MRP / Trib. 2024 MRP Lotto thread II

[gokangas]

Weitering only fined, who could possibly have predicted that

All it deserved tbh. Nothing in it really.

 

[giantroo]

No news that I could find on Sonsie from the VFL tribunal - the hearing was due at 5PM today...

VFL to appeal Tyler Sonsie tribunal decision

The Victorian Football League today notified the VFL Appeal Board and the Richmond Football Club that it would appeal the three-game suspension imposed on Richmond’s Tyler Sonsie for striking in last weekend’s Round 22 VFL match.

www.afl.com.au

 

[The Nostradamus]

Alright so deliberately going up to an opponent and punching them in the chin will only be 3 weeks

Good to know

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

Alright so deliberately going up to an opponent and punching them in the chin will only be 3 weeks

Good to know

It's hard to see how anything but the most serious of deliberate acts can be penalised more harshly than this in future.

I know that the league doesn't allow for precedent to be argued as a defence or to set penalties but if I was suspended for beyond 3 weeks I'd be firing up an appeal to the Privy Council or the HRC in a flash.

 

[shintemaster]

This will result in further structural / policy changes from the AFL (and down to the VFL) to the MRP system. This result indicates systemic failure.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

This will result in further structural / policy changes from the AFL (and down to the VFL) to the MRP system. This result indicates systemic failure.

There were four week suspensions for far less than an outright premeditated haymaker to the jaw.

 

[Kanga Glory]

Lemons not cited for his high round arm to Taylor who was eventually subbed out. Hmmmm, Christian couldn't be bothered

 

[muttley45]

There were four week suspensions for far less than an outright premeditated haymaker to the jaw.

Yep, Broad got 4 weeks for a sling tackle

 

[ferball]

Lemons not cited for his high round arm to Taylor who was eventually subbed out. Hmmmm, Christian couldn't be bothered

Hey GR have you got a gif of this?

 

[Merlin007]

This will result in further structural / policy changes from the AFL (and down to the VFL) to the MRP system. This result indicates systemic failure.

The structural change might need to be a police charge for assault.

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

Lemons not cited for his high round arm to Taylor who was eventually subbed out. Hmmmm, Christian couldn't be bothered

He does get aroused when a North player causes injury to an opponent.

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

The structural change might need to be a police charge for assault.

Honestly, it was a non-footy act and it deserves a non-footy investigation which may lead to criminal charges in addition to an appropriate football penalty due to the incident taking place within a league sanctioned match.

As of last weekend I doubt that tZ would even hire Sonsie to clean toilets.

 

[gokangas]

Interested in what others think of the Maynard report. I'm a real fence sitter here. Can see why some are calling for at least 3 weeks whilst others see no case to answer. I suppose even if it is an accident if you place yourself in a position where there is a risk then you have to accept responsibility for the outcome. Then again, he just went to spoil. Hmmmmmm.

 

[Only Forwards]

Interested in what others think of the Maynard report. I'm a real fence sitter here. Can see why some are calling for at least 3 weeks whilst others see no case to answer. I suppose even if it is an accident if you place yourself in a position where there is a risk then you have to accept responsibility for the outcome. Then again, he just went to spoil. Hmmmmmm.

I posted in another thread I think it is somewhere between this:



and this:

Hall knocked out after Duncan's smother attempt

Geelong's Mitch Duncan collects Aaron Hall, who subsequently gets ruled out of the game

www.afl.com.au

Jack doesn't knock Lyons out. It was graded as reckless, low impact, high contact. He copped 2 weeks, under the current system that would have been a fine.

I am not sure if Duncan was even cited.

the difference as I see it is the bracing for contact.

Where Duncan over rotated basically taking Hall out with his back, Maynard braces for contact and hits Brayshaw.

If you take what Jack's was graded and put it in the new system and adjust for impact, careless, high, high he's looking at a couple of weeks. If you up the impact to Severe, he's looking at 3.

If they grade it as an accident then he gets off. the sticking point will be the shoulder brace.

Also on the point about it being a smother. My son raised an interesting point on this, was he actually trying to get to the ball or was he jumping to make sure Brayshaw kicked the ball high making it easier to defend. His in tent has no bearing on the actions but it is an interesting tactical development if defenders are now jumping to force the ball high to make it easier for other defenders. Not something I had considered before.

 

[gokangas]

I posted in another thread I think it is somewhere between this:



and this:

Hall knocked out after Duncan's smother attempt

Geelong's Mitch Duncan collects Aaron Hall, who subsequently gets ruled out of the game

www.afl.com.au

Jack doesn't knock Lyons out. It was graded as reckless, low impact, high contact. He copped 2 weeks, under the current system that would have been a fine.

I am not sure if Duncan was even cited.

the difference as I see it is the bracing for contact.

Where Duncan over rotated basically taking Hall out with his back, Maynard braces for contact and hits Brayshaw.

If you take what Jack's was graded and put it in the new system and adjust for impact, careless, high, high he's looking at a couple of weeks. If you up the impact to Severe, he's looking at 3.

If they grade it as an accident then he gets off. the sticking point will be the shoulder brace.

Also on the point about it being a smother. My son raised an interesting point on this, was he actually trying to get to the ball or was he jumping to make sure Brayshaw kicked the ball high making it easier to defend. His in tent has no bearing on the actions but it is an interesting tactical development if defenders are now jumping to force the ball high to make it easier for other defenders. Not something I had considered before.

Good summary - I think the bracing is just a natural reaction when a collision is imminent. Will be a very interesting tribunal. My original prediction was 3 weeks and then dismissed on appeal. Have a feeling might still be right.

 

[Ashley B]

Old school rules he is fine . We don’t play that way anymore it’s “duty of care now”( not saying I necessarily agree with this )you choose to bump face the consequences if player is knocked out 2 to 3 weeks. Looking forward to his defence saying he got so high in the air he was blinded by the light towers and could see some cylindrical object( Brayshaws helmet)heading towards him so he braced for contact lol. Funny thing is Mr corrupt was going to say nothing Laura Kane made the decision to send it to the tribunal, says a lot really. One could also argue that taking Brayshaw out of the game (and at least next weeks)had a big say in deciding the result too. He had plenty of options and chose to bump .

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

I posted in another thread I think it is somewhere between this:



and this:

Hall knocked out after Duncan's smother attempt

Geelong's Mitch Duncan collects Aaron Hall, who subsequently gets ruled out of the game

www.afl.com.au

Jack doesn't knock Lyons out. It was graded as reckless, low impact, high contact. He copped 2 weeks, under the current system that would have been a fine.

I am not sure if Duncan was even cited.

the difference as I see it is the bracing for contact.

Where Duncan over rotated basically taking Hall out with his back, Maynard braces for contact and hits Brayshaw.

If you take what Jack's was graded and put it in the new system and adjust for impact, careless, high, high he's looking at a couple of weeks. If you up the impact to Severe, he's looking at 3.

If they grade it as an accident then he gets off. the sticking point will be the shoulder brace.

Also on the point about it being a smother. My son raised an interesting point on this, was he actually trying to get to the ball or was he jumping to make sure Brayshaw kicked the ball high making it easier to defend. His in tent has no bearing on the actions but it is an interesting tactical development if defenders are now jumping to force the ball high to make it easier for other defenders. Not something I had considered before.

I don't see how the Maynard incident can be considered accidental. Even if he intended no harm, his action was deliberate. The outcome may be a result of him being careless, but not accidental. In many previous cases it's been stated that when a player leaps into another when executing a bump and has launched with both feet in the air then the chances of being "let off" are slim to none.

All up, I can easily see that Maynard had in mind to spoil the ball or to interfere with Brayshaw's kick which is what he would be expected to do, however his execution was careless and as a result, he has to be suspended. Players know the consequences of fron on contact and they are well aware of having a personal duty of care towards opponents (and they should expect the same in return).

But... The tribunal were happy with Sonsie getting two weeks for a straight-up punch in the jaw so I expect Maynard to be fined $2000 and he plays in the prelim.

So long as he drops off a bottle of red or two to the tribunal chair of course.

 

[Merlin007]

This is a difficult case that the game has to give some pretty serious thought to. I agree that Maynard attempted a 'footy act' without malice - the problem is that footy acts of that kind are going to end in the game being litigated out of existence. 'Footy acts' of this kind are killing people, not (yet) on the field, but in the long term - the coroner found Danny Frawley took his own life, and the post mortem confirmed his CTE diagnosis, so it's not hard to join the dots. (You might add Shane Tuck

Shane Tuck

Age

42

Ht

189cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.4

5star

K

11.4

4star

HB

12.0

5star

M

4.5

4star

T

3.7

5star

CL

5.0

5star

No current season stats available

D

14.8

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

5.6

4star

M

2.4

3star

T

1.4

4star

to the casualty list, although his case is clouded by his post-footy boxing career, which didn't end well).

I don't have the answer, but some how the 'footy act' that sees a player leave the ground in that manner needs to end, and I think it can be done - players have been able to change tackling techniques to avoid head injury, and we have to find a similar way through this.

 

[outwecome2play]

This is a difficult case that the game has to give some pretty serious thought to. I agree that Maynard attempted a 'footy act' without malice - the problem is that footy acts of that kind are going to end in the game being litigated out of existence. 'Footy acts' of this kind are killing people, not (yet) on the field, but in the long term - the coroner found Danny Frawley took his own life, and the post mortem confirmed his CTS diagnosis, so it's not hard to join the dots. (You might add Shane Tuck to the casualty list, although his case his clouded by his post-footy boxing career, which didn't end well).

I don't have the answer, but some how the 'footy act' that sees a player leave the ground in that manner needs to end, and I think it can be done - players have been able to change tackling techniques to avoid head injury, and we have to find a similar way through this.

Really good post.

The game has evolved into a game that is so quick that collisions are going to happen. Players have to make a split second decision. If Maynard had not tried to smother the footy shows would have been getting into him for not committing.

I believe that this is a footy accident and Maynard will be cleared to play. I feel for Brayshaw but he knows the risks when playing AFL.

 

[leighlee13]

This is a difficult case that the game has to give some pretty serious thought to. I agree that Maynard attempted a 'footy act' without malice - the problem is that footy acts of that kind are going to end in the game being litigated out of existence. 'Footy acts' of this kind are killing people, not (yet) on the field, but in the long term - the coroner found Danny Frawley took his own life, and the post mortem confirmed his CTS diagnosis, so it's not hard to join the dots. (You might add Shane Tuck to the casualty list, although his case his clouded by his post-footy boxing career, which didn't end well).

I don't have the answer, but some how the 'footy act' that sees a player leave the ground in that manner needs to end, and I think it can be done - players have been able to change tackling techniques to avoid head injury, and we have to find a similar way through this.

I don't quite know how to say this without people coming at me (I understand CTE and needing to protect the head) but I just wonder if it wasn't a player with Bradshaw's history, would people be looking at this slightly differently?

 

[shintemaster]

This is a difficult case that the game has to give some pretty serious thought to. I agree that Maynard attempted a 'footy act' without malice - the problem is that footy acts of that kind are going to end in the game being litigated out of existence. 'Footy acts' of this kind are killing people, not (yet) on the field, but in the long term - the coroner found Danny Frawley took his own life, and the post mortem confirmed his CTS diagnosis, so it's not hard to join the dots. (You might add Shane Tuck to the casualty list, although his case his clouded by his post-footy boxing career, which didn't end well).

I don't have the answer, but some how the 'footy act' that sees a player leave the ground in that manner needs to end, and I think it can be done - players have been able to change tackling techniques to avoid head injury, and we have to find a similar way through this.

There's a reasonable argument to be had that a mark requires leaving the ground, as does a ruck contest but maybe, just maybe launching yourself towards a player for a marginal chance of a smother that leaves you unable to avoid serious contact isn't an act that needs to remain protected for the benefit of the game long term.

Noticeably nobody gave a shit when Aaron Hall was cleaned up...

 

[giantroo]

 

[Bren]

Griffith copped one, Maynard should get one

Neither IMO should have been suspended

 

[giantroo]

 

[rippersnipper]

If turning into a guy shoulder first isn't engaging in the act of bumping then I have no ****en idea and will pack it up. I see this as no different to a soccer player going in "to win the ball" and getting there late and just taking the bloke out. It can be a footy act and completely out of control and endangering and that's what it was. He had to go. If ****en Logue gets a week for actually protecting himself then that's at least two.