HumanMeatball
Brownlow Medallist
Stop melting. It’s relevant to the discussion
Is Nat Fyfe in trouble for this incident?
- Thread starter Slats
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Jul 13, 2012
- 43,603
- 21,025
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Charlotte Hornets, Chelsea, Striker
I dont think "a week for that...really" is the right response.
It should be "a week for that and Tom Mitchell gets off doing the same thing 100m behind the ball...really?"
It should be "a week for that and Tom Mitchell gets off doing the same thing 100m behind the ball...really?"
- Jul 13, 2012
- 43,603
- 21,025
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Charlotte Hornets, Chelsea, Striker
Um he's putting some context around it.
The Tom Mitchell and Caddy incidents are similar ones that will always be discussed when it comes to precedent.
Sounds like you need a valium.
peternorth
Moderator
- May 6, 2005
- 127,451
- 75,570
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #504
All attention shall and will be on the brownlow count from hereon in
He didn't....
It should be "a week for that and Tom Mitchell gets off doing the same thing 100m behind the ball but with a lot less impact that didn't have enough force to warrant a charge... really?"
- Nov 14, 2007
- 48,271
- 26,739
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Jul 8, 2015
- 11,017
- 7,574
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Damn girl, that's bad...go change them undies....
- Sep 2, 2012
- 1,282
- 1,322
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- NUFC , Pistons , Lions
the player instantly got up and played the rest of the game without any signs of injury ? Should he just send a group message to the entire opposition team after next game incase any feelings were hurt ?
And they wonder why the AFL has gone downhill
The game has gone soft
The game has gone soft
Maylandsman
🐯EAT ‘EM ALIVE🐯
Softness and a lack of consistency. How Mitchell got off and not Fyfe is mind boggling.
You gotta give him credit for managing to squeeze in a Brownlow at all really!
Not going to read 15 pages. Someone may have already mentioned the point I'm about to raise.
Firstly, he should've gone for what he did. Hard to know what else he was trying to do and we move on.
BUT
Why did it take the panel or jury or whoever it is that makes the final decision 20+ minutes to reach the verdict? I don't want to make the process more dramatic but that's a bloody long time to agree he's guilty and that his actions were intentional.
So IMO the panel didn't initially agree and again IMO that should've created enough doubt as to Fyfe's intentions.
I mean how did it play out:
Juror 1: 'whaddya reckon boys'?
Juror 2: 'Intentional every day of the week'
Juror 3: 'Agree, seems a nice bloke, but he sniped him good'
Juror 1: 'Cool... so we all agree'
... 20 minutes later?
It took them 4 minutes to withdraw the charge on Jy Simpkin, but 20 minutes to keep Fyfe's punishment as it was?? All of that doesn't add up.
Lastly for the record not saying what he did didn't deserve punishment. It sucks, but if you do dumb stuff there's consequences.
Firstly, he should've gone for what he did. Hard to know what else he was trying to do and we move on.
BUT
Why did it take the panel or jury or whoever it is that makes the final decision 20+ minutes to reach the verdict? I don't want to make the process more dramatic but that's a bloody long time to agree he's guilty and that his actions were intentional.
So IMO the panel didn't initially agree and again IMO that should've created enough doubt as to Fyfe's intentions.
I mean how did it play out:
Juror 1: 'whaddya reckon boys'?
Juror 2: 'Intentional every day of the week'
Juror 3: 'Agree, seems a nice bloke, but he sniped him good'
Juror 1: 'Cool... so we all agree'
... 20 minutes later?
It took them 4 minutes to withdraw the charge on Jy Simpkin, but 20 minutes to keep Fyfe's punishment as it was?? All of that doesn't add up.
Lastly for the record not saying what he did didn't deserve punishment. It sucks, but if you do dumb stuff there's consequences.
boncer34
Formerly "Dos23"
Apart from both being head high contact the incidents aren't comparable.
- May 15, 2006
- 19,595
- 19,977
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- The Cobblers who do the Cobbling
But isn't the brief " head high contact " ?
The concussion problem will flow into the AFL same as the NFL
It's only a matter of time,
Anyway I was only highlighting how there is such a lack in consistency
- Aug 13, 2017
- 6,211
- 7,254
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Managed to squeeze it in based on elite talent. And Priddis squeezed one in because..vanilla was flavour of the year?
Well no, Priddis managed to jag one because young Nat missed a few games out suspended. Only pipped him by a vote after all. If Nat had managed to curb his enthusiasm in 2014, he’d have 2 now already.
- Aug 13, 2017
- 6,211
- 7,254
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Agree, just don’t believe that Priddis deserves the accolade, there are many WCE players more worthy imo, let alone in the rest of the comp.Well no, Priddis managed to jag one because young Nat missed a few games out suspended. Only pipped him by a vote after all. If Nat had managed to curb his enthusiasm in 2014, he’d have 2 now already.
Ahh you could argue that I guess - but I think he justified the status with an outstanding 2015 - finishing runner up to Fyfe and led an Eagles midfield to a GF. He doesn’t get the credit he deserves for that year so I think it balances out.
Plenty of guys have won Brownlows that were a stretch at the time - Paul Kelly is a good example - was a shock winner in 1995 but backed it up in 1996 in a similar fashion to Priddis. Kelly a better player obviously but their Brownlow stories are similar.
Strapping Young Lad
Moderator
- Apr 19, 2006
- 97,432
- 235,956
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Storm, Spurs, Socceroos
- Moderator
- #520
I keep reading this sort of comment, and it's amazing.
Mitchell's 'elbow' barely made Goldstein move. Contact was questionable. They gave him the benefit of the doubt due to his clean sheet.
Fyfe decked a bloke. The contact is unquestionable. He does not have a clean sheet.
it was always going to be a week.
Strapping Young Lad
Moderator
- Apr 19, 2006
- 97,432
- 235,956
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Storm, Spurs, Socceroos
- Moderator
- #521
I keep reading this sort of comment, and it's amazing.
Mitchell's 'elbow' barely made Goldstein move. Contact was questionable. They gave him the benefit of the doubt due to his clean sheet.
Fyfe decked a bloke. The contact is unquestionable. He does not have a clean sheet.
it was always going to be a week.
Maylandsman
🐯EAT ‘EM ALIVE🐯
both deserved a penalty. Mitchell was a cheap shot. Taken out or not I used to be sure you couldn't go around throwing elbows/forearms. The intent is unquestionable.
Benzi10
Senior List
Meh, a week seems fair and i stopped caring about the Brownlow after Priddis won it anyways. The way Fyfe plays i expect it won't be last week off he gets his physical presence defines him as player for the good and the bad. I don't think there was any malice in it, the pace of the game these days means a small errors of judgment will cost you.
Easy way to fix it - you hit a player off the ball, you get a week even if it was with force that would have failed to hit the skin off a custard.
The problem is the tribunal does take into account the force of the contact.
I reckon Mitchell was lucky to get off but at the same time, there was a big difference in the force of both incidents.
Maylandsman
🐯EAT ‘EM ALIVE🐯
I have no qualms with either argument.
My beef is with the system and the mixed messages we fans get.
Christensen re-wrote the rules when dealing with Mitchell.
MRP is just one big piss take.
My beef is with the system and the mixed messages we fans get.
Christensen re-wrote the rules when dealing with Mitchell.
MRP is just one big piss take.
