Dangerfield hit on Vlastuin

Remove this Banner Ad

Clearly suspendible offence when watched in super slo-mo by people who have never set foot on a football field...oh hang on a sec, when viewed in real time clearly Dangerfield punches the ball and only has a fraction of a second to try to protect himself (yes he is entitled to protect himself from someone who, although brave, makes a decision to run back into a pack without concern for his own safety) and Vlastuin unfortunately gets hit in the head by his forearm (yes for those who keep saying it was the elbow it was the forearm, obviously the outraged have more outrageous impact if they say elbow :tearsofjoy:). I seriously wonder if sitting on a couch watching TV removes the ability to understand split second reflex actions made on a sporting field, even by people who have played the game!

No one likes to see players injured in this manner but no way should he be suspended for this ACCIDENT, even if you think Dangerfield is a flog, and that was the eventual outcome of the MRP. Enjoy your win Tigers fans and hopefully Vlastuin will as well, without a headache.
 
There appeared 2 separate actions for mine
One was raising to arm to brace vs contact which I thought ok
But then before impact he straightens out the arm a bit or chooses to hit out
And why the use of “floss tone” seems disrespectful to poor nick (already had house doorway fire)
 
There's so little time between when Danger punches the ball and when he's making contact that you can't judge him for what happens.

If Danger doesn't brace they likely clash heads and it might be 2 concussed players not one.

Unfortunate incident but the ball sat up and bounced high, Vlaustin didn't have time to get out of the way and Danger didn't have time and space to take possession so made a legit choice to punch it away.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I don’t think the argument should be about the time between hitting the ball and hitting vlaustin. Even in slomo this is only a flash.

The thing that looks bad for mine is his forearm is up before he motions to hit the ball. Intention is to run through a bloke in a “football play”.

There are other ways to approach a contest apart from leading with your forearm. That’s where the duty of care comes in.

It’s “heroic” and “commendable” when some players do it, but reckless and dangerous when others do.

A player with more poise would use a deft touch to move the ball forward or play it to the advantage of their team. Some with genuine ability might even take possession and attempt to move out of traffic.
 
Jason Cloke would be feeling pretty ripped off. Missed a GF for a spoil where he had his eyes on the ball, missed and hit player in head. Totally accidental just like Danger.
 
Drought Break said:
Jason Cloke would be feeling pretty ripped off. Missed a GF for a spoil where he had his eyes on the ball, missed and hit player in head. Totally accidental just like Danger.
Click to expand...

If he played for a big club they would have let him off
 
HairyO said:
Like those staging fines being overturned.
Click to expand...

We all pray to be like Danger and not even get cited for staging.

There was one on Saturday where he threw his arms out and realised mid dive that it was ridiculous and stopped
 
Guess we need a retrospective apology from the afl to Jeremy Cameron for wrongly suspending hIm for his hit in Andrews a couple of years back
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

marcus1232 said:
Guess we need a retrospective apology from the afl to Jeremy Cameron for wrongly suspending hIm for his hit in Andrews a couple of years back
Click to expand...

I am waiting for Jonas to be exonerated for his elbow to the head of Andrew gaff. After all the ball was in the vicinity, and we have since found out gaff is a campaigner who king hits teenagers
 
sobrave said:
I am waiting for Jonas to be exonerated for his elbow to the head of Andrew gaff. After all the ball was in the vicinity, and we have since found out gaff is a campaigner who king hits teenagers
Click to expand...
True true
 
Phone said:
i refuse to believe anyone seriously thinks this was a reportable (therefore suspendable) offense
Click to expand...

It was a reportable offence. Intentional or clumsiness his stupidity caused the opposition player to be stretchered off and take no further part in the game.
 
Wacko23Jacko said:
I don’t think the argument should be about the time between hitting the ball and hitting vlaustin. Even in slomo this is only a flash.

The thing that looks bad for mine is his forearm is up before he motions to hit the ball. Intention is to run through a bloke in a “football play”.

There are other ways to approach a contest apart from leading with your forearm. That’s where the duty of care comes in.

It’s “heroic” and “commendable” when some players do it, but reckless and dangerous when others do.

A player with more poise would use a deft touch to move the ball forward or play it to the advantage of their team. Some with genuine ability might even take possession and attempt to move out of traffic.
Click to expand...

I agree and also think it was a bit weird how Dangerfield tried to punch the ball with his forearm up in this situation. If he tried to take possession of the ball and knocked out vlaustin, like what cripps did to mayne earlier in the year, that would have removed any doubt that he meant to hit floss high.
 
I agree about the split second part but how many of the suspensions we've witnessed recently have been for split second things?
For me there was 2 actions and instead of bracing for impact elbow rises. To me is classic case of "im just going to be doing this...if you get in the way its your own fault".
 
Wojcinski said:
Watching the replay again and it looks like Grimes pushes Danger as he makes contact with the ball. Grimes and Vlastuin we're trying to crush Danger and it didn't work out as Danger was playing the ball. Unlucky
Click to expand...
Hmmm... I reckon you're just baiting because there is no push whatsoever from Grimes on Dangerflop. If anything Grimes is trying to tackle Dangerflop in the expectation that he'll take possession of the ball.
 
I'm not weighing into the outrage that he wasn't reported, but he had time to pull his fist back out of the way so why wouldn't he have had time to lower his arm for the good old hip and shoulder? Was the most obvious of frees regardless and the umpires had plenty of time to award one. Kneed him in the nuts as well!

 
Wojcinski said:
The incident between Geelong Cats' Patrick Dangerfield and Richmond's Nick Vlastuin from the first quarter of Saturday's game between Richmond and the Geelong Cats was assessed. The ball is loose. Vlastuin and Dangerfield approach the ball from opposing directions. Dangerfield punches the ball and in the process makes high contact to Vlastuin. It was the view of the MRO that Dangerfield's actions were not unreasonable in the circumstances. No further action was taken.
Click to expand...

This is rubbish.

The laws of Australian Football, as published by the AFL, state:

22.2.2 Specific Offences
Any of the following types of conduct is a Reportable Offence:
(a) intentionally or carelessly:
(i) striking another person;
Click to expand...

No mention of whether it was "reasonable" whatever that means.

The rules are very clear: if one player intentionally or carelessly strikes another person then they should be reported.

Was it too quick for Danger to avoid, did his arm move up again after hitting the ball, did Danger go into the contest with his elbow out on purpose, could he have made the spoil differently?

All valid questions, but valid questions for the tribunal to sort out.

In terms of whether this was reportable, there is only one question asked by the rules of the game: did Dangerfield strike another person? Clearly the answer is yes.

He should have been reported and the tribunal could sort out if a penalty was justified and, if so, what the penalty should have been.

The fact they didn't even cite this is a travesty.

Also clearly a free kick for high contact.

The head is sacrosanct - yeah right.

DS
 
DavidSSS said:
This is rubbish.

The laws of Australian Football, as published by the AFL, state:



No mention of whether it was "reasonable" whatever that means.

The rules are very clear: if one player intentionally or carelessly strikes another person then they should be reported.

Was it too quick for Danger to avoid, did his arm move up again after hitting the ball, did Danger go into the contest with his elbow out on purpose, could he have made the spoil differently?

All valid questions, but valid questions for the tribunal to sort out.

In terms of whether this was reportable, there is only one question asked by the rules of the game: did Dangerfield strike another person? Clearly the answer is yes.

He should have been reported and the tribunal could sort out if a penalty was justified and, if so, what the penalty should have been.

The fact they didn't even cite this is a travesty.

Also clearly a free kick for high contact.

The head is sacrosanct - yeah right.

DS
Click to expand...
The ship has sailed, time to move on
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Hobo
Viney hit on Boak
Replies
9
Views
744
The Hobo
The Hobo
Chaisa
MRP / Trib. Hunter on Rozee hit
2 3 4
Replies
94
Views
3K
danster168
danster168
BigVic
MRP / Trib. Rhyan Mansell hit on James Aish
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
195
Views
8K
Roby
Roby
kane249
MRP / Trib. De Goey hit on Elijah Hewett
14 15 16 17 18
Replies
444
Views
15K
Pistol Night
Pistol Night
fpm84
MRP / Trib. Caminiti hit on Murphy
18 19 20 21 22
Replies
544
Views
14K
Wosh
Wosh
kane249
MRP / Trib. Junior Rioli hit on Jordan Ridley
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
293
Views
7K
Vindicater
Vindicater
Chadwiko
Harry McKay hit on Harry Sheezel
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
234
Views
8K
Chism
Chism

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top