Hawkins elbow

Remove this Banner Ad

WestCoast05 said:
Agreed it will likely just be a fine.

But he won't get any more leeway this season in any further incidents so he'll have strive to be more mindful.
Click to expand...
He’s never been given leeway before- alway gets rubbed out, sometimes for 50/50 stuff, sometimes he deserves it, so it will be interesting to see.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

romeohwho said:
He’s never been given leeway before- alway gets rubbed out, sometimes for 50/50 stuff, sometimes he deserves it, so it will be interesting to see.
Click to expand...

Let's face it, this stuff is all based on commentator outrage - that's how Jetta can get a week for the softest, slowest, drop-on-the-spot, one single movement tackle.

There wasn't really any outage so should be all good. Damn shame that's how it works, but it's the way it is atm.
 
He will need to dish out another one of those plus a punch to the head over the next 3 weeks if he wants a 1 week rest.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

muzhogg said:
Seems about right.

A bit careless, but geez we're getting soft if we want a bloke to serve time for that.
Click to expand...
Not a "bit" careless, but very careless for Hawkins. Just when I thought his brain fades were a thing of the past.
 
smasha said:
AFL corruption strikes again.

Soldo’s one set the precedent,Ablett does worse,gets a one week rest so he can play his grand final Friday and Hawkins wacks a bloke and gets a 3k fine and pat on the bum from Hocking.

AFL,nanny state.
Click to expand...

The frustrating part is that precedent doesn't apply -- it lets the AFL ignore all the decisions they got wrong.

Personally think Soldo should have been a fine too, but don't have a problem with the Hawkins decision.

My biggest issue is with claims that player actions are deliberate or not -- simply put, there shouldn't be any such thing as "delibrate, low impact" because I just can't see anybody actually intending to hit another player high and not actually doing a proper job of it.
 
muzhogg said:
The frustrating part is that precedent doesn't apply -- it lets the AFL ignore all the decisions they got wrong.

Personally think Soldo should have been a fine too, but don't have a problem with the Hawkins decision.

My biggest issue is with claims that player actions are deliberate or not -- simply put, there shouldn't be any such thing as "delibrate, low impact" because I just can't see anybody actually intending to hit another player high and not actually doing a proper job of it.
Click to expand...
Richmond should have argued insufficient force for Soldo and he would of got off
(he shouldn't of been suspended either way)
 
Sttew said:
Not a "bit" careless, but very careless for Hawkins. Just when I thought his brain fades were a thing of the past.
Click to expand...

Don't know much about the guy's track record to be honest.

Watching the video of the incident, I have no idea what he was trying to achieve. It didn't look like an attempt at a hit, to be sure, but otherwise I can't think what the blazes he was doing. "Brain fade" might actually cover it! :)
 
Was a clear accident and he apologized right away.

Couldn't find a more gracious player
 
The thing with Hawkins is that he is a recidivist. How many times throughout his career has he been found guilty of minor little taps and jumper punches? Every year there seems to be some outcry about “you can’t suspend him for that”... yep, none of them really deserve more than a fine maybe, but clearly the message isn’t getting through. Surely he is at the point now where they have to look at his record and start with a week off.
 
BF Tiger said:
The thing with Hawkins is that he is a recidivist. How many times throughout his career has he been found guilty of minor little taps and jumper punches? Every year there seems to be some outcry about “you can’t suspend him for that”... yep, none of them really deserve more than a fine maybe, but clearly the message isn’t getting through. Surely he is at the point now where they have to look at his record and start with a week off.
Click to expand...

Thats the way it used to be with carry over points. It was terrible, watching guys get weeks for pitiful incidents.

This way is better, but people need to understand the consistancy is in the result not the action. The guy Hawkins hit sprung 10 feet off the ground and was at full gallop as soon as 50 was given, I don't remember Soldo's result but I assume he stayed down a few seconds which got him the week.

The Hawkins hit as well as all of Ablett's make sense with a view on the damage actually done to the victim.
 
donbooger said:
Thats the way it used to be with carry over points. It was terrible, watching guys get weeks for pitiful incidents.

This way is better, but people need to understand the consistancy is in the result not the action. The guy Hawkins hit sprung 10 feet off the ground and was at full gallop as soon as 50 was given, I don't remember Soldo's result but I assume he stayed down a few seconds which got him the week.

The Hawkins hit as well as all of Ablett's make sense with a view on the damage actually done to the victim.
Click to expand...
I understand your point but IIRC quite often a suspension for a minor infraction would follow because of a more serious offence previously. Ie Someone would have a two week suspension, accept the early plea and have carry-over points right near the limit. A tummy tap would then have been enough to get the points over the limit. So yes, I agree that could result in some terrible decisions at the tribunal.

But with Hawkins (for example) now there must be five or six(?) incidents. Surely it reaches a tipping point where the tribunal decides that punishments are not acting as a deterrent.
 
BF Tiger said:
But with Hawkins (for example) now there must be five or six(?) incidents. Surely it reaches a tipping point where the tribunal decides that punishments are not acting as a deterrent.
Click to expand...
But that’s is not how the system works. Don’t forget Hawkins was fined + had a 50 metre penalty awarded against him. It’s his first blemish in 2019.
 
Hawkins probably saw Nankervis get away with throwing the forearms around a few weeks ago. Players are keen to find a loophole to violence. If you go to AFL.com you can view Crisso explaining his fine for Hawkins thusly: 'I used my psychic powers to determine that it was not an intentional act.' He goes on to say that he gave Sicily a fine for a body punch instead of a suspension 'because I'm a ******* idiot.' Crisso shouldn't be so hard on himself. Speaking of violence, Rhyce Shaw took a page out of Richmond's book, and told his players to tackle to hurt. I've never been so proud of him. I always knew he'd make a great coach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kreuuuzeurns
MRP / Trib. Pickett elbow on Soligo
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
170
Views
5K
sobrave
sobrave
matthew_s
Dusty elbowing
2 3
Replies
54
Views
3K
Back One Out
Back One Out
MickG88
Elbowing
Replies
23
Views
1K
smeltitdeltit
smeltitdeltit
Jim Prideaux
Umpiring The Hawkins Shuffle
Replies
2
Views
525
Jim Prideaux
Jim Prideaux

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top