MRP / Trib. Bailey Smith Headbutt

[The 747]

I'd just give him a fine, but the modern AFL won't do that.

 

[jimmy.h]

Translation: I'm upset that the Dogs players stick up for each other but my club doesn't

I’m reasonably pleased that my club’s players stood up by winning the contests and kicking the goals in the 4th quarter but you do you.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Hurrah, for once the MRP got it right/common sense prevailed, 2 weeks was absolutely right

So glad the Lynch mob didn't get their own way in the end.

 

[Sttew]

They will push for it to be 1 week and say Tuohy contributed. Which he did.

As above the AFL should have given Touhy 1 and Smith 2. Both of them were in the wrong.

Didn’t work for Buddy

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

2 weeks is very lucky.

Cop the same for an actual football act in which you arrive at the contest a fraction of a second late.

But headbutt someone at the end of a qtr and just the two weeks.

Should have been 4. Completely unacceptable and not a football act remotely.

 

[gordo2016]

The fact Geelong are protected by the MRO doesn't change the fact Tuohy went in equally himself. Smiths suspension will get challenged

Can't really challenge on the basis of what Tuohy did. Won't get challenged, pretty easy decision.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Lucky, very lucky.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

This is going to get challenged

Which aspect will they challenge? The impact?

 

[VL3OJ]

I would keep the $10k and accept the two weeks and Tuohy should get a lottery ticket. I'm sure some SC could dream up an excuse and drag a raft of biomechanical experts to give evidence but we have to suck it up and Smith has to learn.

 

[Sarcoidevo]

Ben Long

22

Ben Long

Age

26

Ht

186cm

Wt

81kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.9

3star

K

6.2

2star

HB

4.7

3star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.7

4star

MG

166.8

3star

D

12.8

3star

K

6.7

3star

HB

6.2

4star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.3

3star

MG

129.0

2star

D

13.4

4star

K

6.8

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.2

4star

T

3.2

5star

MG

223.0

4star

would have got 8

 

[DT_35]

Ben Long would have got 8

Long & Greene would’ve been de-registered.

How has that little flog Weightman got off flopping AGAIN?

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

Bulldogs supporters in here victim blaming

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

"The match review officer categorised the headbutt as intentional, high and medium impact, which results in two matches. The Bulldogs could attempt to have the impact downgraded as Tuohy played out the game. However, they know “the potential to cause serious injury” clause the AFL now applies, when high contact is made, has made it difficult for clubs to prove the impact was low rather than medium."


The AFL need to adjust their grading system for stuff like this. This is such a strange situation.

I'll use the Ryder example, as it was recent and resulted in the same penalty.

Ryder: In Play/Careless/High Impact/High Contact
Smith: Behind Play/Intentional/Medium Impact/High Contact

Another comparable example, from memory, is Toby Green copping 2 weeks from the MRO for a fend off on Dangerfield. I think this was graded the same as Ryder's.

So how broken is the AFL's system if a careless (not even reckless) football act during play without malice or intent, is penalised the same as an off the ball act of violence aimed at physically injuring a player's head?

It's mind boggling that this sport considers itself world class sometimes.

Surely the intent from the AFL is to prioritise the outlawing of behind the play violence and thuggery at all levels, over football acts that hurt people? It's just so weird how we have this over the top reaction for certain scenarios, which is justified under the guise of 'the head being sacrosanct', then we don't overreact to headbutts behind play??


To add more confusion, is the two weeks given to the Freo bloke for the 'chicken wing' tackle. There was no damage done at all. Presumably, the whole issue there was the potential to cause injury. So literally, the AFL are telling us that they consider potential injury to someone's arm to be just as serious as actual injury to someone's head.

Seriously, this whole 'the head is sacrosanct' stuff is just such bullshit.

 

[ferball]

I've only seen bulldogs supporters argue that so I'm unsure about the 'arguable' part

ZT head butted him first, shaped up to go again and Smith got in harder. Obviously Smith deserves a week or two but it was petty on ZT's part and he should probably get a week for the first one as well.

 

[ferball]

The bulldogs bloke will cop a whack, but Tuohy will get cleared. Imagine thinking the person on the receiving end of a deliberate headbutt will get penalised...

Touhy headbutted him a couple of seconds earlier. Didn't really make contact, it was more of a drive with his head than a hit like Smith but he started it and should get at least a week.

 

[BarryMorgan]

Bulldogs supporters in here victim blaming

See you at Wednesday’s march in support of headbutt victims.

 

[gordo2016]

"The match review officer categorised the headbutt as intentional, high and medium impact, which results in two matches. The Bulldogs could attempt to have the impact downgraded as Tuohy played out the game. However, they know “the potential to cause serious injury” clause the AFL now applies, when high contact is made, has made it difficult for clubs to prove the impact was low rather than medium."


The AFL need to adjust their grading system for stuff like this. This is such a strange situation.

I'll use the Ryder example, as it was recent and resulted in the same penalty.

Ryder: In Play/Careless/High Impact/High Contact
Smith: Behind Play/Intentional/Medium Impact/High Contact

Another comparable example, from memory, is Toby Green copping 2 weeks from the MRO for a fend off on Dangerfield. I think this was graded the same as Ryder's.

So how broken is the AFL's system if a careless (not even reckless) football act during play without malice or intent, is penalised the same as an off the ball act of violence aimed at physically injuring a player's head?

It's mind boggling that this sport considers itself world class sometimes.

Surely the intent from the AFL is to prioritise the outlawing of behind the play violence and thuggery at all levels, over football acts that hurt people? It's just so weird how we have this over the top reaction for certain scenarios, which is justified under the guise of 'the head being sacrosanct', then we don't overreact to headbutts behind play??


To add more confusion, is the two weeks given to the Freo bloke for the 'chicken wing' tackle. There was no damage done at all. Presumably, the whole issue there was the potential to cause injury. So literally, the AFL are telling us that they consider potential injury to someone's arm to be just as serious as actual injury to someone's head.

Seriously, this whole 'the head is sacrosanct' stuff is just such bullshit.

You said Smith should get off in a previous post and that Touhy overreacted. Now you are saying that is violence and thuggery and should have a higher penalty than other ones. Not up to the AFL or MRP to determine what violence and thuggery is. They aren't a law court and all they can do is follow their own guidelines based on the impact of the offence.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

You said Smith should get off in a previous post and that Touhy overreacted. Now you are saying that is violence and thuggery and should have a higher penalty than other ones. Not up to the AFL or MRP to determine what violence and thuggery is. They aren't a law court and all they can do is follow their own guidelines based on the impact of the offence.

Did you even read what I wrote?

 

[theyellowsash]

smith prooving the idiotic dirty bogan grub that he is

 

[CaptainHowdy87]

It's arguable that Tuohy made contact first and Bailey retaliated. I still think he cops 1-2 weeks for drawing blood but there wasn't much in it.

Username checks out...

 

[theyellowsash]

It's arguable that Tuohy made contact first and Bailey retaliated. I still think he cops 1-2 weeks for drawing blood but there wasn't much in it.

is that the same kind of baseless argument you coach makes everytime a journo asks him a reasonable selection question?

 

[BarryMorgan]

is that the same kind of baseless argument you coach makes everytime a journo asks him a reasonable selection question?

It’s the sort of thing your coach would tweet after an umpire makes a correct ruling.

I wonder what Mrs Hardwick would say.

 

[adogsfan5]

smith prooving the idiotic dirty bogan grub that he is

At least use capital letters where needed and spell “proving” correctly, before throwing out the words bogan and idiotic.

 

[BarryMorgan]

At least use capital letters where needed and spell “proving” correctly, before throwing out the words bogan and idiotic.

Richmond only have the refined, intellectual types on their list, the sort of high-class citizens who hit people in the back of the head whilst they’re lying on the ground.

Young Tiger Rhyan Mansell suspended for ‘double forearm’ when umpires were ‘powerless’

Tiger cops ban for ugly ‘cheap shot’ that sparked brawl

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[adogsfan5]

You said Smith should get off in a previous post and that Touhy overreacted. Now you are saying that is violence and thuggery and should have a higher penalty than other ones. Not up to the AFL or MRP to determine what violence and thuggery is. They aren't a law court and all they can do is follow their own guidelines based on the impact of the offence.

Doesn’t like the dogs, and uses the same post every time regarding if you read their post properly. Best to not engage.