How many weeks for Mackay?

[ossie_21]

View attachment 1157301

Damning vision of Clark not contesting the ball either before launching a vicious headbutt, Mackay very lucky to avoid injury

 

[JP Sauce]

Damning vision of Clark not contesting the ball either before launching a vicious headbutt, Mackay very lucky to avoid injury

Agreed, Clark 5 weeks.

 

[seriousiamserious]

I mentioned this before on the other thread, at the point of impact, Mackay still had a limp arm dangling out, trying to grab the footy. If he was intending to bump, then his arm needed to stiffen with a fully flexed right elbow.

If he cocked his elbow in a bumping action he automatically gets 6 weeks. Because he hits with force with a dangling arm he makes it appear he is going for the ball. However it is hard to dangle a shoulder which did the damage.

 

[Instincts]

Maybe Gleeson has seen the true power of David Mackay who exists as a divine being in the realm of the 4th dimension currently trying to defeat all of the Hunter Clarks in parallel universes and Gleeson is just trying to stop the tyrannical discrimination against Hunter Clarks

 

[Apsaalooke]

Just saying. Chris Judd was one of the fastest blokes going into and out of a contest.
To say Mackay at that speed was going for the ball is laughable. If he had of stayed out of the contest the crows player following could have tackled Clark once he took possession.

Going for the ball means grabbing it or knocking it forward to your advantage. Neither of these are impossible at any speed for an AFL footballer and happen frequently in any game ever played

 

[Milux]

What you are saying, is before Clark goes for the ball he has to look left and right like he is coming to a road intersection.

If Mackay is let off the fabric of the game will surely change and no one will be game to go for the ball if the parents even let them

If he gets suspended the fabric of the game will change and to some extent it already has. There is nothing to suggest AFL is in trouble at grass roots and my two young boys are taught to attack the football at every contest. They are obviously been taught to care for themselves and their opponents. But I will never encourage them to baulk a contest. Just the same I will encourage them to not cheap shot or run over the ball just to take the body. My wife feels the same way. All the parents at the football club my kids play at feel the same.

 

[Alesana]

Going for the ball means grabbing it or knocking it forward to your advantage. Neither of these are impossible at any speed for an AFL footballer and happen frequently in any game ever played

Look at his join date.. trolling

 

[tiger_tough]

Mate... at this point it is becoming clear that this bloke is simply trolling for attention..

everyone here need to ignore his comments.

The ignore button get some use on our board

 

[Milux]

This is silly. There are plenty of options here that aren't shirk the contest or charge in the way he did. Players do these things at almost every contest.



And he miscalculated, did something dangerous and broke the opponent's jaw. It's careless.

Mate. He attacked the football.

In all seriousness if he ran over the ball just to put physical pressure on the opponent then id be all for a suspension. But he attacked the ball. Not the player.

 

[sprockets]

I am a bit old school and where they are clearly taking the game is somewhere that will lose me. This duty of care thing is all very well and good in slow motion and frame by frame images but it simply is not how things work in real time.
The injury that Clarke has received is an accident and its nothing more and nothing less. You are saying Mackay should not of ran so quickly and have offered up alternatives but I again come back to real time and reality where all he knows is to get the ball before his opponent as he has been trained to do his whole life.
I have no doubt they will change the laws to say that he cannot make the ball his priority if he feels their may be a collision? That suits this new sport called AFL and that is where it will end up I feel.

But please can everyone spare me this duty of care rubbish, it's become the statement of the decade. No player that is actually in the moment has ever and will never ever think about a duty of care to his opponent, he will think only about what he has to do to help his team.

Play as many slow motion replays and frame by frame images as you like, offer as many alternatives as you like based on what you see in those images but they are not reality, they are not in the moment and they are not in the split second when players make decisions in sport.

If the AFL want to penalize accidental contact then I guess so be it, talk about fairness and there it is in black and white, the AFL want to penalize accidents. How unfair is that?

I am not cracking you Mr Magic, I can see you are posting as to where it is all going, I am just saying it's the wrong place to go.

There's no choice, football would be sued out of existence even faster if the outcome in this instance is tolerated by those that run the game.

 

[Cyclonus]

Just for clarity for anyone who doesn’t understand football on this thread, this isn’t an act of a bump by Mackay, but him still trying to grab at the ball (at the point of impact).
View attachment 1157309

Conclusive evidence. That's not a bump.

 

[Milux]

There's no choice, football would be sued out of existence even faster if the outcome in this instance is tolerated by those that run the game.

I know this maybe slightly over exaggerating but we honestly can't control this action. Only way we can is to go no contact.

This was a pure football accident. If people are going to get sued over these actions then I see no alternative.

Im so glad they cracked down on sling tackles and cheap shots to the head. But this incident on display is a clear football accident.

 

[John Who]

If he cocked his elbow in a bumping action he automatically gets 6 weeks. Because he hits with force with a dangling arm he makes it appear he is going for the ball. However it is hard to dangle a shoulder which did the damage.

I’m guessing you’ve never actually played footy before? Who goes to bump with that action? Or who goes to deliberately harm someone with their arm dangling out like that? If anything Mackay was at high risk for a shoulder dislocation or concussion himself.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Should be zero, but will probably be straight to the tribunal and thrown out.

He left the ground though.

The narrative that he was merely going for the ball kinda goes out the window if you drop your shoulder and jump.

 

[Drewie11]

He left the ground though.

The narrative that he was merely going for the ball kinda goes out the window if you drop your shoulder and jump.

When did he leave the ground? They just showed footage that at the point of contact one foot was still on the ground.He left the ground after contact

 

[dplggr47]

He left the ground though.

The narrative that he was merely going for the ball kinda goes out the window if you drop your shoulder and jump.

Only after colliding into Clarke did his feet leave the ground and it was not willingly.

 

[Danger Zone]

He left the ground though.

The narrative that he was merely going for the ball kinda goes out the window if you drop your shoulder and jump.

When did he leave the ground? They just showed footage that at the point of contact one foot was still on the ground.He left the ground after contact

Don't bother with Lavender, mate.
He could go read the live feed of the hearing and see that was proven false. He won't, he is one of the biggest trolls on this site.

 

[Rod Stroker]

Whately not doing a good job of hiding his position of wanting McKay gone for weeks.

Dunstall leaning the other way.

 

[Rod Stroker]

Say what you like about Dunstall, but he's usually the voice of reason. Measured, logical, sensible, comprehendible. The Anti-Robbo

 

[spudmaster]

Was the 3 weeks Gleeson is asking for the length of any suspension or how long they have to come to a decision?

 

[Mr Magic]

I cannot believe Mackay's defence suggest he did not see Clark and Clark was going full tilt himself.

Just fake news IMO.

In 4-5 metres out, after the ball kicked up on a relative dime Mackay had time to adjust afterwards, even if he miscalculated earlier, and he ought to have known, even if he said he did not, that he was not going to get there before Clark. Even so he was going to collect Clark hard at that pace and wind up and his primary job is to negate the contest not necessarily win the ball and he could do that slowing up like 25 especially since Clark was not aware of Mackay

 

[Rod Stroker]

The longer this has dragged on, the more convinced I am that this case should be thrown out. McKay can't be suspended for going for the ball, it shouldn't matter from how far away he ran to get to the contest, that is no rule against that.

 

[D-N-R]

I love the prosecution "the potential for injury was frightening " . That's pretty much the description of Aussie rules.

 

[Alesana]

Was the 3 weeks Gleeson is asking for the length of any suspension or how long they have to come to a decision?

Even if it comes back not-guilty, it's disturbing that it's taking them this long.

 

[Matera92]

Say what you like about Dunstall, but he's usually the voice of reason. Measured, logical, sensible, comprehendible. The Anti-Robbo

sobre?