Bontempelli's hit on Haynes

[Virgin Dog]

If the Giants let him play out the game, and didn't report any injury to Haynes, what exactly are people expecting the MRO to do? Arbitrarily wait on some random additional injury to possibly be reported, unlike any other week when they'd already have made a decision by now?

 

[BF Tiger]

If the Giants let him play out the game, and didn't report any injury to Haynes, what exactly are people expecting the MRO to do? Arbitrarily wait on some random additional injury to possibly be reported, unlike any other week when they'd already have made a decision by now?

They knew there was an issue because they cited Bontempelli. Surely the least they could is wait for the medical report. If it hadn't been submitted in time maybe that should have been a red flag that something was up.

 

[kernelT]

Totally different, but ok. In footy physical contact is expected, in what appears to be your world I'm not sure if the kids expect to be mowed down by a drunk driver.

Look at it this way, lets say someone leaves the ground to bump & gets someone in the head. The player gets up, isn't affected & plays out the game.
Someone else leaves the ground to bump, gets someone in the head which knocks them out & they miss another week or two. Personally I feel it should be graded on the intention & the act, not the result.

So you are challenging the only reason that he was cleared in the first place?

If you remove the broken larynx element, you have a player choosing to lay a late bump and clearly collects a player high.

The intention was to hurt a player when he couldn't effect a legitimate spoil. (make him earn it as the commentators say in the clip)

If we disregard the injury then these kinds of late bumps would need an automatic suspension.

 

[Tugga27]

Totally different, but ok. In footy physical contact is expected, in what appears to be your world I'm not sure if the kids expect to be mowed down by a drunk driver.

Look at it this way, lets say someone leaves the ground to bump & gets someone in the head. The player gets up, isn't affected & plays out the game.
Someone else leaves the ground to bump, gets someone in the head which knocks them out & they miss another week or two. Personally I feel it should be graded on the intention & the act, not the result.

I agree the act itself should be graded, but still think the result should play a part.

 

[Max zero]

They knew there was an issue because they cited Bontempelli. Surely the least they could is wait for the medical report. If it hadn't been submitted in time maybe that should have been a red flag that something was up.

Or they do something really wacky like call the Giants and ask them on Hayne's condition?

I just love the MRO's view on this:

"Hmm Giants have said nothing yet guess he must be okay!"

 

[BF Tiger]

Or they do something really wacky like call the Giants and ask them on Hayne's condition?

I just love the MRO's view on this:

"Hmm Giants have said nothing yet guess he must be okay!"

They couldn't ask Hayne because he probably can't talk.

 

[Max zero]

Personally I feel it should be graded on the intention & the act, not the result.

Nothing personal but how you feel about does not really matter. I actually agree with you but the MRO have made it clear multiple times this year that outcome is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) factor in determining any penalty.

Except this time.

Because contacting the Giants to get an accurate measurement of a player's condition is just too much to ask.

 

[Virgin Dog]

They knew there was an issue because they cited Bontempelli. Surely the least they could is wait for the medical report. If it hadn't been submitted in time maybe that should have been a red flag that something was up.

Sounds like they need to make a policy change then. But no point in people talking about Brownlow bias as if that was the motivation, when in reality the penalty was appropriate based on the information at hand

 

[The Warlord]

One of the GWS players should have gone on radio and talked about how brutal the blow was and how it certainly looked reportable like the dog Bontempelli did to Lindsay Thomas a few years back.

 

[Max zero]

One of the GWS players should have gone on radio and talked about how brutal the blow was and how it certainly looked reportable like the dog Bontempelli did to Lindsay Thomas a few years back.

And get local radio personalities to cry about on morning radio and start a twitter hashtag campaign.

 

[Bald]

Should he have been suspended in hindsight? Probably.

Clearly circumstances here show an inept system whereby GWS have either failed to provide a medical report or the AFL have failed to ask for it, either way, they've not played the 'good bloke' card in this circumstance. Anyways, I'm sure Bontempelli will cop boo's from the GWS fans if we meet them again in the first round of the finals. I'm sure all seventeen of them will really get to him.

 

[The Warlord]

And get local radio personalities to cry about on morning radio and start a twitter hashtag campaign.

Its almost like there's different rules for different players - oh hang on, is that Patrick Dangerfield being tackled and spun two times and brought to his knees and the ball sputters out while he swings a fist that clearly misses it while a self-regarding twat in green prances past ten metres away squeaking "Knocked out in the tackle, play on play on".

 

[Firestarter]

Sportsbet breathed a sigh of relief.

 

[SunshineBoy]

No potential to cause injury, plus no Tatts

 

[Truckosaurus]

No delayed concussion though.

 

[AFLQLD]

This decision is the epitome of the dubious nature of the MRO system. It is open to so many variables that can be applied at the discretion or whim of the MRO and yet has all the hallmarks of a justice system at risk of bias, allegations of preferential treatment and good old-fashioned inconsistency.

Justice hasn’t been done here from the victim’s point of view. That is quite clear to all but rusted-on dogs supporters, who would no doubt scream loudest if the boot was on the other foot.

A decision has been dispensed but justice hasn’t been done.

 

[Iamspock]

Its almost like there's different rules for different players - oh hang on, is that Patrick Dangerfield being tackled and spun two times and brought to his knees and the ball sputters out while he swings a fist that clearly misses it while a self-regarding twat in green prances past ten minutes away squeaking "Knocked out in the tackle, play on play on".

Yes those rules sure are different for Zeibel, Cunnington....

 

[ossie_21]

So you are challenging the only reason that he was cleared in the first place?

If you remove the broken larynx element, you have a player choosing to lay a late bump and clearly collects a player high.

The intention was to hurt a player when he couldn't effect a legitimate spoil. (make him earn it as the commentators say in the clip)

If we disregard the injury then these kinds of late bumps would need an automatic suspension.

I guess that's just a difference of opinion, I see it more as bracing for contact rather than a bump. It was a freak injury, but that sort of "bump" is seen quite regularly & just a part of footy.

Remember the tackle that Koby Stevens won a HTB free kick but got suspended as the opponent was concussed? Also a freak injury from a great tackle, I didn't agree with that decision either

 

[kernelT]

I guess that's just a difference of opinion, I see it more as bracing for contact rather than a bump. It was a freak injury, but that sort of "bump" is seen quite regularly & just a part of footy.

Remember the tackle that Koby Stevens won a HTB free kick but got suspended as the opponent was concussed? Also a freak injury from a great tackle, I didn't agree with that decision either

Also probably pretty pointless debating over something like intent over outcome as it hasn't been part of the process for over a decade.

That sort of bump often results in a concussion which is why the onus is now on players to choose when to go or not, which is a good thing considering the amount of players retiring early from concussion.

I don't think bont was trying break a larynx, but he ran the gauntlet by choosing to bump when he didn't have to… as a result the giants will miss their best defender for weeks and it could ruin their season.

 

[perplexed]

Totally different, but ok. In footy physical contact is expected, in what appears to be your world I'm not sure if the kids expect to be mowed down by a drunk driver.

Look at it this way, lets say someone leaves the ground to bump & gets someone in the head. The player gets up, isn't affected & plays out the game.
Someone else leaves the ground to bump, gets someone in the head which knocks them out & they miss another week or two. Personally I feel it should be graded on the intention & the act, not the result.

Why do you 'feel' that?
He broke a rule designed to prevent injury. It caused injury. For all we know he intentionally crushed the blokes larynx, or intended worse.
But of course nobody but him knows his intentions. But we do know his actions and their consequences.

 

[ossie_21]

Why do you 'feel' that?
He broke a rule designed to prevent injury. It caused injury. For all we know he intentionally crushed the blokes larynx, or intended worse.
But of course nobody but him knows his intentions. But we do know his actions and their consequences.

Like I said in another post, I don't see it as a bump & more just bracing for contact as he was moving towards him. I don't want to be an advocate for contact after players have disposed of the ball, but there has been far worse than what happened. You see it in games all the time where some form of contact is put on players after disposal, to at least hinder them linking up again in the chain. Different levels of contact ranging from a block or just an arm thrown out as they run past. It was a freak injury, if everyone gets suspensions for things like that the game is well & truly ruined

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Should he have been suspended in hindsight? Probably.

Clearly circumstances here show an inept system whereby GWS have either failed to provide a medical report or the AFL have failed to ask for it, either way, they've not played the 'good bloke' card in this circumstance. Anyways, I'm sure Bontempelli will cop boo's from the GWS fans if we meet them again in the first round of the finals. I'm sure all seventeen of them will really get to him.

Steve Smith and Adam Goodes, move over . Are we really moving towards never ending vengeance for every transgression, real or imagined?

 

[Murphkreuzmitch]

If bont wins the Brownlow can we agree to never have to hear about Chris Grant being robbed again...

I’ll see myself out...

a bit of crude hit, but the doggies are rampant at the moment, they could turn the finals on its head, they need Bontempelli playing, and it’s good for the finals series having him out there. Football is the winner here, although unfortunate for GWS.

 

[The_Flying_Egg]

One of the GWS players should have gone on radio and talked about how brutal the blow was and how it certainly looked reportable like the dog Bontempelli did to Lindsay Thomas a few years back.

If you’re still going on about it, at least finish the story and include the part where North put a target on his back and focussed on roughing him up the next time the teams met, only for the Bont to get 3 Brownlow votes and make them look incredibly stupid

On topic had to laugh in the article where apparently the Giants, of all clubs are apparently privately upset about perceived Vic bias

 

[YippeeYiYeo]

Broken larynx or not - its still a high hit that should have copped 1-2 weeks.