Maxwell Gets 4

[Pie eyed]

Firstly, Maxwell is not one of our best players, and we will be able to cover his position pretty easily as he serves the suspension.

Secondly, it shouldn't be a surprise that we lost the appeal. The surprise for me was that Collingwood appealed the decision and risked the extra week against the remotest of chances that the decision would be overturned.

Collingwood obviously have more faith in him than you and support their player when they require it.
Just because there is very little chance of reversing a stupid decision is no reason to accept it and not question it.
The MRP should be questioned and scrutinized at every turn.

 

[NT.Thunder]

Firstly, Maxwell is not one of our best players, and we will be able to cover his position pretty easily as he serves the suspension.quote]


Well i disagree and think that he brings more to the paddock then alot of others in the team. Sure he doesnt get the stats like other show ponies, but the 1% and toughness he brings to the team is crucial.

I think he is hard to replace and will be missed.

Unfortunately everyone is rating games and players by Dream Team points and missing the little things that get the boys over the line in times when players need to stand up. Tough hard football used to win you a premiership, now you get weeks

I'm sure their are alot of nervous footballers out there now after this suspension has been handed down. A few unsociable footballers (Hawks i'm lookin at you) could find themselves on the pine for extended stays this season.

 

[maxwellbomb]

This is ridiculous. Nicks feet hardly left the ground so how could it be dangerous or intentionlly high. his arm was tucked in, how can someone get suspended for something that is (use to be) part of our game.

A few years ago Dean Wallis got 4 weeks for Striking

I think someone should make a list of past suspensions that have been worse but got softer penelities

 

[beez]

Absolute bollocks! We're gonna have to win the NAB cup now so Maxwell only misses the opening game of the season.

 

[maxwellbomb]

Would he be inelligble for brownlow now?

 

[MagpieTrav]

Oh well this is my final year of following football with all the rule changes and now this football has become a sport for girls wearing bibs and skirts. "Contact"

 

[FloreatPica17]

this is setting a scary precedent, seriously. where are our officials suggesting this game head exactly.

i like to watch players put their bodies on the line. players can't and shouldn't be able to dish out the biff, but they should be able to express their physicality in a fair manner, i.e Maxwell. protect the mantra 'make em hurt'

message to AFL. don't ...@#$! with my game any more i like it how it is ... hard and tough

 

[maxwellbomb]

Sureley if the umpire saw the incident and didnt call n e thing it shouldnt be bad enough to get 4 weeks. You would think an umpire who is paid to do his job would try his best so he would keep his job.

 

[Teh_Nub]

Sureley if the umpire saw the incident and didnt call n e thing it shouldnt be bad enough to get 4 weeks. You would think an umpire who is paid to do his job would try his best so he would keep his job.

you would think that of the MRP as well right lol

Bloody disgrace. The AFL employees aren't held accountable for their actions its ridiculous.

 

[Alexander323bc]

It is an absolute disgrace.

However, regardless of the punishment I think the greater tragedy is that by eliminating all the bumps in the game you will get players with absolutely no perifferal vision when going for the ball and get themselves in a position where they will get hurt. How the Eagles player did not see Maxwell coming and try to protect himself is beyond belief.

I am not saying that there should be free reign on bumps, but when the oposition player is coming right at you from a front on position, you also have a duty of care to protect yourself.

The tragedy is that there are kids coming up through the grass roots footy with absolutely no sense of their surroundings and getting themselves in positions where they can get hurt. If your don't want to get bumped, play netball.

 

[unplugged]

Would he be inelligble for brownlow now?

Good question, but somehow I don't think that's going to matter.

 

[Hells K1tch3n]

The Club should boycott the Nab community games if we get knocked out at any point of the NAB cup. **** the admin, just dont turn up to the community games. Also, whilst we're still in the NAB cup 1 of 2 things should happen, either fans boycott the games and dont turn up, or as a joint initiative between fans and the cheer squad, all banners around the grounds should read "**** OFF ANDERSON AND DEMITRIOU.... STOP RUINING OUR GAME"

 

[conno]

Would he be inelligble for brownlow now?

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What odds would Maxwell pay for the Brownlow I wonder?

 

[Spectre]

Unbiased eyes say: complete and utter nonsense. That bump was fair every frame of that replay, and Maxwell should be getting a pat on the back for it, not shafted with 4 weeks. Not his fault Eagles have glass jaws...

Anyway, hope it doesn't mess his season up too much. Oh yeah, and what Alexander323 said - pray for the kids.

 

[Juddys_navy_blues]

This is ridiculous. Nicks feet hardly left the ground so how could it be dangerous or intentionlly high. his arm was tucked in, how can someone get suspended for something that is (use to be) part of our game.

A few years ago Dean Wallis got 4 weeks for Striking

I think someone should make a list of past suspensions that have been worse but got softer penelities

There is no way he deserved 4 weeks, he didnt deserve 2 weeks, but his feet did leave the ground and 1 week would have been fair.

 

[Asgardian]

Send an email to your club protesting the tribunal decision, if enough people send enough emails, then maybe the people's voice will be heard, and we'll have a return to the tough physical game that we all love.

The following is what I have sent to my club protesting the Maxwell decision

Dear Sirs,

As a long time Port Adelaide supporter, and generally a mad footy watcher I
am most concerned with the AFL tribunal's decision to suspend Collingwood's
Nick Maxwell.

The hip & shoulder delivered by Maxwell was, in my opinion, a perfect
example of that skill within Aussie Rules. The fact that it was even
reported, let alone be found worthy of a four match suspension is an
absolute disgrace.

The fact that the West Coast player suffered a broken jaw from the contact
should in no way be even considered when looking at the incident.

Maxwell did not leave the ground, his elbow was tucked in, and the impact by him was with his hip & shoulder, just as so many juniors have previously
been coached in the correct method of executing this skill.

I would hope, and even expect, that the Port Adelaide Football Club will
raise this issue with the AFL, at the appropriate time, possibly within the
Rules committee forum, that the AFL has taken the issue of body contact
within our sport to a ridiculous level of almost "non-contact". Our sport
should be all about physical contact, and if that contact is to be
legislated out of the game, then I for one will be wondering where the game
I loved so much has disappeared to?

Even further, if hip & shoulders, such as executed by Maxwell, are to be
banished, then I honestly believe many AFL supporters will be lost to the
game, I for one will question if I should bother watching when so much of
what I previously loved is no longer part of the modern game.

I hope the Port Adelaide Football Club will fight against this movement that
seeks to banish strong physical contact from our game, otherwise it'll no
longer be considered "our game"

Yours sincerely

Chris Glover

 

[Juddys_navy_blues]

Send an email to your club protesting the tribunal decision, if enough people send enough emails, then maybe the people's voice will be heard, and we'll have a return to the tough physical game that we all love.

The following is what I have sent to my club protesting the Maxwell decision

Dear Sirs,

As a long time Port Adelaide supporter, and generally a mad footy watcher I
am most concerned with the AFL tribunal's decision to suspend Collingwood's
Nick Maxwell.

The hip & shoulder delivered by Maxwell was, in my opinion, a perfect
example of that skill within Aussie Rules. The fact that it was even
reported, let alone be found worthy of a four match suspension is an
absolute disgrace.

The fact that the Fremantle player suffered a broken jaw from the contact
should in no way be even considered when looking at the incident.

Maxwell did not leave the ground, his elbow was tucked in, and the impact by him was with his hip & shoulder, just as so many juniors have previously
been coached in the correct method of executing this skill.

I would hope, and even expect, that the Port Adelaide Football Club will
raise this issue with the AFL, at the appropriate time, possibly within the
Rules committee forum, that the AFL has taken the issue of body contact
within our sport to a ridiculous level of almost "non-contact". Our sport
should be all about physical contact, and if that contact is to be
legislated out of the game, then I for one will be wondering where the game
I loved so much has disappeared to?

Even further, if hip & shoulders, such as executed by Maxwell, are to be
banished, then I honestly believe many AFL supporters will be lost to the
game, I for one will question if I should bother watching when so much of
what I previously loved is no longer part of the modern game.

I hope the Port Adelaide Football Club will fight against this movement that
seeks to banish strong physical contact from our game, otherwise it'll no
longer be considered "our game"

Yours sincerely

Chris Glover

They played the West Coast.

 

[King Woodie]

This desn't mean we have to win the whole thing. We could lose the grand final and he would still be available in round two.

And we need to stop thinking this is an AFL versus Collingwood thing. That is just irrational. It was a very bad decision, but it is not because he plays for Collngwood. It is just that the MRP and AA are incompetent.

 

[Snag Breac]

Asgardian has the right idea - we should flood the club and/or AFL with emails of protest. The guilty parties are named below, Pie eyed.

Ben Broad 6:46 PM Tue 17 February, 2009

Nick Maxwell's appeal has been thrown out by the AFL Tribunal and will subsequently miss the next four games.


COLLINGWOOD captain Nick Maxwell will be missing for his side’s AFL season opener – and possibly longer – after failing to beat a rough conduct charge at the League Tribunal on Tuesday night.

Maxwell will have to serve a four-match ban after unsuccessfully challenging a Level Three charge for engaging in rough conduct against West Coast’s Patrick McGinnity.

Maxwell’s existing bad record in the last three seasons – combined with 82.81 points carried over from within the last 12 months – means his total penalty was increased to 440.31 points which resulted in a four-match sanction.

The hearing lasted more than an hour and the three-man jury deliberated for more than 20 minutes before deciding Maxwell would have to sit out the start of the home-and-away season – his first as skipper.

Maxwell will miss the rest of the NAB Cup, along with however many home-and-away matches remain throughout his club’s run throughout the pre-season competition.

Collingwood officials were hugely disappointed with the result, quickly leaving AFL headquarters following the hearing without making any comment.

Earlier, the Pies had been hopeful their challenge might pay dividends.

However jury members Wayne Henwood, Wayne Schimmelbusch and Emmett Dunne ruled Maxwell’s much-scrutinised bump on McGinnity was, in fact, negligent conduct, which is what the case hinged on.

The jury decided that Maxwell did have a “realistic alternative” other than shepherding McGinnity, who was left with a broken jaw from the February 7 clash at Subiaco.

A report tabled from West Coast doctor Rod Moore told of the Eagle’s injuries. He is expected to miss between eight and 12 weeks.

Legal Counsel Jeff Gleeson – despite agreeing with defence counsel that Maxwell had “displayed good technique” while shepherding – argued that it was the Collingwood leader’s decision to bump that had to be questioned.

But he didn't decide to break McGinnity's jaw - that was accidental.
Is deciding to bump now illegal?

Defence counsel Terry Forrest said “football is a fast game” and the rules only took into account so much.

“Players are only human and players can only be expected to do what is reasonable in the circumstances.”

Forrest also showed slow-motion replays of Maxwell’s shepherd, which illustrated the Magpie with his arm tucked in and his feet firmly planted on the ground.

“The acknowledgement that Mr Gleeson said the shepherd was carried out with a good technique, that is pretty much the answer in itself,” Forrest said.

Maxwell took the witness box and argued that he and his teammates were taught the correct way to shepherd and he was confident he had executed a legal bump.

He also told that given his presence near the boundary made it a two-on-one situation, it was an ideal time to shepherd and give his team an advantage.

He said coach Mick Malthouse would not have been pleased had he surrendered that advantage by merely running the ball over the boundary line.

Collingwood tabled its own medical report, with evidence suggesting Maxwell’s head had made contact with McGinnity during the clash.

However not even that could save the Magpie skipper.

Hear what Maxwell has to say about the decision on Wednesday, exclusive to Collingwoodfc.com.au
collingwoodfc.com.au

 

[SteeleBeams]

Never saw him getting off, i actually don't know why we appealed in the first place, the only place the suspension could go was up.

If you look at the footage, he never really had eyes for the ball, but it was the injury that made him receive 4 weeks. If the player didn't break his jaw, it would've just been a nice hip and shoulder, but because of the damage inflicted, he has to pay the price.

We should be fine without him imho.

 

[Snag Breac]

Never saw him getting off, i actually don't know why we appealed in the first place, the only place the suspension could go was up.

If you look at the footage, he never really had eyes for the ball, but it was the injury that made him receive 4 weeks. If the player didn't break his jaw, it would've just been a nice hip and shoulder, but because of the damage inflicted, he has to pay the price.

We should be fine without him imho.

Therein lies the problem. How are players to regulate their play if this is the guiding principle? The outcome of a physical encounter such as the bump hinges on pure chance.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Therein lies the problem. How are players to regulate their play if this is the guiding principle? The outcome of a physical encounter such as the bump hinges on pure chance.

Its not pure chance. Its a risk that the player needs to assess.

Basically the front on full force bump is not worth applying these days.

 

[Optimax]

Its not pure chance. Its a risk that the player needs to assess.

Basically the front on full force bump is not worth applying these days.

Bullshit, ive applied bumps throughout my days of playing football even those that have been more then slightly in correct (elbow up aimed at head everything).

Never once have i caused any head injury bar the time i clashed heads with another player which knocked us both out.


Even with a perfectly executed bump you dont know what teh result will be as you dont know 1) whether they have braced (shouldnt be your problem), 2) whether they will break their fall (once again not the bumpers problem) the only thing you can control is whether you bump or not. This suspension mens you can bump as long as YOU make sure the other player braces and prepares for it meaning dont bump anymore

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Bullshit, ive applied bumps throughout my days of playing football even those that have been more then slightly in correct (elbow up aimed at head everything).

Never once have i caused any head injury bar the time i clashed heads with another player which knocked us both out.


Even with a perfectly executed bump you dont know what teh result will be as you dont know 1) whether they have braced (shouldnt be your problem), 2) whether they will break their fall (once again not the bumpers problem) the only thing you can control is whether you bump or not. This suspension mens you can bump as long as YOU make sure the other player braces and prepares for it meaning dont bump anymore

Agree with that but the rules (and they are pretty new rules) state that you are responsible if you make head high contact in a bump, especially if you cause injury and even if the elbows were tucked an the bump was otherwise legal.

Soif you dont know what the result will be but the MRP will still ping you if it goes bad, then it wont be worth the risk. Front on, full contact bumps will occur much less frequently.

 

[Optimax]

Agree with that but the rules (and they are pretty new rules) state that you are responsible if you make head high contact in a bump, especially if you cause injury and even if the elbows were tucked an the bump was otherwise legal.

Soif you dont know what the result will be but the MRP will still ping you if it goes bad, then it wont be worth the risk. Front on, full contact bumps will occur much less frequently.

making this a very sad day in the world of AFL