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

 

[Sir_Loin]

Suppose if Dangerfield can throw an elbow and knock out an oppo player in a GF without consequences he’ll get off.

In all seriousness, there’s not a more punchable head in the comp that I’d love to see suspended but there’s no way he should go for that.

But that duty of care thingy. AFL loves painting itself into a corner.

 

[Tonythetiger]

Suppose if Dangerfield can throw an elbow and knock out an oppo player in a GF without consequences he’ll get off.

In all seriousness, there’s not a more punchable head in the comp that I’d love to see suspended but there’s no way he should go for that.

But that duty of care thingy. AFL loves painting itself into a corner.

Any other player, in any other week would have been cited

 

[Libba39]

Not draw contact just not protect himself and allows contact.

There is a difference.

Trying to protect himself lol.

I'm picturing a WWE wrestler coming down off the top turnbuckle. CLEARLY dipped the shoulder and targeted the player.

Maynard plays on the edge (and good luck to him) but you can't expect to do that and not be penalised.

Queue the boos from the collingwood fans as that seems to be their favourite pastime.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Any other player, in any other week would have been cited

Agree. If it was in-season I have no doubt.

 

[Tonythetiger]

Richmond fan making it about Richmond

It's a fair point. (Ignore the team I support)

 

[Belnakor]

Have a sook.

That's not what's being said or the intent.

Its that Brayshaw also played a part in it by not protecting himself, not that it's his fault alone. It is an accidental incident not deliberate.

Brayshaw was in the act of kicking the ball and it wasn't reasonable to expect he would be shouldered in the face because smothers happen 50 times a game and almost none of them end with the player crashing into the kicker, let alone smashing them in the face.

re: the impact, it is graded on (bolded probably relevant for this case)

"
Secondly, the potential to cause injury must be factored into the determination of Impact, particularly in the following cases:

1. » Intentional strikes, such as those with a swinging clenched fist, raised forearm or elbow;
2. » High bumps, particularly with significant head contact and/or Player momentum;
3. » Any head-high contact with a Player who has his head over the ball, particularly when contact is made from an opponent approaching from a front-on position;
4. » Forceful swings that make head-high contact to a Player in a marking contest, ruck contest or when tackling;
5. » Any contact that occurs when the Victim Player should not reasonably be expecting or is not reasonably prepared for contact (i.e. contact off the ball);

"

there is zero chance this should be graded below severe.

 

[Chadwiko]

Its that Brayshaw also played a part in it by not protecting himself, not that it's his fault alone. It is an accidental incident not deliberate.

Players in the process of kicking the football do not have any requirement/expectation to 'protect themselves' cmon man.

 

[Erakor]

He did not choose to bump, ffs what is wrong with some of you. He chose to try and smother the kick, that was his only choice. Once in mid flight he has no say in where he lands and he did the right thing to brace himself to stop himself getting hurt.
Can you see a cape n Maynard where he can just fly away in another direction?

Fantasy world your living in.

He did choose to bump, evident by him bumping Brayshaw's head. Bracing and hitting someone with your shoulder while you are jumping and looking only at the other player is just another way to describe a bump.

Saying once he CHOSE to jump he had no way to not bump him doesn't make sense. Anyone who jumps into another play can say " i wasn't bumping him when I left the ground, so therefor I could not control what happened after I jumped'.

It is pretty simple. You are allowed to jump, you cant jump and collect someone's head with your shoulder after they kick the ball.

He had only eyes for the player.

If this was not a finals game, the only discussion would be how many weeks.

 

[TheGhostOfJohnBelushi]

I understand those arguing that a smother is a legitimate football action. But Maynard had a choice in how to do it. If you run at and jump towards a player straight on to try and smother a kick, you've undertaken an intentional act towards that player with the ball. You're not reasonably contesting the ball. Reasonable would be to jump up to try and smother and then turn away (to the left) to avoid the player's follow through.

Maynard caused the contact through reckless action. Yes, trying to smother, but his choice of how to do it was reckless. Someone posted Pickett doing something similar but also slightly from the side and he made sure to avoid contact with the player. Maynard did not try to avoid contact at all, he initiated it.

The entire league knows there is a duty of care now.

Sorry Collingwood fans. Defend it all you like, but it's completely reckless and deserves suspension.

 

[Raging Blue]

Under AFL's duty of care this incident should get 2 to 3 wks. Careless, high, high impact 2wks, severe impact 3 wks

• Maynard did do a footy act and attempt to smother. He did this sprinting towards the player. After/during the attempt it is his duty of care to avoid head high contact if he is moving. The ball had been kicked, then contact was made by a player carelessly approaching the play. On the previous pages, there is vision of Pickett of the Dees doing a similar action only to spring out of the way remaining always in the front position and not turning.
• This is different from the Cripps incident as Cripps shoulder met the Lions player simultaneously as the ball arrived. It was more about what constitutes a contest. You could argue what happened with Cripps happens in a marking contest even though it was not from a kick but a ruck contest. In the case of Maynard it was not a simultaneous contest. Cripps was lucky but there were grounds to argue a contest if you review the right camera angle.
• We saw what happened with Plowman with the O'Meara incident. He started to put out arms to take a chest mark (footy act) O'Meara lunged across the line of the ball and was collected by Plowman bracing himself. If instead Plowman had stretched his arm out to punch the ball it probably would have been deemed a contest.

Plowman was harshly done by and so would Maynard if he gets weeks, but I can't see how he doesn't get 2 to 3 wks.

 

[maskmcgee]

Even Damien Barrett, with his history of extremely conservative views around protecting the head, agrees Maynard has no case to answer.

 

[Barrybran]

28 pages. Sheesh.

Maynard was entitled to jump to block the ball but he could have done better to brace himself in a way that wasn't going to harm Brayshaw. While contact was inevitable, it was reckless at best.

In season, Maynard might have been in a bit of trouble however it seems the AFL have softened their stance on head contact as the season wore on. They're typically more lenient in finals as well so I expect Maynard will play in the prelim.

 

[Belnakor]

Even Damien Barrett, with his history of extremely conservative views around protecting the head, agrees Maynard has no case to answer.

Barrett is a cretin and he is only saying that because it is a big club player.

 

[tiger_tough]

Even Damien Barrett, with his history of extremely conservative views around protecting the head, agrees Maynard has no case to answer.

So does Robbo (yeah yeah I know) and he's been outraged with any head high hit lately.

 

[Tonythetiger]

Even Damien Barrett, with his history of extremely conservative views around protecting the head, agrees Maynard has no case to answer.

You can just say, referring to my article this morning, Damian.

 

[Flog_Toolist]

You can just say, referring to my article this morning, Damian.

Get a muscle car up ya Damian.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

He could of landed into Brayshaw in a wrap arms around soft tackle motion but he decided to tuck the arm in and lead with the shoulder.

Suspension warranted.

Yes he should of got a cussion out of his shorts in mid air to soften the impact.

 

[loki04]

Trying to protect himself lol.

I'm picturing a WWE wrestler coming down off the top turnbuckle. CLEARLY dipped the shoulder and targeted the player.

Maynard plays on the edge (and good luck to him) but you can't expect to do that and not be penalised.

Queue the boos from the collingwood fans as that seems to be their favourite pastime.

He could of both stepped away with the last step and braced or put his own arms out he did none of it and turned more into Maynards path.

 

[eddiesmith]

Brayshaw was in the act of kicking the ball and it wasn't reasonable to expect he would be shouldered in the face because smothers happen 50 times a game and almost none of them end with the player crashing into the kicker, let alone smashing them in the face.

re: the impact, it is graded on (bolded probably relevant for this case)

"
Secondly, the potential to cause injury must be factored into the determination of Impact, particularly in the following cases:

1. » Intentional strikes, such as those with a swinging clenched fist, raised forearm or elbow;
2. » High bumps, particularly with significant head contact and/or Player momentum;
3. » Any head-high contact with a Player who has his head over the ball, particularly when contact is made from an opponent approaching from a front-on position;
4. » Forceful swings that make head-high contact to a Player in a marking contest, ruck contest or when tackling;
5. » Any contact that occurs when the Victim Player should not reasonably be expecting or is not reasonably prepared for contact (i.e. contact off the ball);

"

there is zero chance this should be graded below severe.

3 and 5 have absolutely nothing to do with this case!

3 is for head over the ball incidents, like Pickett hitting a pies player last night…

5? He can see him coming and braces for contact, of course he could see it and expect it…

 

[Belnakor]

3 and 5 have absolutely nothing to do with this case!

3 is for head over the ball incidents, like Pickett hitting a pies player last night…

5? He can see him coming and braces for contact, of course he could see it and expect it…

would you reasonably expect someone to drop their shoulder into your head after a smother attempt? there have been countless smothers this is the one time its happened.

Brayshaws head was down as he was looking at the ball as he kicked it.

 

[CakeEater]

Non vic club best 22 player in finals -2 weeks
Vic club best 22 player in finals 0 weeks

Therefore Maynard will get 0 weeks

 

[Interstater]

He could of both stepped away with the last step and braced or put his own arms out he did none of it and turned more into Maynards path.

Are you being paid to do this damage control, or is it just blind loyalty from someone with too much time on their hands?

 

[JackFlash]

It's great for every footy show in town, but the AFL should clear this up today and get on with it. There was absolutely nothing Maynard could do and it was an unfortunate football incident. However, i expect this to be a media frenzy for a few days and i don't put it past the AFL drawing this out until next week!

 

[eddiesmith]

Non vic club best 22 player in finals -2 weeks
Vic club best 22 player in finals 0 weeks

Therefore Maynard will get 0 weeks

Collingwood player in finals - 6 weeks

 

[Erakor]

He could of both stepped away with the last step and braced or put his own arms out he did none of it and turned more into Maynards path.

If you are going to try to work around this incident to get your boy off ( I get it, its a final and he is an important player) don't use the defense that Brayshaw somehow made it happen by moving into Maynard's path. It is honestly terrible and stupid.

Maynard had eyes only for the player. He chose the path his body went and it was straight for Brayshaw's head.

If you watch the reply, Brayshaw doesn't actually take another step at all after he kicks it. Kicks with his right foot, lands on his right foot and then contact is made.

Not that it matters, but for arguement sake, there is no deviation from Brayshaw.