Maynard cleared by tribunal for Brayshaw collision

[Corn Cobbers]

THE AFL has opted against appealing the Tribunal's decision in the Brayden Maynard case, meaning the Collingwood defender is in the clear to play in the Magpies' preliminary final.

AFL ponders rule change after Maynard Tribunal call

The Brayden Maynard saga is officially over after the AFL opted not to appeal the Tribunal's decision

www.afl.com.au

The AFL, having brought the charge against Maynard, said on Wednesday that it would not challenge the Tribunal's ruling, but would comment further later in the day.

"The AFL has confirmed that after careful consideration and review of the Tribunal's decision and reasons following last night's hearing into the incident involving Collingwood's Brayden Maynard and Melbourne's Angus Brayshaw, the AFL has decided not to appeal the Tribunal's decision," a statement read.

"Per the Tribunal Guidelines the AFL had to make this decision by 12:00pm AEST today.

"The AFL will release a further statement later today."

Finally some sanity

 

[Tonythetiger]

The current interpretations are that if you bump, you wear the consequences, and sometimes you get done for something that had "the potential to cause injury".

When a player mis-times something and have left the ground, it speaks to the duty of care they have to the opposition player. The ball was in Melbourne's possession, so it's whether the defensive action from Maynard provided sufficient duty of care and minimised the chance of injury which it didn't.

If the ball was in dispute and say Maynard marked it and on the way down bumped Brayshaw then I would say that is more of a legitimate football action as he would have won the ball that neither side has possession of and the contact was accidental.

The idea that going for a leaping smother allows for like a blanket comment on "It's a football action, move on" i don't think is going to fly.

Be interesting to see which way they go, I reckon he doesn't get weeks because the AFL are going to go hard on JVR so they can appear to be tough on head bumps in a finals series. But we all know they have no integrity anyway. I think you can make more of a case that Maynard should get weeks than you can that he shouldn't.

 

[loki04]

But he didn't turn his body to collect Brayshaw, he instantly reacted and turned his body to protect himself with a incoming collision with Brayshaw. Everyone is taught (or used to be anyway) to protect yourself at all times, which is what Maynard is doing. I just don't think it warrants a suspension.

Yup and some players in AFL also don't look to protect themselves, often, rather they look for the high free kick.

Brayshaw is one of them, he in this play changed his line of movement to turn into Maynard's line of fire instead of away from him, he neither braced for contact to mitigate it nor tried in anyway to protect himself.
Down field free kick being the aim.

They bought a rule in to stop ginni abusing head high contact rules, but yet players like Brayshaw been abusing them much longer but more subtle in their approach by simply choosing not to protect themselves.

 

[Giant Pete]

I think he’ll get off. I do however think it is worth asking, could he have put his hands and arms up to push off Brayshaw, as opposed to turning his shoulder, which consequently made contact with Brayshaws head.

 

[HotPiesWithSauce]

He could’ve stayed on the ground. The AFL don’t want players leaving the ground and losing control, putting concussion down to chance.

AFL bans players from leaving the ground during games

The AFL has announced a new rule that prohibits players from jumping at all during matches, even if they are attempting a mark or a spoil. The rule, which will come into effect from next season, is aimed at protecting players from serious injuries, such as concussions, fractures, or spinal damage.

The AFL’s football operations manager, Steve Hocking, said the rule was introduced after witnessing several horrific incidents where players jumped recklessly or collided with each other in mid-air. He said the rule would ensure the health and wellbeing of the players, as well as reduce the liability and insurance costs for the league.

“We want to see the best players on the ground, not in the hospital,” Hocking said. “Jumping is a dangerous and unnecessary part of our game, and it should be banned completely. This rule will make the game safer and more sustainable for everyone involved.”

 

[420]

You leave the ground you cop the consequences, you elect to bump and you cop the consequences. His intention is irrelevant, he left the ground and collected a player high with a bump action, he's done.

 

[faible]

Brayshaw has medical history of concussions and would go down from innocuous contact.

... couldn't be any less relevant in this scenario. It clearly was not innocuous contact.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Contact was unavoidable but dropping his shoulder was not. He should have kept his arms out and tried to minimise the hit.

No person ever would of kept his arms out. Maynard was in mid air, he was thinking of making sure he doesn't injure himself. He had to brace and human nature says every person ever would of done the same.

 

[Maddo11]

Brayshaw is one of them, he in this play changed his line of movement to turn into Maynard's line of fire instead of away from him, he neither braced for contact to mitigate it nor tried in anyway to protect himself.
Down field free kick being the aim.

They bought a rule in to stop ginni abusing head high contact rules, but yet players like Brayshaw been abusing them much longer but more subtle in their approach by simply choosing not to protect themselves.

Of all the shit takes, this is definitely one of them

 

[greatwhiteshark]

You leave the ground you cop the consequences, you elect to bump and you cop the consequences. His intention is irrelevant, he left the ground and collected a player high with a bump action, he's done.

Wrong on so many levels.

 

[faible]

Of all the s**t takes, this is definitely one of them

AFL Club: Collingwood

 

[PowerBaz]

* it. If Sicily can be suspended for 3 weeks for an football act which was an accident so can Maynard.

He didnt mean to collect Brayshaw high but that doesnt matter anymore.

the fact that its finals & its 'bruzzy' means he will get off

Imagine it was Rioli or Jonas.

The media talk will be does he miss round 1-4 next year too?

 

[juss]

Watching it, I'm not sure I'd like to see a player rubbed out for that. I think if I was in charge they're not the type of actions I'd be suspending.

However the MRP is so random as ****, that I would be equally not surprised if he got 2-3 weeks, or if he got off.

 

[420]

Wrong on so many levels.

We shall see, after the year the afl have had, its a complete coin toss.

Carn West

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Yes I would because it wasn't a malicious action. It was an accident. I am shocked reading this thread.

"This type of incident being legitimised" wat? Posters in this thread are talking about this like its Matthew Lloyd on Brad Sewell.

Lets go through this "type of incident".

Pushes up to defend a player running from the centre, Petracca was his direct opponent. We see defenders do this all game every game and the way Collingwood play, push up and pressure the player by Narrowing the space. People are suggesting he lined up Brayshaw, he wouldn't have left the ground, he wouldn't have attempted to smother. He would have beelined the player and ran straight through him if that was what he was hoping to achieve.
View attachment 1796886

Jumps to smother. I didn't catch this the first time i watched this but If you watch it from this angle, the ball deflects off Maynards elbow making it a smother and not just an attempt or from what I have seen some people suggest. 1:16 in the video from the below article

Pie defends 'footy act' in Brayshaw collision, awaits MRO verdict
View attachment 1796893

Then turns to protect the body and Brayshaw is in the landing zone. Again making this an accident and again people suggesting that he could have put his arms out to soften the blow, I don't think you have ever been in a reflexive, split second moment, in your life outside of a quick closing of the hub tab when your parent walks into your room.
View attachment 1796897

Anyone suggesting this was a deliberate action is being disingenuous. I understand that the AFL MRO and tribunal is a lucky door prize but I hate seeing players miss games for an action that is genuinely trying to influence the ball and the play and not the player.

Good pick up on the deflection. I never noticed it either and it's hard to say that it's a definitive deflection, but it does seem to have perfect rotation off Brayshaw's boot, then goes into a slightly more wobbly motion as it goes past Maynard's arm.

I’m torn

On the incident I don’t think there’s much in it (aside from a sprinting player hitting a tough shoulder).

However, do we really want to encourage poorly timed jumps that have no chance of impacting the kick and ultimately end up in a certain collision? Where one player is vulnerable from running flat out and the other has the ability to turn? I mean, if this became a common incident you know it would be stamped out quick smart.

See above. Seems he DID impact the kick. I'm fairly certain, on looking again, that he DOES touch the ball with his arm, but it's not 100% definitive.

The other factor with Mudeo's screen shots is Brayshaw is running in a straight line from the centre of the ground.


When he kicks, his body weight shifts to the left of screen, and he takes another step to the left of screen after the kick, and this puts him in Maynard's landing zone. Maynard is already in the air.


Had Brayshaw continued his original trajectory, they likely make no contact at all, or minimal contact.

 

[PowerBaz]

Brayshaw changes his line to turn into Maynard instead of away from him.

Brayshaw at no stage looks to brace for contact or protect himself.
A habit of his to draw free kicks and down field free advantage for his team. Does it weekly.

Maynard's intent was to smother the ball, not make contact and just braced for impact.

Brayshaw has medical history of concussions and would go down from innocuous contact. Much like Collingwoods Nathan Murphy.

This incident should be thrown out and not even be looked at. If it is the game is in serious trouble as a contact sport.

However JVR is in trouble, eyes off the ball and raises the elbow to McStay's jaw.

You recall Riolis arm that was flapping about earlier in the year he got two weeks for. Hardly touched the guy and wasn’t even looking at him, the guy he hit has a history of concussion, nobody said anything about that, all the media did was just hung Rioli out to dry….

 

[loki04]

What else can he do? they say.

I ask, what would he have done if he did actually smother the ball? Would he have smothered it, then turned to the side and collected Brayshaw in the head? Or would he have landed of Brayshaw with his hands out trying to cushion the impact?

Exactly.

3 weeks.

Why didn't Brayshaw put his hands out to cushion it?

Why didn't he brace for contact?

Why didn't he turn away with his last 2 steps instead of into Maynard?

Where is Brayshaws own duty of care to himself? to you know....actually protect himself?

Why is it incumbent on the bloke who launch from meters away fully stretched arms in air to change his line magically to avoid contact, when Maynard jumped brayshaw could of easily just feigned and moved around him then kicked.

Watch brayshaw weekly and he near on ALWAYS chooses to take the high contact for a free kick or downfield free. NEVER enters contested situations to defend himself hoping that if he doesn't win its a free kick.

The rules changes for Ginnivan they also need to start making players who never defend themselves more accountable for their own safety.

 

[TotalJoker]

I think Maynard shouldn't be suspended. Imo people are thinking that he deserves 4+ weeks just because their hatred of Collingwood. And yes, I also dislike Collingwood but to be completely fair, he jumped to smother the ball the moment it left Brayshaw's boot and Maynard can't really do much more while he's in the air. It's a footy accident. If you can't handle this maybe you shouldn't be playing football. It's the risk you've taken to play the game. I would be fine with 1 week but knowing how the tribunal have been this year it could be any number of weeks.

 

[ChristianBoy]

I’m torn

On the incident I don’t think there’s much in it (aside from a sprinting player hitting a tough shoulder).

However, do we really want to encourage poorly timed jumps that have no chance of impacting the kick and ultimately end up in a certain collision? Where one player is vulnerable from running flat out and the other has the ability to turn? I mean, if this became a common incident you know it would be stamped out quick smart.

Correct. Just line up across half back and pick off players kicking the ball and make it look like your smothering.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

He tried to smother? So now you think the rule should be when you are on the mark you cannot leave the ground?
Maybe ruckman should not be aloud to jump either.
Seriously it is an accident, bad luck to Brayshaw but it's jus that. bad luck.

If you can’t jump without causing a concussion don’t jump.

 

[Arr0w]

The only thing Maynard could have done, is rather than pulling his hands down and turn/brace, was to not turn and push Brayshaw in the chest

But, that isn't the normal mindset of any player, you grow up playing to brace for any contact with the shoulder

This year they have come down harder on any form of head contact, especially if it results in concussion, even a so called footy act

I think he gets cited/suspended, but likely overturned on appeal, but it has been a lottery

 

[Billy_01]

Not a reportable offence move on

 

[Rabish Binney]

Watching it, I'm not sure I'd like to see a player rubbed out for that. I think if I was in charge they're not the type of actions I'd be suspending.

However the MRP is so random as *, that I would be equally not surprised if he got 2-3 weeks, or if he got off.

Well you can bump an opponent, break his cheekbone and then get let off (McCartin - McAdam).

MRP is chook lotto.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Shouldn't have anything to worry about as he was contesting the ball then braced after it left.
But then again, the tribunal thought a player getting knocked out by the third man in was worth 3 weeks for a tackler, so who knows. Probably life

 

[pebblesofsand]

Wherever you are now, go stand on a desk then jump off it landing horizontal on the floor. Now lets see you not brace for your landing.
He chose to smother, Brayshaw kicked the ball and his momentum carried him forward. Maynard jumped to smother also carrying him forward. Contact is unavoidable and obviously unless you are Superman you can't change direction in flight the outcome is the outcome.
Terrible for Brayshaw but an accident that is not avoidable.

No - you miss the point. Contact was completely avoidable.

Maynard choose to leave the ground and remove his ability to avoid the subsequent head high contact therefore he must be held responsible for the outcome of his actions.

3 weeks but who knows with chook lotto.

 

[LordLucifer]

No case to answer, it was an accident as a result of a football action.