Dusty elbowing

Remove this Banner Ad

Robbo picking on Dusty because he is a big named player. A pathetic attempt in trying to rationalise why Dusty needed to be suspended and Newcombe didn't.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

I reckon Robbo has a point.



Probably should be a week in this day and age. Bonus points for off the ball and pointless.

What did AFL360s love child Nick Daicos get for a gut punch on Acres in round 10? Oh, just a fine. So Dusty's fine is exactly in line with precedents.

End of story, get off the turps Robbo and matthew_s
 
Poor from Dustin, clearly reactionary but needs to be more disciplined, HOWEVER - please explain how it’s worthy of suspension rather than a fine:

IMG_2987.jpeg IMG_2989.jpeg IMG_2988.jpeg
 
Poor from Dustin, clearly reactionary but needs to be more disciplined, HOWEVER - please explain how it’s worthy of suspension rather than a fine:

View attachment 1742425 View attachment 1742426View attachment 1742427
Read the section on impact.

"Firstly, consideration will be given to the extent of force and in particular, any injury sustained by the Player who was offended against. The absence of injury does not preclude the classification of impact as Severe.

"Secondly, the potential to cause injury must be factored into the determination of Impact, particularly in the following cases:
- Intentional strikes, such as those with a swinging clenched fist, raised forearm or elbow

"In the case of any intentional strike, strong consideration will be given to the distance the incident occurs from the ball and the expectation of contact of the Victim Player."

The elbow was certainly intentional by Dusty, and the distance it was from the contest and the guidelines on strikes that have "potential to cause injury" should probably grade it higher than low impact.

Intentional, medium impact to the body, 1 week.
 
Read the section on impact.

"Firstly, consideration will be given to the extent of force and in particular, any injury sustained by the Player who was offended against. The absence of injury does not preclude the classification of impact as Severe.

"Secondly, the potential to cause injury must be factored into the determination of Impact, particularly in the following cases:
- Intentional strikes, such as those with a swinging clenched fist, raised forearm or elbow

"In the case of any intentional strike, strong consideration will be given to the distance the incident occurs from the ball and the expectation of contact of the Victim Player."

The elbow was certainly intentional by Dusty, and the distance it was from the contest and the guidelines on strikes that have "potential to cause injury" should probably grade it higher than low impact.

Intentional, medium impact to the body, 1 week.
A hawks fan wanting Dusty suspended a week before playing the tigers… hmmmm.
Just sit back and rejoice in being able to witness greatness first hand this weekend.
 
A hawks fan wanting Dusty suspended a week before playing the tigers… hmmmm.
Just sit back and rejoice in being able to witness greatness first hand this weekend.
I don't care if he plays against us or not, we'll probably lose either way, I'm just saying that suspensions have been given for similar hits previously.

As a Hawks fan, after the year we've had on that front, I just want consistency from the MRO / Tribunal.
 
I don't care if he plays against us or not, we'll probably lose either way, I'm just saying that suspensions have been given for similar hits previously.

As a Hawks fan, after the year we've had on that front, I just want consistency from the MRO / Tribunal.
Newcombe getting off fair? Or did he deserve a suspension?
 
Newcombe getting off fair? Or did he deserve a suspension?
I'm trying to find a replay of the incident but I can't, if it satisfies the same criteria as Martin's hit then sure. I remember it gave them a free kick so if the suspension helps him remove that from his game he should cop a week.
 
IMO Alex Witherden should of copped a suspension for thrusting his solar plexus into Dustys elbow.
 
Read the section on impact.

"Firstly, consideration will be given to the extent of force and in particular, any injury sustained by the Player who was offended against. The absence of injury does not preclude the classification of impact as Severe.

"Secondly, the potential to cause injury must be factored into the determination of Impact, particularly in the following cases:
- Intentional strikes, such as those with a swinging clenched fist, raised forearm or elbow

"In the case of any intentional strike, strong consideration will be given to the distance the incident occurs from the ball and the expectation of contact of the Victim Player."

The elbow was certainly intentional by Dusty, and the distance it was from the contest and the guidelines on strikes that have "potential to cause injury" should probably grade it higher than low impact.

Intentional, medium impact to the body, 1 week.
Why is that medium impact? Witherden gets straight up and takes his free kick, continues playing. What would constitute low, a mean look towards an opposing player? And potential to cause what injury?

I’m not even against incidents like this being suspension worthy, just against deciding to go against the guidelines mid-game because it didn’t look very nice. Change it at season’s end or even between rounds with communication, or just accept it wasn’t worthy of suspension.
 
Why is that medium impact? Witherden gets straight up and takes his free kick, continues playing. What would constitute low, a mean look towards an opposing player? And potential to cause what injury?

I’m not even against incidents like this being suspension worthy, just against deciding to go against the guidelines mid-game because it didn’t look very nice. Change it at season’s end or even between rounds with communication, or just accept it wasn’t worthy of suspension.
I showed you where the medium impact is, there are a bunch of considerations where impact can change - it was miles off the contest and completely unexpected by Witherden, it was an elbow, and the absence of an injury does not preclude a higher classification.

On the potential to cause injury, all you need to do is look at Gaff on Brayshaw the other year. Gaff aimed a strike at Brayshaw's chest which according to this decision would have been a fine, but because Brayshaw chose that moment to lower himself slightly it copped him square on the jaw, the result was a broken jaw to Brayshaw and 8 weeks for Gaff. What if Witherden had chosen that moment to re-tie his laces or pull up his socks? It might sound ridiculous, but a blind swinging elbow could go that wrong.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What did jai newcombe get for his punch into the guts of his opponent?

Same penalty.

Difference is Newcombe knew where he was hitting. Dusty swung an elbow behind him not having a clue where he was hitting.

So it should have received a potential to cause serious injury update which would be a week.

If Toby Greene did this noone would be surprised if he got a week.

That is what Robbo was saying and was right, for probably his one and only time this year.
 
Same penalty.

Difference is Newcombe knew where he was hitting. Dusty swung an elbow behind him not having a clue where he was hitting.

So it should have received a potential to cause serious injury update which would be a week.

If Toby Greene did this noone would be surprised if he got a week.

That is what Robbo was saying and was right, for probably his one and only time this year.
You think the GOAT doesn’t know the exact spot his elbow is going to hit?
Dusty has been suspended previously but on the whole is a very fair player. Witherden was obviously hanging on to him illegally, Dusty told him to stop and he didn’t.
He’ll think twice next time.
 
That sort of incident takes place every game, often multiple times. If we started rubbing players out for that then we've got issues.
There seems to be a greater scrutiny of Richmond players in the media.
If Dangerfield did that,you would not hear about it from the media.
If Daicos did it,nothing to see here.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top