Brad Ebert - How many weeks?

Remove this Banner Ad

donaldknuth

Debutant
Jul 4, 2020
75
124
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
For his hit on Perryman. No eyes for the ball, hit him high in the head with the point of the shoulder at full speed.

Should be weeks, but that isn't factoring in the AFL's stupid rule where outcome matters more than intent.

Either way, if Crozier got a week for his tackle, Ebert will still be suspended.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

shiels was slightly worse. and he got two
so 2 down to 1 for ebo
Id say Ebert's intent was worse, but impact less so

Chook lottery with the MRO though. i'm keen to see if Ebert get a fine, 1 or 2 given it was a straight report from the ump and he took Perryman out from behind and lined him up. Where Shiel braced and went past the ball.
But then based on Rohan, it's clear incidents have no bearing on each other.
 
Id say Ebert's intent was worse, but impact less so

Chook lottery with the MRO though. i'm keen to see if Ebert get a fine, 1 or 2 given it was a straight report from the ump and he took Perryman out from behind and lined him up. Where Shiel braced and went past the ball.
But then based on Rohan, it's clear incidents have no bearing on each other.

agree with that.
i based it just on the way the AFL love the impact part of it.
careless, high, low impact
 
Id say Ebert's intent was worse, but impact less so
I disagree on that. Shiel clearly went past the ball and was incredibly luck to get away with 'careless conduct' rather than 'intentional' because of it.
Ebert's still sits in careless conduct.

Shiel got caught with high impact because of the injury report. I haven't seen anything about Perryman that indicates that Ebert should cop a higher level of impact.

Chook lottery with the MRO though. i'm keen to see if Ebert get a fine, 1 or 2 given it was a straight report from the ump and he took Perryman out from behind and lined him up. Where Shiel braced and went past the ball.
Straight report from the field umpire should be considered meaningless. As you mentioned have a look at what Gary Rohan was reported for on the field.

Its bit rich to be claiming Ebert lined up Perryman, while trying to talk down Shiel. Ebert was going for the loose ball, saw he wasn't going to get there and braced to protect himself from unavoidable contact. Ebert's contact being claiming Ebert's contact is avoidable after going full tilt for the loose ball, starts getting in to Gleeson's ridiculous piroette out of the way tribunal arguments.

Dylan Shiel ran past the ball, clearly showing what his intent was.
 
And it’s 1 week after applying the port Adelaide penalty.

Basically exact the same incident, force and outcome as the Pickett knock. Pickett only a fine and Evert a week.

Wpuld like to know what the difference is aside from it’s a port player and it’s a Richmond player

Apart from the fact it was a snipe? Ebert is lucky it’s only 1 week.
 
Apart from the fact it was a snipe? Ebert is lucky it’s only 1 week.

that doesn’t answer my question, how is it different to Pickett ? Both a bump to the head, both either a week each or fine each.

I don’t mind ebert getting a week, just want it judged consistently to avoid this merry go round lottery system we have
 
that doesn’t answer my question, how is it different to Pickett ? Both a bump to the head, both either a week each or fine each.

I don’t mind ebert getting a week, just want it judged consistently to avoid this merry go round lottery system we have

The biggest problem is ALL of Shiel, Ebert and Pickett should have got 2 weeks. Both Pickett and Ebert were lucky
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

that doesn’t answer my question, how is it different to Pickett ? Both a bump to the head, both either a week each or fine each.
The difference is the commentary.

The only factor from Michael Christian's explanation of the gradings is the nebulous "look of the incident". And that entirely comes down to how the AFL media paints the impact afterwards. Hudson, Dunstall and co decided to hang Ebert out to dry. And then spent the rest of the game going on about how he's going to be in trouble. Thus it would look really bad if Christian decided to grade it as low impact.

Meanwhile they were completely silent on deBoer's hit on Ebert at the end of the second. So it all just goes under the radar, despite being a worse action, since it was a hit on a player after the play had stopped. There is no way for deBoer to lay a legal bump on a player who has taken a mark.

Same with the commentary on Pickett's hit on Heeney. The first thing is, oh thats just a bump to the chest... maybe a little late. The entire commentary is playing it down. Heeney left the field after that hit, something that Perryman didn't.

The same also applies for Shane Mumford's thuggery throughout his career. The commentators go on about it being a bit of a joke. Not too bad just clumsy as he goes about just hitting players in the head, falling on players to drive their head into the ground.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top