Luke Parker bump on Jarman Impey [Cleared, No alternative to contest ball]

[Obeanie1]

I don’t simply because IT WAS ACCIDENTAL HEAD CONTACT.

Was the action leading up to the head clash accidental?

Was there a reasonable alternative.

Boys on the couch didnt agree with the Parker decision and again mentioned the Burton decision also being flawed.

But we move on and look forward to the next bizarre episode of chook lotto brought to us by the AFL MRP.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Was the action leading up to the head clash accidental?

You seem to really have a problem understanding the words “accidental head clash”.

It doesn’t matter if Burton ran up to Higgins doing scissor kicks, the AFL said his action was completely fair and reasonable and the fact he knocked him out was due to...wait for it....an accidental head clash.

 

[Obeanie1]

You seem to really have a problem understanding the words “accidental head clash”.

It doesn’t matter if Burton ran up to Higgins doing scissor kicks, the AFL said his action was completely fair and reasonable and the fact he knocked him out was due to...wait for it....an accidental head clash.

And 12 months ago accidental head clashes from electing to bump didnt cut it as an excuse to knock someone out when you had a reasonable alternative such as tackling.

What part of the AFL doing back flips do you not understand. Healy on the Couch said we are now confused with the message the AFL is sending. Last year we were getting clear black and white direction on protecting the head. Now its gone back to grey. Is the AFL serious about concussions or not?

The issue really is a bump that goes wrong careless or in extreme cases reckless?

When is rough conduct reportable?

Are head clashes always unforeseeable accidents?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

And 12 months ago accidental head clashes from electing to bump didnt cut it as an excuse to knock someone out when you had a reasonable alternative such as tackling.

What part of the AFL doing back flips do you not understand. Healy on the Couch said we are now confused with the message the AFL is sending. Last year we were getting clear black and white direction on protecting the head. Now its gone back to grey. Is the AFL serious about concussions or not?

The issue really is a bump that goes wrong careless or in extreme cases reckless?

When is rough conduct reportable?

Are head clashes always unforeseeable accidents?

Healy is a ******* moron. Every time he opens his mouth s**t pours out.

There’s no grey area. The ruling is the rulings.

If you choose to bump and make head contact you’re in trouble, but if you make contact with the body and there’s an accidental clash of heads you’ll most likely be fine.

 

[go you pups]

So many melts here still

The right decision was made for a change...

 

[Number37]

Lindsay Thomas must be thinking...

No point reading past that!

 

[HairyO]

And 12 months ago accidental head clashes from electing to bump didnt cut it as an excuse to knock someone out when you had a reasonable alternative such as tackling.

What part of the AFL doing back flips do you not understand. Healy on the Couch said we are now confused with the message the AFL is sending. Last year we were getting clear black and white direction on protecting the head. Now its gone back to grey. Is the AFL serious about concussions or not?

The issue really is a bump that goes wrong careless or in extreme cases reckless?

When is rough conduct reportable?

Are head clashes always unforeseeable accidents?

12 months ago which accidental head clashes had people miss weeks?

Which MRP members voted for punishment?

You do realise accidental head clashes have been allowed since 2015?

 

[Obeanie1]

12 months ago which accidental head clashes had people miss weeks?

Which MRP members voted for punishment?

You do realise accidental head clashes have been allowed since 2015?

Wrong.

Go read the current AFL guidelines.

''Head clashes may be considered reasonably foresseeable.......players who elect to bump, resulting in a head clash, may be liable for sanction if the level of impact is above the threshhold requied to constitute a reportable offense".

So again a bit of room for interpretation there.

 

[HairyO]

Wrong.

Go read the current AFL guidelines.

''Head clashes may be considered reasonably foresseeable.......players who elect to bump, resulting in a head clash, may be liable for sanction if the level of impact is above the threshhold requied to constitute a reportable offense".

So again a bit of room for interpretation there.

Where is what I said wrong? In 2014 the rule was any head hit from a bump would see a sanction which is why Fyfe got 2 weeks. For 2015 they changed that rule so that it is no longer automatic.

We have now seen 2 accidental head clashes allowed which occurred during bumps.

 

[JackFlash]

No point reading past that!

Parker was careless, Thomas was careless and you can't see past that , let alone read past it?
He's a very lucky man in this very confused world of MRO decision making. I'm a great advocate for the bump and tackle, physicality is part of the excitement the game provides, but Parker's bump was dangerous.

 

[Number37]

Parker was careless, Thomas was careless and you can't see past that , let alone read past it?
He's a very lucky man in this very confused world of MRO decision making. I'm a great advocate for the bump and tackle, physicality is part of the excitement the game provides, but Parker's bump was dangerous.

I was saying that Thomas doesn't think.

If it was a bump it would be dangerous, no question. But it wasn't a bump.

 

[Luv_our_club]

Parker was careless, Thomas was careless and you can't see past that , let alone read past it?
He's a very lucky man in this very confused world of MRO decision making. I'm a great advocate for the bump and tackle, physicality is part of the excitement the game provides, but Parker's bump was dangerous.

Exactly my thoughts.

This was the kind of bump that was considered egregious when the bump was always lawful in the early 2000s and then Byron Pickett came along. Anything that is front on, with a player bending over the ball, is too dangerous.

The momentum that Parker had coming into a flat footed Impey is the problem. He had an obligation to slow down, or to try to slow down. If he did try then it would have been just a fee kick, but since he went full pace, it should be a week (even if it was not malicious).

 

[MattyB_76]

Healy is a ******* moron. Every time he opens his mouth s**t pours out.

There’s no grey area. The ruling is the rulings.

If you choose to bump and make head contact you’re in trouble, but if you make contact with the body and there’s an accidental clash of heads you’ll most likely be fine.

Which one is it? "No grey area", or "most likely be fine"? I don't think you can claim those 2 things in consecutive paragraphs, unless your name is Michael Christian.

 

[JackFlash]

I was saying that Thomas doesn't think.

If it was a bump it would be dangerous, no question. But it wasn't a bump.

If it wasn't a bump that sent Impey off the ground what was it? Parker clearly turns and collects him in the head with his hip and he is stunned then leaves the field?

 

[Back One Out]

Healy on the Couch said we are now confused with the message the AFL is sending.

If you rely on people in the media to clue you in, then you will spend your life being confused. The Naitanui suspension was the perfect example. People in the media are experts at whipping up controversy and pushing people's 'outrage' buttons because it generates clicks, boosts ratings and sells papers. If you ignored all the f-wits in the media and followed the AFL closely, you would've known Nicnat was a goner. (He isn't the first player to be suspended for a dangerous non-sling tackle)

Re/Burton... The AFL changed the rules with bumps and permitted accidental head clashes over 2 years ago. It's not even a new rule change!! Michael Christian went around to all the clubs during the pre-season and reminded them of this and other rules.

The reason why people are confused is that we have f**king morons in the media like Gerard Healy and Mark Robinson who get paid big dollars to talk footy, but they're too damn lazy to keep abreast of rule changes. They fill their listeners heads up with s**t.

There's your source of confusion. It's not the AFL. It's the lazy, self-satisfied dipshits who work in the football media. When they're not on camera, they too busy getting away from the footy, sinking piss, playing golf, etc. Most of them are USELESS at their job (i.e. covering the game)

7 days before Shaun Higgins was knocked out, Mark LeCras knocked out Ben Ainsworth in an identical manner. He was given the green light by the MRO. Were YOU paying attention? I was. I knew Burton would be cleared because I read the MRO's report from Round 4 and I watched the video on afl.com.

No confusion for me. I then sat back and watched the "confusion" and "outrage" over Burton in the media and laughed in amazement as everyone parroted each other saying "he had the option to tackle". (Damn right he did. He also had the option to bump.)

People hear Robbo whinging over and over about the Tom Mitchell "elbow" to Goldstein's head and they actually believe him - If they watched the footage and used their eyes/brains, they can see it wasn't an elbow strike, but a raised forearm (of insufficent force) and Goldstein actually leaned into it (therefore unintentional). It's actually quite interesting to hear Robbo continually lie about it and see the way he shapes the opinions of casual non-discerning viewers. Makes me realise how a lot of people watching Fox Footy are zombies.

My advice to you is stop watching 360 and On The Couch and taking them seriously. They're either thick as a plank (Healy, Brown, Robbo), or they're hopelessly biased (Whateley, Robbo, Roos.) Learn to laugh at them. Do like I do and yell "Bullshit" at your TV every time they speak.

 

[Number37]

If you rely on people in the media to clue you in, then you will spend your life being confused. The Naitanui suspension was the perfect example. People in the media are experts at whipping up controversy and pushing people's 'outrage' buttons because it generates clicks, boosts ratings and sells papers. If you ignored all the f-wits in the media and followed the AFL closely, then you would've known that Nicnat was gone from the moment it happened. (He isn't the first player to be suspended for a dangerous non-sling tackle)

Re/Burton... The AFL changed the rules with bumps and permitted accidental head clashes over 2 years ago. It's not even a new rule change!! Michael Christian went around to all the clubs during the pre-season and reminded them of this and other rules.

The reason why people are confused is that we have f**king morons in the media like Gerard Healy and Mark Robinson who get paid big dollars to talk footy, but they're too damn lazy to keep abreast of rule changes. They fill their listeners heads up with s**t.

There's your source of confusion. It's not the AFL. It's the lazy, self-satisfied dipshits who work in the football media.

7 days before Shaun Higgins was knocked out, Mark LeCras knocked out Ben Ainsworth in an identical manner. He was given the green light by the MRO. Were YOU paying attention? I was. I knew Burton would be cleared because I read the MRO's report from Round 4 and I watched the video on afl.com.

No confusion for me. I then sat back and watched the "confusion" and "outrage" in the media over the next few days and laughed in amazement as everyone parroted each other saying "he had the option to tackle". (Damn right he did. He also had the option to bump.)

People hear Robbo whinging over and over about the Tom Mitchell "elbow" to Goldstein's head and they actually believe him - If they watched the footage and used their eyes/brains, they can see it was a forearm (of insuffienct force) and Goldstein leaned into it (unintentional) - It's actually quite interesting to hear Robbo lie about it and see the way he shapes the opinions of casual non-discerning viewers

My advice to you is stop watching 360 and stop watching On The Couch...
You won't be missing anything. You'll actually be smarter for not listening to those clowns.

The only reason I occasionally watch is laugh at their bullshit. They're either thick as a plank (Healy, Brown, Robbo), or they're hopelessly biased (Whateley, Robbo, Roos)

So you watch 360 but other people shouldn't because it's bullshit?

Do you work for the AFL?
You should, you are good at arguing black is white and white is black, AT THE SAME TIME.

 

[Back One Out]

So you watch 360 but other people shouldn't because it's bullshit?

Do you work for the AFL?
You should, you are good at arguing black is white and white is black, AT THE SAME TIME.

I edited the last paragraph of my post to be more accurate about how I feel.

 

[Number37]

I edited the last paragraph of my post to be more accurate about how I feel.

The problem with what you are saying is that you assume people are listening to Robbo/Whateley & co and taking their word as the gospel truth.
You recognise that they are idiots, as most people do.

 

[rhinowce]

Parker was careless, Thomas was careless and you can't see past that , let alone read past it?
He's a very lucky man in this very confused world of MRO decision making. I'm a great advocate for the bump and tackle, physicality is part of the excitement the game provides, but Parker's bump was dangerous.

Impey going in head first was dangerous, but hey at least when he's in a wheelchair he will get comfort from the fact he managed to draw a free kick.

 

[liz]

If it wasn't a bump that sent Impey off the ground what was it? Parker clearly turns and collects him in the head with his hip and he is stunned then leaves the field?

The MRO's assessment was that it was contact arising from two players contesting the ball, not contact arising from a deliberate bump by Parker.

People may, or may not, agree with the MRP/MRO/tribunal's approach towards contact in genuine contests (as opposed to deliberate bumps) but the rulings in these circumstances have been consistent over the last few seasons.

 

[Crow till I die]

Healy is a ******* moron. Every time he opens his mouth s**t pours out.

There’s no grey area. The ruling is the rulings.

If you choose to bump and make head contact you’re in trouble, but if you make contact with the body and there’s an accidental clash of heads you’ll most likely be fine.

This was virtually identical to the douglas bump in round 1 but 2 different outcomes with one getting a suspension and the other getting no suspension..no wonder clubs and supporters get frustrated

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

This was virtually identical to the douglas bump in round 1 but 2 different outcomes with one getting a suspension and the other getting no suspension..no wonder clubs and supporters get frustrated

I can’t help you if you think they were identical, because they simply weren’t.

 

[Crow till I die]

I can’t help you if you think they were identical, because they simply weren’t.

yeah...nah

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

yeah...nah

Dude. They’re not even close to the same thing. Stop.

 

[Crow till I die]

Dude. They’re not even close to the same thing. Stop.

like I said...yeah..nah