How many for Darcy?

[CrowToon]

butts seems to illegally infringe and scrag as an oppopent and the umps are letting him blatantly get away with it....both lynch and now darcy have lashed out at him. it aint a coincidence.

If being a campaigner is cause for physical violence the wards would be overflowing.

I'm happy to let Bulldogs fans whinge about Butts' glass lung because what Darcy did happens a 100 times a game but if you are going to pretend haymakers are ok then you are one silly, silly sausage.

 

[Andyy]

If Lynch gets 5 then surely this gets 6+, but that's the problem with the tribunal.

They apply 'potential for outcome' when it suits, and when the outcome is clear as day they'll come out and say it was a football incident, no intent etc, water it down.

 

[Andyy]

If being a campaigner is cause for physical violence the wards would be overflowing.

I'm happy to let Bulldogs fans whinge about Butts' glass lung because what Darcy did happens a 100 times a game but if you are going to pretend haymakers are ok then you are one silly, silly sausage.

The Darcy action was a nothing vs Lynch's stupidity, but the AFL/tribunal love to harp on about outcomes and potential for outcomes.

Stupid though it is, it's very hard to see how this can be graded as anything other than intentional, body contact, severe impact.

I don't like the rules, but that seems to be how they're doing things these days.

EDIT: Oh, and it's absolutely up to the AFL to coach the umpires to pay free kicks if Butts is scragging. Not his fault if he's getting away with it. Credit to him...

 

[Bald]

The Darcy action was a nothing vs Lynch's stupidity, but the AFL/tribunal love to harp on about outcomes and potential for outcomes.

Stupid though it is, it's very hard to see how this can be graded as anything other than intentional, body contact, severe impact.

I don't like the rules, but that seems to be how they're doing things these days.

EDIT: Oh, and it's absolutely up to the AFL to coach the umpires to pay free kicks if Butts is scragging. Not his fault if he's getting away with it. Credit to him...

It has to be considered a reportable offence though before it enters the matrix.

If they deem it reportable he likely will be suspended but I don’t even know if it’ll get there.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

I feel like we would have heard something by now if it was reportable and that action was to blame

 

[Bald]

I feel like we would have heard something by now if it was reportable and that action was to blame

It may be a tricky one as the Crows to my knowledge haven’t confirmed where the injury happened with Butts - it seems most likely that it was from the open hand strike from Darcy but if there’s any doubt it wouldn’t shock me for the decision to be delayed.

 

[MagpieJo]

butts seems to illegally infringe and scrag as an opponent and the umps are letting him blatantly get away with it....both lynch and now darcy have lashed out at him. it aint a coincidence.

and thats why the fricken umpires need to stop the off the ball shit, its not tagging, its cheating! Nick cops it non stop now, and its bullshit!

 

[conrad_437]

I would be staggered if this even reaches the MRO tbh.

 

[Cyclonus]

Butts has been shown to do nothing out of the ordinary. Any holds he makes on opponents should be paid. Bad umpiring doesn't mean Butts deserves to be whacked.

 

[spenze]

I feel like we would have heard something by now if it was reportable and that action was to blame

BBQ at Christians place this arvo, he'll get onto it tomorrow.

Once again, it should be nothing

 

[spenze]

Butts has been shown to do nothing out of the ordinary. Any holds he makes on opponents should be paid. Bad umpiring doesn't mean Butts deserves to be whacked.

I'm not sure you need to respond to Tiges supporters who forgot to jump off the Bandwagon. Trying to justify a king hit has been the Tige supporters whole season, first Bolta, now Lynch, it is at least one statistic they are AFL leading this season

 

[Cyclonus]

David Zita on Fox says the AFL have cleared Darcy, nothing for which to answer.

 

[Black Diamond]

It is a bizarre one. I don't seriously think Darcy should be suspended so I am only writing this theoretically.

His opponent now has quite a bad rib/lung injury, and there is no other event which could have caused it.

Darcy struck his opponent which is against the rules. It was intentional, and to the extent we are taking injury into account it should be high-impact.

Why is he not answering for this?

 

[Bald]

It is a bizarre one. I don't seriously think Darcy should be suspended so I am only writing this theoretically.

His opponent now has quite a bad rib/lung injury, and there is no other event which could have caused it.

Darcy struck his opponent which is against the rules. It was intentional, and to the extent we are taking injury into account it should be high-impact.

Why is he not answering for this?

I’m sure there’ll be a reason but to me it probably just falls under the freak accident description. Open palm to the chest that happens probably 50-60 times a game, first time I can ever remember something like this happening.

I understand the confusion though, but I’ve noticed since the administration changes at the AFL generally speaking action is what the suspension is based off rather than outcome - which is how it should be.

Still mystifying how the young lad that did something similar to Nick Daicos got cited though.

 

[Black Diamond]

I’m sure there’ll be a reason but to me it probably just falls under the freak accident description. Open palm to the chest that happens probably 50-60 times a game, first time I can ever remember something like this happening.

I understand the confusion though, but I’ve noticed since the administration changes at the AFL generally speaking action is what the suspension is based off rather than outcome - which is how it should be.

Still mystifying how the young lad that did something similar to Nick Daicos got cited though.

Darcy could conceivably had a free awarded against him for the action though. Not sure freak accident is appropriate given the action was obviously intentional.

 

[Bald]

Darcy could conceivably had a free awarded against him for the action though. Not sure freak accident is appropriate given the action was obviously intentional.

Yeah potentially but if they gave free kicks for every open hand strike a forward gave a defender we’d get 60 extras per game, freak accident was a poor choice of words. Freak circumstance maybe a little more appropriate.

 

[CrowToon]

Reckon Darcy getting off has a lot to do with a) the unspoken code between clubs not to dob each other in and even more likely b) the difficult precedent this would set given the difficulty of proving the act causing the injury and, if the charge was proven, the pandoras box it might open with these types of cases.

 

[Smeg Head]

Reckon Darcy getting off has a lot to do with a) the unspoken code between clubs not to dob each other in and even more likely b) the difficult precedent this would set given the difficulty of proving the act causing the injury and, if the charge was proven, the pandoras box it might open with these types of cases.

c) latest media darling star of a vfl team

 

[57 Milner]

c) latest media darling star of a vfl team

Well, in hindsight we should be surprised the incident was even mentioned on VFL media at all.

 

[RAPPA]

his dad is punishment for life for the lad

 

[swoop42]

So Sam Darcy off the ball deliberately struck Butts in the chest with the heel of his hand (the strongest part) and caused a punctured lung.

So an intentional strike/punch by a 208cm man and obviously delivered with force.

AFL nothing to see here.

Paul Curtis produces a sensational rundown tackle that unintentionally caused a concussion.

AFL 3 weeks suspension.

It doesn't matter whether the actions of Darcy happen multiple times during a game without incident or he had no ill intent.

Players throughout a game lay tackles and bumps without incident and no intent to harm and yet if they choose to do them and it goes wrong they might face a consequence.

Jordon Butts sure did.

Strange how "jumper punches" have become a more acceptable part of the game than a tackle gone unintentionally wrong.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

They have said a broken rib and collapsed lung and will spend tonight in hospital.

I'm not sure it'll warrant a suspension, probably be a fine. I'll be shocked honestly if he gets games

Gotta ask...why? Break a bloke's rib cause you whack him off the ball - yet you'd be surprised if he gets suspended for it?

What's your logic?

 

[Profop]

If it really is no case to answer it can only be because the AFL don’t think they can prove the injury came from that incident

 

[Black Diamond]

The AFL will take steps to eradicate what Darcy did from the game very soon.

And they will scapegoat a battling or unfashionable player to do it, a’la Paul Curtis’ tackle.

 

[GetDimmaBack]

Did anyone at the game see what happened?
Is there any footage of the incident?