plain English and makes perfect sense - even if you don't agree with it. Like it was written by somebody with a brain, not some dickhead bureaucrat. It looks like a local AFLQ thing though, don't think it's present in other states or the AFL:

https://www.aflq.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Set-Penalty-Guide.pdf

IMPACT GUIDELINES

Low – Minimal or no impact on the game, and Player continues to play unabated or was able to play, and No ongoing issues.

Medium – Clearly some impact on the Player, and / or the Player left the field for a lengthy period of time, and / or some possible lower level ongoing treatments.

High – Major impact on the player, and / or Was not able to participate in the remainder of the game, and / or major ongoing issues that require medical intervention and / or May miss some matches.

Severe – Major impact and serious injury to the player, and / or Likely to miss a significant number of matches.

Note – These are proposed base level impact guidelines. The impact can be raised under the potential to cause
serious injury.

TheGrizz

 

[Shanghaistu]

Well we do have a Dyson

100% this - we should negotiate with the AFL that the umpire wrote down the number wrong by 1 digit and the culprit was actually number 21. (At that speed, surely a 0 can look like a 1?) As a goodwill measure, if the MRO can accept this amendment, then the club can now graciously accept a 6-week penalty to the player concerned as a sign of good faith

 

[astrowizzle]

Essendon only suspension like most of them

That's the tax your pay for a red stripe

 

[fairbump_playon]

was gonna go up to 6 weeks if they fought it

Can anyone explain why you get more weeks if you ask for the tribunal to do their job and weigh up differing opinions?

 

[brain taylor]

Can anyone explain why you get more weeks if you ask for the tribunal to do their job and weigh up differing opinions?

because they don’t want to be asked to do their jobs

 

[fairbump_playon]

because they don’t want to be asked to do their jobs

I'm going to give an extra two weeks to anyone who asks me to answer my emails

 

[Blind Turn]

Wright might have created a symbolic moment where we begin to reassert ourselves onfield as a club that won’t shirk and hits every contest at full tilt.