Charging Definition

[Port01]

If Malthouse wants charging to be defined he should just look at what Johnson did on the weekend.
That was the definition of what the charging rule is. Player takes mark running with flight, player is buried when there was plenty of time to not do so. Malthouse himself said in evidence that Johnson had time to choose whether to bump or tackle.

Pie supporters probably wouldn't agree but thats like Eddie claiming Tarrant had post-1984 Dean Lukin sitting on him when he took his mark.

 

[mantis]

I think the charging & unduly rough play, both have a lot of grey areas & need to be defined, even the umps & tribunal have trouble with these offences.

 

[Port01]

Thats because its been proven time and time again the the umpires and tribunal have no common sense to apply to the rule.

Hell, even that woman on the tribunal whose name i dont care about was whining and moaning on tv last week about all the pissy little incidents that they get before the tribunal. Judging by the amount of people that get off, she suspends them anyway.

My point being that anyone with any common sense (this excludes collingwood people obviously) that used that sense to apply to the Johnson incident, would think that that particular incident was exactly what the charging rule was designed to stop.

I don't see any problem with the charging rule, just with the senseless people that apply it.

 

[topdon]

All i can say is that i am pretty disappointed with the Wellman decision. I have been in South Australia all week and didn't even 'know' he was reported. To cop 2 weeks was really stiff

To see Wellman cop a couple and Johnson to get off totally makes me angry. Wellman and Smith were both committed to the ball and made contact, albeit Wellman's slightly high. What disappoints me the most is here we have two players going for the ball in a 'marking contest' (Wellman was trying to intercept the mark) and then you see a player (Johnson) 'take-out' another and gets off.

I'm sorry...Wellman would have been unlucky to get one week let alone two!!!

 

[Dave]

Adrian, Johnson didn't get off:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/story_238114.htm

 

[JUBJUB]

TOPDON
Do you mean Maxfield,not Johnson ?

I'm amazed Maxfield got off for charging Ally McLappin

 

[topdon]

Originally posted by JUBJUB
TOPDON
Do you mean Maxfield,not Johnson ?

I'm amazed Maxfield got off for charging Ally McLappin

I stand corrected. My mistake!

Meant Maxfield!!

My trip to South Australia must've really messed with my head!

 

[CJH]

Originally posted by JUBJUB
TOPDON
Do you mean Maxfield,not Johnson ?

I'm amazed Maxfield got off for charging Ally McLappin

Maxfield got off becuase it simply wasn't a charge. It was a hip and shoulder onto a player who had just kicked that ball in general play.

If anything, it was marginally late which means a probable free kick down the field at the most. Definitely not a charge.

Wellman should have been booked under the charging rule rather than unduly rough play. Doesn't matter either way though as he still would have got 2 weeks.

Difference between Wellman/Johnson and the Maxfield incident was that Wellman/Johnson both took out players in a marking contest. That has always been a charge, even before they buggered the rule up a few years back.

Cannot "hip and shoulder" someone who is in a marking or ruck contest or is not in "general play" (currently defined as within 5 metres of the ball.

Lappin was arguably still within general play at the time.

This is actually really simple once you think about it!

 

[topdon]

I think Sheedy put it best tonight!

The AFL is lost! They don't even know where they are heading (re: the rules of the game). When asked what could be done about it, he said "that's the AFL's job". He went on to say that he and other coaches are there to nurture young talent to play the game at the highest level....within the rules. Rules that are "...different shades of grey, light grey, white and ... pink "

He has a point. There is far to much ambiguity in the rules, and penalties are coming down to the guess work of Brian Collis Q.C.

 

[SS11]

OK...BEN JOHNSONS INCIDENT-

it was late , yes. but it was a legal hip and shoulder..it cost us a 50m penalty and a goal at a VERY crucial stage in the match...i thought that was punishment enough, and it shoulda been ended right there...2 weeks is way to harsh.