Player Watch Brayden Maynard

[Tippy78]

3 weeks!!!

GAGF

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

Scandalous. Expect nothing less from the AFL.

 

[legendstatus]

****en disgrace and the credibility on this made up please yourself comp continues

 

[jakson68]

Martin played ok, shame he wont be there next week.

 

[sam_e]

We all know it was accidental but given the current climate and a few recent cases Bruz was very likely to cop a whack.
And if I was one of the posters that told us ten times last night he had nothing to worry about I'd cancel my account.

Is your definition of 'whack' pre or post appeal?

 

[Monco Matt]

If Brayshaw was Jack Viney

7

Jack Viney

Age

32

Ht

179cm

Wt

93kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

22.1

5star

K

9.4

4star

HB

12.6

5star

M

2.8

3star

T

5.7

5star

CL

5.0

5star

D

21.8

5star

K

10.3

4star

HB

11.5

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

4.5

5star

CL

5.0

5star

D

13.4

4star

K

8.6

4star

HB

4.8

4star

M

2.6

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

3.6

5star

he gets up and carries on with the game. Brayshaw has a history, a wet lettuce leaf would concuss him. I can't believe the AFL would rub Bruz out for that and cost him his dream, potentially. Accidents happen in footy, not everything high should be a suspension especially if it is a footy act. No malice at all. we should take this one all the way to the High Court and then some.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

He will get off. This image gives you a better look at it.

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

So I’m pretty confused about the tribunal process. The MRO has been overruled I gather and the AFL lawyers will now present a case for the charge to be upheld which our lawyers will argue against. A decision will be made and then we have a right to appeal. Is that how it works?

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

If Maynard is suspended for that 'hit' then the game has reached the point where it is not worth following anymore.

 

[Kirby]

So I’m pretty confused about the tribunal process. The MRO has been overruled I gather and the AFL lawyers will now present a case for the charge to be upheld which our lawyers will argue against. A decision will be made and then we have a right to appeal. Is that how it works?

Pretty much.

With a straight face the AFL have to argue that he carelessly tried to smother the ball or that he carelessly tried to protect himself from impact.

Try to get your head around that!

 

[domus]

He will get off. This image gives you a better look at it.

He didn't seem to hit him in the head. Maybe whiplash or did his head hit the ground afterwards. It looked all chest.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Here is a left field idea.

If the rules do not state “I care for opposition “, but instead state “care for player”…..then I’d be rolling the vision of Rowan knocking out Cameron when contesting a high ball.

Pending the wording, that’s absolutely done and dusted.

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

Pretty much.

With a straight face the AFL have to argue that he carelessly tried to smother the ball or that he carelessly tried to protect himself from impact.

Try to get your head around that!

I think I’ve given myself concussion trying to figure it out.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

I think I’ve given myself concussion trying to figure it out.

Come back in 12 days and let us all know what you’ve come up with

 

[Scud2]

As much as we were hopeful that common sense would prevail - it was inevitable that it would not.

It’s either Maynard misses the rest of the season or he gets off. No in-between on this one.

It’s now on us to prove he showed a reasonable duty of care to Gus and it was a reasonable footy action.

Pros:

• He was clearly trying to smother / pressure the ball like all players would in that situation.
• His initial jump was not in line with Gus.
• He minimally missed getting a hand to the ball. He was in the play.
• Gus does shift his body weight and angles his body right into Maynard’s trajectory. Some would argue natural ball kicking action, others would not. (Would love to see similar Gus kicks to see if he does move naturally to the right or if this was different).
• Was clearly regretful and concerned straightaway.

Cons:

• Gus got knocked out bad.
• The AFL doesn’t like concussions at all and clearly are trying to make a stand.
• Bruz does tuck his shoulder slightly that can be argued as more attacking than defensive in its intention.

 

[domus]

Pretty much.

With a straight face the AFL have to argue that he carelessly tried to smother the ball or that he carelessly tried to protect himself from impact.

Try to get your head around that!

Jakob Ryan gets knocked out by a knee to his head when Rayner flew for a mark. He hasn't played a game since it happened. No problem. King rants about the sanctity of the head and how it must be protected at all costs but when someone says then we must ban flying for marks as countless players have been concussed in marking contests he responds with, "We can't take away the high mark!" So, knees to the head are just dandy but a vigorous bump is outrageous and a relic from our violent past.

If the end result of both is brain damage and concussion, why are we even debating this?

You cannot punish every action which leads to a player being hurt. It is absurd. Everyone knows that you can no longer shirt front an opponent or bump him in the head and there has been dramatic change in the way players approach a contest. But this latest absurdity with Maynard is a tipping point.

 

[domus]

Winning a flag with our spirit leader in the stand would truly ruin a magical occasion. What the hell is it with Collingwood and bloody reports and suspensions in the lead up to preliminary and grand finals?

 

[Kirby]

Winning a flag with our spirit leader in the stand would truly ruin a magical occasion. What the hell is it with Collingwood and bloody reports and suspensions in the lead up to preliminary and grand finals?

Settle down.

He’ll get off

 

[Piewithsauce13]

Have you seen the snippet of brayshaws head making contact with Adam’s knee 4 mins into game ( I think he got a free). From Tom Brown tweet:
“Definitely not commenting on whether this impacted the Maynard incident. But Brayshaw’s head collided with Adams 4.30mins prior. It will be interesting to see if this is a relevant discussion point raised by lawyers in the tribunal case this week.”

Interesting if this did have any affect on him and contributed to making the impact to the head even worse than it would of without the knee to the head or if they will use it. I know getting a hit from Bruzz would make sense he was out on its own, but a combination of a T Adam’s knee and a Bruzz shoulder would not be fun!

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

As much as we were hopeful that common sense would prevail - it was inevitable that it would not.

It’s either Maynard misses the rest of the season or he gets off. No in-between on this one.

It’s now on us to prove he showed a reasonable duty of care to Gus and it was a reasonable footy action.

Pros:

• He was clearly trying to smother / pressure the ball like all players would in that situation.
• His initial jump was not in line with Gus.
• He minimally missed getting a hand to the ball. He was in the play.
• Gus does shift his body weight and angles his body right into Maynard’s trajectory. Some would argue natural ball kicking action, others would not. (Would love to see similar Gus kicks to see if he does move naturally to the right or if this was different).
• Was clearly regretful and concerned straightaway.

Cons:

• Gus got knocked out bad.
• The AFL doesn’t like concussions at all and clearly are trying to make a stand.
• Bruz does tuck his shoulder slightly that can be argued as more attacking than defensive in its intention.

Re the last point I’d probably argue that Bruz turned his shoulder slightly to avoid concussing himself.

 

[domus]

Settle down.

He’ll get off

If he doesn't what I said stands. I didn't say it was certain to happen. I'm comforted by your confidence.

 

[Kirby]

Have you seen the snippet of brayshaws head making contact with Adam’s knee 4 mins into game ( I think he got a free). From Tom Brown tweet:
“Definitely not commenting on whether this impacted the Maynard incident. But Brayshaw’s head collided with Adams 4.30mins prior. It will be interesting to see if this is a relevant discussion point raised by lawyers in the tribunal case this week.”

Interesting if this did have any affect on him and contributed to making the impact to the head even worse than it would have without the knee to the head or if they will use it. I know getting a hit from Bruzz would make sense he was out on its own, but a combination of a T Adam’s knee and a Bruzz shoulder would not be fun!

I’d say it’s entirely irrelevant

 

[Scud2]

Re the last point I’d probably argue that Bruz turned his shoulder slightly to avoid concussing himself.

I agree - bracing for the contact. But the AFL will argue otherwise and that’s why it’s careless.

 

[Anzacday]

The AFL has to ensure this is assessed by an independent body/bodies namely the Tribunal and the Appeals Board.
This will ensure they avoid any potential for liability.
Common sense will, (eventually) prevail as it did in the Bedford one.

 

[Piewithsauce13]

I agree - bracing for the contact. But the AFL will argue otherwise and that’s why it’s careless.

What do they expect him to do in that situation? Not turn and land front on and no brace protection. Would love it if they got one of the lawyers to demonstrate the exact technique and landing position they expect him to do in that scenario and split second coming down!