- Thread starter
- #201
The MRO or Tribunal ruling an act as careless is surely not evidence that the act was deliberate though? You need better evidence than that to make the statement you made.
MRP / Trib. Jeremy Cameron makes contact with umpire while celebrating a goal
- Thread starter Meteoric Rise
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The MRO or Tribunal ruling an act as careless is surely not evidence that the act was deliberate though? You need better evidence than that to make the statement you made.
- Thread starter
- #202
The fine fir Unreasonable or Unnecessary Contact with an Umpire:
First offence: $2500 ($1500)
Second offence3500 ($2000)
Third offence: $5000
The AFL would embarrass itself if Jezza copped a fine as the boundary umpire had ample opportunity to get out of Jezza’s way
Only in a Cats supporters mind is it incumbent upon the umpire to avoid contact with a Cats player who is charging at him at full speed while the ball is not even in play.
Surely it is incumbent upon the player to look where he is running rather than running around like a lunatic with his eyes somewhere else when the ball is not even in play.
What Cameron did is the equivalent of smashing into a lollipop person at high speed in your car because you are reading something on your phone rather than watching the road. What you are arguing is like saying it would be the lollipop person's fault they got hit they should have moved out of the way. It doesn't wash.
Last edited:
- Sep 18, 2014
- 22,047
- 19,913
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Man United, San Antonio Spurs
Haha no it’s not, that’s a ridiculous comparison.
Bloody hell some people have lost the plot over this.
What a world we live in.
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
In a weekend where there were many incidents that could be looked at by the MRO Meteoric “I’m not obsessed with Geelong” Rise starts a thread on the Jeremy Cameron incident and then proceeds to contribute more than 10% of the posts in the thread. Where was your thread when Dusty dislocated Adam Wojcik’s shoulder?
- Thread starter
- #205
Why are you attributing the words "I am not obsessed with Geelong" to me? I have never said that. I ******* hate Geelong. I am always happy to highlight anything that reflects badly on Geelong because the mainstream media point blank refuse to do so.
I posted footage of the Dusty collision with the goal ump earlier in this thread. What it showed was in the course of Dusty trying to contest the ball and kick a goal he had a collision with the goal umpire that could only have been avoided had Dusty not tried to contest the ball and kick the goal. So that is a red herring in this thread.
- Thread starter
- #206
The comparison doesn't become untrue because you declare it so.
The similarities between the two things are clear. There is a difference in the likely scale of damage that could be caused in the two scenarios, but I did not claim otherwise.
Cameron was running full tilt and not watching where he was going and this caused him to collide with the umpire. If you are in charge of a moving object that could injure people( a car, bike, your own body) then I think it is a reasonable expectation you watch where you are going so as to avoid colliding with other people. This might be different if the ball was in play and the player was running one direction and watching the ball while it was behind him, participants in a live play scenario know to expect that. What Cameron did was foolish, reckless, and potentially dangerous to himself and the umpire and it should be dealt with accordingly.
Last edited:
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
You never know with MR. He starts off trolling, but gets himself so worked up he creates the impression that he actually believes what he is posting. Cameron ran 20 metres after kicking a goal and his actions were, quote, "foolish, reckless, and potentially dangerous to himself and the umpire and it should be dealt with accordingly". LOL
Last edited:
- Jan 20, 2015
- 2,577
- 4,817
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
I don’t think it should be anything really, but if a player is in the way as an umpire backs out of a ball up and makes contact, it’s a fine for careless contact, even if the player totally has eyes on the ball. I certainly don’t think celebrating should be stamped out, but I can see how the afl could come to the conclusion that this is a fine.
Mofra
Moderator
- Dec 6, 2005
- 67,113
- 198,420
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Footscray, Coney Island Warriors
- Moderator
- #211
A complete accident, so no way should there be any suspension for that.
Does the AFL have scope to issue a warning or reprimand? That would be the sensible option I would have thought. If it happens again, he gets fined.
Does the AFL have scope to issue a warning or reprimand? That would be the sensible option I would have thought. If it happens again, he gets fined.
or sadder
In those situations the umpire always waves an arm back before the ball up to remind the players that that is "their space", hence any collision carries some degree of negligence on the part of the player as they should know the umpire will be there.
Indeed the whole process of the umpire "claiming" that space came about because there was a problem of too many collisions.
Player umpire contact from goal celebrations just isn't a problem in the game.
- Feb 12, 2017
- 16,610
- 43,514
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Case closed, from the great man himself.
I will take the -8 weeks!
I love the one where Umpire Cameron took a chest mark
- Feb 12, 2017
- 16,610
- 43,514
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Wasn't even mentioned in the MRO report. Meek a fine, Rohan 1 week, Day 2 weeks, and for OP an indefinite case of stoopid.
For all intents and purposes, JC was still part of the play. While he had already disposed of the ball, his celebration was a continuation of the play. He was the spectacle.
So much so that all the cameras in the stadium continued to track and film him. With millions of viewers watching what they intend to see every week, the players, not the umpires.
Meanwhile a boundary umpire has hurtled towards the play at top speed and collided with a player. The MRO non- decision today suggests that umpire was probably in the wrong for recklessly hurtling toward the play.
Thankfully for the AFL our star player was not injured or they would potentially be liable for the lack of training and awareness of their official.
- Feb 9, 2015
- 4,661
- 9,200
- AFL Club
- Geelong
He got 0!?
There has to be some sort of conflict of interest inside AFL House (not a bad idea for a thread btw).
There has to be some sort of conflict of interest inside AFL House (not a bad idea for a thread btw).
It is an interesting topic - while obviously Jezza shouldn’t go, all this time we’ve heard about duty of care. Players can go the ball and head knock someone and it’s “duty of care”.
If Cameron ran into Paddy McCartin & he got concussed then the AFL probably turns around and gives him 2 weeks - careless, high impact, high contact…no one genuinely thinks Cameron was at fault or did anything wrong but there is definitely some inconsistency
If Cameron ran into Paddy McCartin & he got concussed then the AFL probably turns around and gives him 2 weeks - careless, high impact, high contact…no one genuinely thinks Cameron was at fault or did anything wrong but there is definitely some inconsistency
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,539
- 40,733
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Run around like a dickhead after kicking a goal and running in to an umpire is now getting added to the Toby Greene playbook.
Similar threads
- Poll
