Thought it should have been a free kick - not quite sure though. Ball was fairly well gone. Goodes did everything right not to hit him dangerously.
Definitely not a report.
Definitely not a report.
-
Rd 14 Reviews + Club boards »
BL v StK · WB v FRE · RIC v HAW · ADE v SYD · NM v COL · GWS v PA ·
And post your "Liked, Learned, Hated" right here.
Goodes and Monfries incidents
- Thread starter Riders of Rohan
- Start date
- Tagged users None
MightyHawks
Norm Smith Medallist
Veteran
Footy Club Survivor 3: Hawks Back to Back
10k Posts
Hawthorn Hawks - Conor Nash Player Sponsor 2017
Hawthorn Hawks - Kaiden Brand Player Sponsor 2017
Hawthorn Hawks - James Cousins Player Sponsor 2017
Hawthorn Hawks - Jermaine Miller-Lewis, Alex Woodward, Kaiden Brand Player Sponsor 2016
Hawthorn Hawks - Lowden, Anderson, Woodward Player Sponsor 2013
Looks like simliar force to Lewis on Monfries
- Banned
- #28
Riewoldt did everything to avoid contact copped three. Goodes has to be gone.
Changa10
Premiership Player
Are those photos blocked for Swans supporters on here?
On that first picture, and I'm assuming Monfries dropped the ball when first hit by Goodes, he surely should have tackled, hits him high, and therefore will be cited.
Riewoldt was done on this recently, and Buddy repeatedly.
Goodes is in trouble.
On that first picture, and I'm assuming Monfries dropped the ball when first hit by Goodes, he surely should have tackled, hits him high, and therefore will be cited.
Riewoldt was done on this recently, and Buddy repeatedly.
Goodes is in trouble.
Riders of Rohan
Club Legend
- Thread starter
- #30
Since you haven't seen it it's probably best you don't make a judgement based on wrong assumptions.
Probably a free kick but nothing more i hope.
- Sep 10, 2006
- 20,200
- 20,900
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Liverpool FC
You'd be incorrect in your assumption.
From memory Monfries had the ball moments before the collision but it was knocked from his hands by a team mate.
Goodes was initially going in for the tackle but had to adjust as the ball spilled free. He had basically no choice at all in his actions....
If he had elected to tackle it would have been a clear free kick.
Pinpoint Pass
Team Captain
- Apr 13, 2009
- 479
- 176
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Neither had enough force for a penalty.
Official ruling.
Official ruling.
DapperDon
Custom title:
- Oct 4, 2006
- 33,072
- 53,419
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- PHX Suns, Leeds Utd, Celtics FC
Good solid hit, he didn't dip his shoulder or anything, was just a great hit.
It's what footy is about.
8 weeks most likely.
It's what footy is about.
8 weeks most likely.
Gotta admit that made me laugh.
However regarding the incident itself i must admit in the spur of the moment i thought it was a free (copious scotch and my essendon bias probably helped that) but after seeing the replay and reading some other posts, have to agree there was nothing there and play on was the right call. Never even thought about suspending the bloke.
But now that iv said that he will probably get 2 weeks and we can all just scratch our heads and continue to wonder where it is the MRP are getting that fine fine stuff they must all be smoking...
As has been said time and time again, all we want is some consistency. Its ridiculous that as spectators of the sport 50 of us see the same incident and manage to come up with 50 different outcomes, because we all compare the one incident at hand with 50 other different incidents we all saw as similar but the MRP handled differently (if that makes sense, best i could word it). I dont think that would be the case in any other sport in the world ever.
6thankgods
- Banned
- #37
LOL the AFL,S Love child walks free. What a joke.
Ben Johnson did same type of bump on Robbie Grey and is offered a reprimand.
Goodes does a bump and AFL says - ok that's ok carry on.
MRP piss off waste of time.
Goodes does a bump and AFL says - ok that's ok carry on.
MRP piss off waste of time.
"After...receiving a medical report from the Essendon Football Club, which stated there was no high contact to player Monfries and he had not been treated for any injury..."
Hawthorn United
Brownlow Medallist
Didn't look like much in it.
From what I saw, looked like they just ran into each other and Goodes pushed him off in the high chest region causing Monfries to fall to the ground. Was more the push than a bump.
From what I saw, looked like they just ran into each other and Goodes pushed him off in the high chest region causing Monfries to fall to the ground. Was more the push than a bump.
Any umpire that deemed what Goodes did to be reportable should leave the game immediately.
Any supporter that deemed what Goodes did to be reportable is just as guilty of causing our game to deteriorate into a farce as the administration itself.
http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/...kippers-for-crucial-clash-20110808-1ijba.html
Congrats to the Dons for their honesty in their medical report that said there was no high contact.
Congrats to the Dons for their honesty in their medical report that said there was no high contact.
SinCitySainter
Senior List
The problem though is that it doesn't matter what Goodes or Judd do they simply will not be suspended as the AFL sees them as marketing tools.
In this situation I think the decision is correct and he is clear to play but in previous incidents he has got away with murder.
He or Judd could walk onto the field with a knife and stab someone and the MRP would deem it insufficient force.
So the MRP now use the following criteria to assess incidents:
Was the incident deliberate?
How hard was the impact?
Was the impact high?
Was the player injured?
And is the player reported a valuable marketing tool (this supersedes all other considerations) ?
In this situation I think the decision is correct and he is clear to play but in previous incidents he has got away with murder.
He or Judd could walk onto the field with a knife and stab someone and the MRP would deem it insufficient force.
So the MRP now use the following criteria to assess incidents:
Was the incident deliberate?
How hard was the impact?
Was the impact high?
Was the player injured?
And is the player reported a valuable marketing tool (this supersedes all other considerations) ?
Changa10
Premiership Player
Just watched the MRP video, and agree with what you say above. I hope the MRP can assess future similar instances like this one
Can't believe this wasn't a free kick. How can an umpire who calls high contact for a stroke of the shoulder in a tackle see this incident and not give a free kick for high contact? I agree it wasn't worthy of a suspension but surely on first look you could not say that it wasn't high contact.
baja
Premiership Player
This...
They could have done what Geelong did when Mumford 'sling' tackled Ablett.
Geelong produced a medical report claiming head injury, concussion etc even though he didnt leave the field, bounced to his feet, won the next 5 contests in a row and went on to be best on ground.
Mumford got 2 weeks for a fair tackle and it set the precedent for all future 'sling' tackles.
It was a dog act from Geelong FC and payback for losing Mumford and now we all paying for stupid rule.
baja
Premiership Player
Monfries hit his head on the ground, not Goodes.
vonn
Bigfooty Legend
10k Posts
Pokemon is Life
Meet-Up Master
Pantskyle
Podcaster
WCE Wings Guernsey
Casey Tutungi Future Fund
- Sep 29, 2008
- 20,495
- 12,339
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Do you know what evidence is? I love the idea that because he has won 2 brownlows he is the 'umpire's love child' and hence that translates into automatic free kicks. Well, it doesn't. The statistics show that he has been penalised and has received more frees against then frees for.
Similar threads
- Poll
