AFL Player 27: Mason Redman 🐕 - Goes whack

[Lore]

Contract Status: Free Agent 2028
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 24, ghostdog

 

[boncer34]

lololol the afl arent even trying anymore

To what?

 

[Lore]

It wasn't a sling so it shouldn't be an automatic week. I actually thought Bont jumped a little which made it look worse.

The impact is where you challenge. Lore your a bit more knowledgeable than me, if it was low that downgrades it to a fine correct?

I'd be challenging straight away. We will need him in form and playing the next two weeks to do what we need to do.

https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2021/03/22/221593f5-9b5b-46c7-b038-b032283fcd41/2021-AFL-Tribunal-Guidelines.pdf

 

[andleanback]

Any footage of that one? That's the game I was thinking of.
There was like 6 dangerous tackle free kicks that game and I don't think a single suspension.

 

[Lore]

Argue low impact and get it reduced. Cut and dry.

The Selwood comparison is completely irrelevant.

Idk why he included the Selwood comparison, probably making some sort of point about the MRO/Tribunal lately.

Challenge for low impact seems to be the consensus

 

[Zach Package]

Amongst a very long list of things wrong with this is the fact that he has no real other recourse here apart from not tackle him. Bont being far too big and strong for him caused this

 

[ant555]

It is clear that with this along with the continue holding the ball confusion that the AFL wants to eliminate tackling from the game.

 

[boncer34]

Idk why he included the Selwood comparison, probably making some sort of point about the MRO/Tribunal lately.

Challenge for low impact seems to be the consensus

Pinned the arm so Bont couldn't protect himself, head bounced into the turf.

Pretty clear cut dangerous tackle under the letter of the law. Impact makes no sense.

 

[Paul Mac]

Sorry for intrusion people but i came across the redman video while watching the starcevich bump from the lions. The redman decision is a joke and you have to appeal. MRO Michael Christian has lost the plot and needs to vacate his position immediately. He has no idea what he is doing anymore. On the one hand he is making the dumbest decisions you could imagine or on the other hand he has his favourites and looks after them.

 

[Yoda_]

It is clear that with this along with the continue holding the ball confusion that the AFL wants to eliminate tackling from the game.

Go out of my way to watch NRL if Essendon isn’t on now a days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DERO]

He’s a bit stiff yeah?

 

[Stopher]

Chris Johnson

Chris Johnson

Age

49

Ht

180cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.7

4star

K

8.6

3star

HB

5.1

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.0

4star

No current season stats available

D

9.0

3star

K

7.0

3star

HB

2.0

2star

M

3.2

4star

T

1.4

4star

summed it up perfectly:

'I'm not too sure what Redman is supposed to do there'

In one.

 

[windyhill]

Stop tackling bont.

 

[WindyHillWarrior]

To what?

find discrete ways to make shit up as they go along

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

AFL can shoulder some responsibility if Bont was hurt, should have paid holding the ball quicker. Can clearly see him fake the hand off so there's prior.

****ing around is human, finding out is divine.

 

[Phone]

Pinned the arm so Bont couldn't protect himself, head bounced into the turf.

Pretty clear cut dangerous tackle under the letter of the law. Impact makes no sense.

Yep, this is it. It's not at all surprising to me that Redmond was cited, I pointed out in the GD thread that if Bont had been concussed it would have been a slam dunk suspension, but the medium impact is difficult to understand assuming Bont has not suffered any delayed concussion (as well as no heavy sling action). Christian has obviously been knocked back a fair bit at the tribunal this year so you challenge it and see what happens. The comparison to make is with Buddy, not Selwood. Buddy got hit with medium impact when the MRP historically has under punished elbows and he got it moved back down to low and that usual level. That would be the tactic for Essendon to take as well. Low impact and fined is the appropriate punishment.

 

[Runk]

Go and get ****ed

 

[TheFrenchCut]

 

[boncer34]

find discrete ways to make sh*t up as they go along

On impact sure appears like he's picked it outta a hat.

 

[scyth]

Absolute total ****ing bullshit. It was a legal tackle and a clear HTB.

 

[andleanback]

Idk why he included the Selwood comparison, probably making some sort of point about the MRO/Tribunal lately.

Challenge for low impact seems to be the consensus

I think the comparison is if they are suspending the action not the outcome with redman, how come selwood doesn’t get suspended on the action not the outcome.

 

[citizen-erased]

Stop tackling bont.

Or elbow him in the head. Far more acceptable

 

[boncer34]

The rule he's been pinged under for anyone interested:

The Player being tackled is in a vulnerable position (e.g. arm(s) pinned)
with little opportunity to protect himself;

 

[Mercurial89]

Yep, this is it. It's not at all surprising to me that Redmond was cited, I pointed out in the GD thread that if Bont had been concussed it would have been a slam dunk suspension, but the medium impact is difficult to understand assuming Bont has not suffered any delayed concussion (as well as no heavy sling action). Christian has obviously been knocked back a fair bit at the tribunal this year so you challenge it and see what happens. The comparison to make is with Buddy, not Selwood. Buddy got hit with medium impact when the MRP historically has under punished elbows and he got it moved back down to low and that usual level. That would be the tactic for Essendon to take as well. Low impact and fined is the appropriate punishment.

I don't mind the suspension if we have this rubbed out all year.
We havnt so it's so odd to cop this now late in the year.

The issue of course is this happens every year. Some rogue late decisions that seem to go against the established way things had operated most of the year.

If there was a concussion, sure rub him out.
If there had been this act suspended all year, sure rub him out.

Neither of those appears to be the case.

 

[YEMOC NAYR]

The rule he's been pinged under for anyone interested:

The Player being tackled is in a vulnerable position (e.g. arm(s) pinned)
with little opportunity to protect himself;

Used to be called the perfect tackle. Unfortunate.

 

[nylexbandit]

I would argue the ridiculous grading of it as medium impact should be challenged, and we should also challenge the suggestion it meets the criteria for dangerous tackle:
“3. Rough Conduct (Dangerous Tackles)
The application of a tackle may be considered Rough Conduct which is unreasonable in the circumstances. In determining whether the application of a tackle constitutes a Reportable Offence and whether the offence is Careless or Intentional, without limitation, regard may be had to the following factors, whether:
» The tackle consists of more than one action, regardless of whether the Player being tackled is in possession of the ball;
» The tackle is of an inherently dangerous kind, such as a spear tackle or a tackle where a Player is lifted off the ground;
» The Player being tackled is in a vulnerable position (e.g. arm(s) pinned) with little opportunity to protect himself;
» An opponent is slung, driven or rotated into the ground with excessive force"

While the list above suggests it is 'without limitation' it clearly identifies the type of actions that should constitute rough conduct for a tackle. In this case:
1) there is a single action;
2) the tackle is not inherently dangerous - there is no spearing or lifting;
3) Bontempelli is not in a vulnerable position as intended by the purpose of the rules (being arm's pinned or no opportunity to protect). Any vulnerability or lack of protection is created by Bontempelli, not by the tackler. He has every opportunity to use his free hand to brace any impact, but chooses to hold the ball instead. This should be no different to if a player had both hands free when tackled and chose not to brace, whether holding on to the ball or otherwise. I can't see any way that scenario should be treated as a player in a vulnerable position, and likewise Bontempelli's choice to hold on to the ball to try and avoid a free kick against him should not give rise to a conclusion that he was in a vulnerable position. Otherwise any player tackled is by definition in a vulnerable position and the use of this example/category is redundant.
4) the only question is whether there is a 'sling' in the way he is brought to ground. In this case, even if you could say there is a slight sling (as every tackle almost has to have to avoid an in the back or a spear tackle), in no way should this be considered 'excessive'. The force looks to be the basic amount to bring him down, and nothing more.

In summary, no suspension, retrospective free kick to the Dons and a home final.