Review Geelong defeats Hawks by 5 points

Remove this Banner Ad

Ricketz

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 2, 2011
5,553
6,611
Wagga Wagga
AFL Club
Geelong
There's nothing to be said. The 'head must be protected' grandstanding lasted two weeks, they can't preach that anymore after the findings today.
They can and they will. It's about helicopter parents, soccer mums and legal bills. It's not about consistency, transparency or actually protecting the head.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ricketz

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 2, 2011
5,553
6,611
Wagga Wagga
AFL Club
Geelong
Well, I can only hope the karma bus hits Hartigan nice and hard down the track then........
A player like that doesn't really have a bright future in the game. He is like the 40 year old in the Magoo's who whacks the 16 year old out of frustration at not being able to keep up. He won't last long in the AFL.
 

dangerwood

Club Legend
Dec 19, 2015
1,133
1,844
AFL Club
Geelong
If Hartigans incident isnt worth a suspension based on the rules then so be it.

However, whilst not a comparable incident, I do feel Dangerfields suspension was a demonstration of the AFLs intent to prevent avoidable head injuries from now on, which whilst disappointing for us, is an unavoidable progression the game needs to make due to CTE.

This was another chance to rub out an aspect of avoidable head injuries. Noted that Hawkins wasn't knocked out but it was a completely unnecessary act which could contribute to impacts if repeated.

The lack of suspension means there is still room for avoidable head striking and contradicts the stance taken with Dangerfield.
 

cats_09

Moderator
Jun 21, 2011
28,614
52,694
AFL Club
Geelong
They can argue it was done during play, not well away from it.
The old "football action" idea with more leniency given for actions that occur "within play" versus behind play

Everyone knows he meant to give Hawkins a whack, but if taken to the tribunal a good legal representative would argue it was accidental as he thought he could punch the ball, blah blah blah
 

Mad_Hatter

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 12, 2015
11,187
21,550
AFL Club
Geelong
What pisses me off is when it's an incident against the Cats its "he can consider himself lucky" or "gee I can't believe he didn't go for that!" but when its a Cats player facing the music it's always "gotta set a standard and an example" or "geez he really got wacked for it".
It's ******* bullshit and I don't care who disagrees.
 

Cataholic

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 11, 2009
20,425
24,202
a happy wanderer
AFL Club
Geelong
The old "football action" idea with more leniency given for actions that occur "within play" versus behind play

Everyone knows he meant to give Hawkins a whack, but if taken to the tribunal a good legal representative would argue it was accidental as he thought he could punch the ball, blah blah blah
What, 3 minutes after Hawkins completed the mark??!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

cats_09

Moderator
Jun 21, 2011
28,614
52,694
AFL Club
Geelong
What, 3 minutes after Hawkins completed the mark??!
There's no doubt it was intentional, and that Hartigan really wanted to make Hawkins earn it, but I doubt Hawthorn accept any suspension without appealing the decision

Wouldn't be surprised if they also argued that the hit wasn't hard enough to be deemed forceful contact as Hawkins was quick to his feet to go take his kick and showed no lasting effects

It's a situation where we are shown to be too nice when on the receiving end and it keeps the opposition from having someone sit on the sidelines - as I said earlier, Hawkins needs to be told to stay on the ground for longer, take his time getting up and then really rub his head/jaws region to exaggerate the contact. Also need to ensure that the medical report shows a headache, or other such pain
 

Cataholic

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 11, 2009
20,425
24,202
a happy wanderer
AFL Club
Geelong
There's no doubt it was intentional, and that Hartigan really wanted to make Hawkins earn it, but I doubt Hawthorn accept any suspension without appealing the decision

Wouldn't be surprised if they also argued that the hit wasn't hard enough to be deemed forceful contact as Hawkins was quick to his feet to go take his kick and showed no lasting effects

It's a situation where we are shown to be too nice when on the receiving end and it keeps the opposition from having someone sit on the sidelines - as I said earlier, Hawkins needs to be told to stay on the ground for longer, take his time getting up and then really rub his head/jaws region to exaggerate the contact. Also need to ensure that the medical report shows a headache, or other such pain
Easy to prove it was intentional, and given a DIRECT blow to the head - regardless of whether it caused injury - the AFL would've had no option but to enforce a suspension given its clear statement that the head is sacrosanct.

That no injury was incurred is irrelevant. See the Rohan decision.

Yet the cowardly double-standards of the AFL have seen Hartigan excused for deliberately punching a guy to the head. It also turned a blind eye to Neale initiating the first physical strike on Rohan.

Bravo. Their integrity is impeccable.
 
Last edited:

Ricketz

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 2, 2011
5,553
6,611
Wagga Wagga
AFL Club
Geelong
I look at their list with as an unbiased view as I can form, and try as I might, I can't do anything other than believe it is very ordinary and will condemn them to some bleak years.

I hope I'm right for once.......
Last Monday was a very workmanlike performance from them. Clarkson is a good coach, so he will get that list into the 8, but apart from CJ and Worpel they are desperately lacking talent in the sub 25yo group, imo.

I'm not sure what their future picks are, but it is difficult to see them building a premiership side out of them.

Hartigan is 29, btw. Holy moly, I didn't realise he was at the Crows that long! Oh well, at least you know he won't see a premiership...
 

Cataholic

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 11, 2009
20,425
24,202
a happy wanderer
AFL Club
Geelong
Last Monday was a very workmanlike performance from them. Clarkson is a good coach, so he will get that list into the 8, but apart from CJ and Worpel they are desperately lacking talent in the sub 25yo group, imo.

I'm not sure what their future picks are, but it is difficult to see them building a premiership side out of them.

Hartigan is 29, btw. Holy moly, I didn't realise he was at the Crows that long! Oh well, at least you know he won't see a premiership...
Not sure about their picks either, but didn't they go hard with the likes of Wingard, O'Meara and Patton?
 

MacStradbroke

Premiership Player
Jul 19, 2015
3,574
7,626
AFL Club
Geelong
Surely no better way to endear yourself to the Geelong faithful than get picked up by the MRO for an incident involving your former club Hawthorn...

Isaac Smith, Geelong, has been charged with Misconduct against Daniel Howe, Hawthorn, during the first quarter of the Round Three match between Geelong and Hawthorn, played at the MCG, on Monday April 5.

In summary, he can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Misconduct. The incident was classified as a $1500 sanction as a first offence. The player can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea.



Loved it on the weekend when Mitchell took a dive and followed it up with the gut punch on O'Connor, and now the MRO have told him to pay up

Tom Mitchell, Hawthorn, has been charged with Striking (Fixed Financial Sanction) Mark O'Connor, Geelong, during the third quarter of the Round Three match between Geelong and Hawthorn, played at the MCG, on Monday April 5.

In summary, he can accept a $1500 sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Striking (Fixed Financial Sanction). The incident was classified as a $2500 sanction as a first offence. The player can accept a $1500 sanction with an early plea.



And Hartigan's ear clip didn't go unnoticed

Kyle Hartigan, Hawthorn, has been charged with Striking Tom Hawkins, Geelong, during the second quarter of the Round Three match between Geelong and Hawthorn, played at the MCG, on Monday April 5.

In summary, he can accept a $2000 sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Careless Conduct, Low Impact and High Contact. The incident was classified as a $3000 sanction as a first offence. The player can accept a $2000 sanction with an early plea.


I thought Mitchell was dead when he was laying there motionless. Pathetic flop.
 

CatToTheFuture

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 18, 2018
6,737
9,397
AFL Club
Geelong
Whenever there are these situations, that seems to get trotted out as part of the argument. Called in play the scope of careless or reckless or whatever they want to call it widens.

Personally it was just another cheap shot that need to have heavy consequences.
I have no idea how you can say something like that is in play if he took a swing after the mark
 

Remove this Banner Ad