- Oct 16, 2011
- 15,338
- 38,077
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
But that also involves finding ways to prevent, or even penalise, players for putting themselves in that situation in the first place.
It will be known as "The Selwood rule".
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
But that also involves finding ways to prevent, or even penalise, players for putting themselves in that situation in the first place.
I agree with this to a certain degree. But here’s the thing..The reality is, we do need to do whatever it takes to remove head knocks, even accidental ones, from the game to whatever extent is possible. Even if it means making the game a worse spectacle as a result. What we've learned in recent years about the effects of concussions is frightening and we need to go all-in on preventing it.
But that also involves finding ways to prevent, or even penalise, players for putting themselves in that situation in the first place.
No current season stats available
"Chairman Jones questioned why Adelaide did not find this footage earlier."
WTF?
"Chairman Jones questioned why Adelaide did not find this footage earlier."
WTF?
Adelaide probably expected that no sane individual could hand out a ban for that. But they did. Underestimated the stupidity of the Tribunal
Lawyers gotta get paid.Why does the hearing need to be adjourned,? Why not just let the video be used?
Supposedly a connection breakdown so the video they wanted to show was fuzzy and not so clear, or something to that effectWhy does the hearing need to be adjourned,? Why not just let the video be used?
Supposedly a connection breakdown so the video they wanted to show was fuzzy and not so clear, or something to that effect
If they reduce it then Giants supporters will be upset
I think you might find this is a general footy issue and not just a club one. It has significant implication for all players concerned, and they might end up fearing of going for the ball hard if unfair penalties are given.Because people have the attention span of gnats
If they uphold the suspension only Adelaide supporters will get upset
If they reduce it then Giants supporters will be upset
Either way all the surrounding media etc will have moved on
I think they’re going to refer to further medical opinions with the new evidence.Are we suggesting that she may have already been hurt by crashing into the fence, and that the bit of Contact from Eb just finished the job?
I'm surprised the vision they've seen isn't already enough to overturn it, let alone the added bit
Never said any of thatI think you might find this is a general footy issue and not just a club one. It has significant implication for all players concerned, and they might end up fearing of going for the ball hard if unfair penalties are given.
Sad incident? Yes. Fair penalty? No.
The AFL has been clear for years that they use severity as a major deciding factor in their rulings, and the only real way they have to judge the severity of an action is by the outcome.
Yes, it's stupid. Yes, it means that genuinely dangerous actions get slaps on the wrist because the opponent is lucky to avoid serious injury, while innocuous incidents get penalised harshly because of freak accidents. It's a dumb way of doing things, but it's the one they've chosen.
This seems different, though. Usually in this sort of situation you can at least say "well, that's a pity but that's the risk you take when you bump/tackle/whatever". But as far as I can tell here, Marinoff didn't actually do... anything. She just happened to be nearby when Stack accidentally drove her head into Marinoff's torso. Yes, the outcome needs to be taken into consideration when determining the length of suspension, but surely you need to actually be found guilty of something first. Rough conduct? Where? I've watched the footage a dozen times, I can't see anything whatsoever that would indicate rough conduct.
It was just a freak accident, a shitty situation. It sucks big time and I hate that I'm sitting here whinging about a suspension when someone is sitting in the hospital with an injured neck after travelling halfway across the world to be here. But I just can't see how Marinoff can be considered at fault here based on the footage we've seen.