Harry McKay hit on Harry Sheezel

[CrowToon]

Adelaide and North supporters outraged. Neutrals cool with the decision.

Says all you need to know.

What? That only two sets of supporters are willing to stand up for what is right in the world?

That our moral compass' are so resolute that we won't be silenced?

Well guilty as charged, Mister.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

#VICBIAS right?

You think making a sarcastic hashtag means it’s not real?

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

What? That only two sets of supporters are willing to stand up for what is right in the world?

That our moral compass' are so resolute that we won't be silenced?

Well guilty as charged, Mister.

Keep fighting the good fight brother

 

[SBYM]

lygon street mafia starting early with the brown paper bags this year

Racial.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

LolAFL..

He did everything he could to minimise the impact ...LOL. My 4 year old comes up with better crap than that.

For certain clubs they’ll find any reason possible to downgrade a charge. For others they’ll find any reason to upgrade it.

Not that it matters because we know they just make it up as they go along, but wouldn’t “doing everything he could to minimise the impact” involve not striking Sheezel in the head with his forearms?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

And uncle fitzy

That information might be a little outdated.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

For certain clubs they’ll find any reason possible to downgrade a charge. For others they’ll find any reason to upgrade it.

Not that it matters because we know they just make it up as they go along, but wouldn’t “doing everything he could to minimise the impact” involve not striking Sheezel in the head with his forearms?

Don't hate us 'cos you ain't us!

Our legal strategies are very sound. Remember this tribunal suspended Cripps last year. The appeals tribunal overturned it. So there is no logic to thinking that we have some strange power over the tribunal.

Also, the MRO smacks us for anything he can.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

Don't hate us 'cos you ain't us!

Our legal strategies are very sound. Remember this tribunal suspended Cripps last year. The appeals tribunal overturned it. So there is no logic to thinking that we have some strange power over the tribunal.

Also, the MRO smacks us for anything he can.

Not sure where hate comes into it, but I certainly don’t hate Carlton. As a SANFL Sturt barracker, if I had a second team Carlton would be it.

Given who you barrack for I don’t expect you to agree but it doesn’t change the fact - This decision was as predictable as it is ridiculous.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Not sure where hate comes into it, but I certainly don’t hate Carlton. As a SANFL Sturt barracker, if I had a second team Carlton would be it.

Doesn’t change the fact - This decision was as predictable as it is ridiculous.

The explanation was given and evidence was provided. Nothing ridiculous about it.

 

[Erakor]

For certain clubs they’ll find any reason possible to downgrade a charge. For others they’ll find any reason to upgrade it.

Not that it matters because we know they just make it up as they go along, but wouldn’t “doing everything he could to minimise the impact” involve not striking Sheezel in the head with his forearms?

It truly is the funny farm at this point.

For certain clubs they’ll find any reason possible to downgrade a charge. For others they’ll find any reason to upgrade it.

Not that it matters because we know they just make it up as they go along, but wouldn’t “doing everything he could to minimise the impact” involve not striking Sheezel in the head with his forearms?

You would think so, but this is truly the funny farm at this point. It is one thing to grade on severity of impact or force, another to use the 'logic' of but he could have hit him in the head harder if he wanted but showed super human control and only did it a little bit, as a defence.

Amazing stuff.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

The explanation was given and evidence was provided. Nothing ridiculous about it.

Mate, this is from their own guidelines:

Impact: Notwithstanding any other part of these Guidelines, any Careless or Intentional strike which is of an inherently dangerous kind and/or where there is a potential to cause serious injury (such as a strike with a raised elbow or forearm) will usually not be classified as Low Impact even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low.

Instead they’ve fallen over themselves to excuse someone striking another player in the head with his forearms. In the context of a football climate where they’re otherwise doing everything to protect the head.

 

[MrBarry]

In isolation probably not worth a week, but when you have people getting a week off for textbook tackles (Pedlar) something just isn't adding up here.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

It truly is the funny farm at this point.

You would think so, but this is truly the funny farm at this point. It is one thing to grade on severity of impact or force, another to use the 'logic' of but he could have hit him in the head harder if he wanted but showed super human control and only did it a little bit, as a defence.

Amazing stuff.

McAdam gets upgraded on “potential to cause injury” when his opponent had the ball.

McKay gets downgraded because “he could’ve hit him harder” with a cheap shot well after Sheezel had disposed of the ball.

 

[Cornelius Roy]

Did the AFL not just recently support a lengthy suspension with the justification “the potential to cause injury” as opposed to the outcome itself?

So running at someone half your size with your elbows at their head like an absolute pelican has no potential to cause injury?

Sports entertainment league.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

Did the AFL not just recently support a lengthy suspension with the justification “the potential to cause injury” as opposed to the outcome itself?

So running at someone half your size with your elbows at their head like an absolute pelican has no potential to cause injury?

Sports entertainment league.

It’s WWE but exclusively for football clubs South-East of the Murray river.

We’ve had the Bulldogs, Tigers, Demons and Cats “fairytales”. Now it’s time for the Blues. Presumably followed by the Saints.

 

[Aphrodite]

And uncle fitzy

Retired in 2017 as AFL Chairman.

Keep up

 

[PrinceCharles]

Mate, this is from their own guidelines:

Impact: Notwithstanding any other part of these Guidelines, any Careless or Intentional strike which is of an inherently dangerous kind and/or where there is a potential to cause serious injury (such as a strike with a raised elbow or forearm) will usually not be classified as Low Impact even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low.

Instead they’ve fallen over themselves to excuse someone striking another player in the head with his forearms. In the context of a football climate where they’re otherwise doing everything to protect the head.

You're not bolding the right part, their conclusion was that it wasn't dangerous. Soz but he's playing against you, I know it's scary.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

You're not bolding the right part, their conclusion was that it wasn't dangerous. Soz but he's playing against you, I know it's scary.

Why do you keep saying it’s scary?

 

[PrinceCharles]

Why do you keep saying it’s scary?

It's the first time I've said it? Are you hearing voices?

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Did the AFL not just recently support a lengthy suspension with the justification “the potential to cause injury” as opposed to the outcome itself?

So running at someone half your size with your elbows at their head like an absolute pelican has no potential to cause injury?

Sports entertainment league.

If it actually happened how you described it he would’ve knocked him out.

 

[twiggy4PM]

You're not bolding the right part, their conclusion was that it wasn't dangerous. Soz but he's playing against you, I know it's scary.

Scary as in Crows players will be hit in the head with impunity?

 

[PrinceCharles]

Scary as in Crows players will be hit in the head with impunity?

Seems like a s**t weapon, but okay why not.

 

[Rankine2Thilthorpe]

It's the first time I've said it? Are you hearing voices?

Haha could be. Must have been a different Carlton supporting poster. Apologies.

 

[Cornelius Roy]

If it actually happened how you described it he would’ve knocked him out.

“Running at someone with elbows at head”



What part are you disagreeing with?

You think that’s how you approach a contest you’re trying to impact in a legal manner and that doing so doesn’t have potential to cause injury?

I don’t even disagree with the grading. But it’s not consistent with the absolute lotto that the AFL is throwing out in its decisions at the moment which is the problem.

If you want to stamp an action out of the game with the potential to cause injury with consideration to concussion class actions surely this is one of them?

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

“Running at someone with elbows at head”



What part are you disagreeing with?

You think that’s how you approach a contest you’re trying to impact in a legal manner and that doing so doesn’t have potential to cause injury?

I don’t even disagree with the grading. But it’s not consistent with the absolute lotto that the AFL is throwing out in its decisions at the moment which is the problem.

If you want to stamp an action out of the game with the potential to cause injury with consideration to concussion class actions surely this is one of them?

His elbow wasn’t aimed at his head. He was shoving the shoulder just as he did towards Ziebell in a fair way earlier in the game, which caused a turn over as a reasonable football action.

No one is denying that he wasn’t clumsy or slightly late, or that he didn’t graze the head as he slipped off the shoulder. But to suggest he ran at Sheezel with the intention to elbow him in the face is ridiculous. And to mention that Sheezel is half his size as if it matters, just made me laugh. They are grown men playing footy.