McCartin v McAdams

[DJ75]

The tribunal does not accept precedence in any cases to my understanding. Each case is judged on its own merits.

Which is just a convenient excuse to ignore any consistency and allows another opportunity for the AFL to manipulate outcomes.

 

[DJ75]

So wheres the HIA?

We were just waiting the 30 minutes to see if we should do it. You know, like Port did. We just ran out of time.

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

Is it illegal to bump someone? It's not.
McAdam laid a hard bump. To the chest. There was no injury. MASSIVE difference to a bump to the head that injured the player.

FTR I'm not convinced McCartin deserves a suspension, but out of the two, McCartin's was worse than McAdam's. McAdam remains the only player suspended for 'potential' to cause injury through a bump. I think it's fair to ask questions.

Thats the worst impression of reality I've seen in a long time. Have a chat to a therapist, friend.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Which is just a convenient excuse to ignore any consistency and allows another opportunity for the AFL to manipulate outcomes.

Exactly... why do proper courts encourage the use of precedents... yet the AFL won't allow it... your explanation is bang on... as the AFL have no interest in having a fair competition.

 

[Blackhawk42]

The most stunning tribunal decision of what was has been the most inconsistent and head scratching season on record.

 

[BF Tiger]

Right decision IMHO. Does highlight all the crap decisions the MRO and tribunal have made though.

Burn it down and start again!

 

[SSwans2011]

shut up while you are ahead ya right w***er
enjoy your cheated for club til it becomes the bloods in a couple weeks, btw wtf is bloods culture being a club that just about wins nothing and is forced to move and then given more money than the rest for their players, joke of a side joke of a decision just like how your champs drop the ball soon as get touched and get holding the man. Nevermind clearly blind umpires you are just as blind.

please let me run your head into my foot moron

EXPLOSIVE stuff

 

[SSwans2011]

Look at McAdam totally not collecting the Giants' player's head guys

 

[Maddo11]

Look at McAdam totally not collecting the Giants' player's head guys

View attachment 1782735

• elects to bump
• jumps, increasing likelihood of head injury
• had the alternative of tackling because the player had the ball

Deserved more than three.

 

[bonehilda]

Look at McAdam totally not collecting the Giants' player's head guys

View attachment 1782735

Hits his chest, head jolted forward from whiplash. Not great but still didn’t get the head

 

[SSwans2011]

Hits his chest, head jolted forward from whiplash.

I don't see why that's relevant. He got him in the head. Once he leaves the ground and elects to bump, he's responsible for the consequences of that whiplash.

He undoubtedly got him in the head.

P.S. excellent avatar

 

[Hojuman]

Hey, Swans had 19 men on the field v us a few years ago.

AFL - " nothing to see here, all good "

 

[SSwans2011]

Hey, Swans had 19 men on the field v us a few years ago.

AFL - " nothing to see here, all good "

To be fair, we didn't mean to have 19 guys out there so it would be unfair to punish us for it.

It'd be like punishing a team for accidentally going over their allocated rotations.

 

[Soggy2112]

McAdams elected to bump when he could have tackled. Not only did he elect to bump, he dangerously jumped at his opponent.

McCartin was just in the way when McAdams over ran a ball that Warnie would be proud of how much it turned.

Pretty simple

Let’s break it down:


Before ball bounces, McAdam clearly has eyes for the ball, hard to tell where McCartin is as he’s out of frame.

McAdam still over the ball, McCartin still out of frame.

McAdam has hands positioned to pick up ball, McCartin just enters frame.

Funny bounce happens, both players still have eyes for the ball.

McAdam taps ball on, McCartin very clearly second to ball in a position to bump.

Same as above.

McAdam still in the action of tapping the ball, McCartin now clearly elects to bump instead of reaching for the ball.

Bump occurs, McCartin still makes no attempt to win the ball.

In summary, the whole way through McCartin was second to the ball, even with the funny bounce McAdam does not overrun the ball as he taps it on, McCartin makes no attempt to win the ball, instead chooses to bump. He makes contact to the head, resulting in a fractured cheekbone.

Now I know this is split second stuff, but the AFL has been suspending players for split second decisions for years. Despite what you said McCartin is second to the ball, clearly initiates contact and does not attempt to win the ball, making contact to the head resulting in an injury. That has to be a suspension.

 

[ibd77]

Which is just a convenient excuse to ignore any consistency and allows another opportunity for the AFL to manipulate outcomes.

Exactly!

 

[Magma]

potentially causing injury worse than actually causing injury. cool.

 

[Chaisa]

shut up while you are ahead ya right w***er
enjoy your cheated for club til it becomes the bloods in a couple weeks, btw wtf is bloods culture being a club that just about wins nothing and is forced to move and then given more money than the rest for their players, joke of a side joke of a decision just like how your champs drop the ball soon as get touched and get holding the man. Nevermind clearly blind umpires you are just as blind.

Eat a ******* dick, a-hole. Hope Adelaide keep failing

 

[twiggy4PM]

And, again, theres no evidence the cracked cheekbone occurred during this impact. Quit the victimhood.

That wins an award for the most ridiculous deflection.
Apart from the clear evidence of the cheekbone being hit by McMartin's shouder you mean. Is there any proof it was broken any other time. Your arguments to protect Sydney are pathetic.

 

[Chaisa]

All arguments aside, I do think McCartin is lucky, at least based on this year's criteria. It maybe wasn't 110% a bump but neither have like 5-6 suspensions this year.

Don't think the McAdam argument works for me. That was clearly a bump, it just wasn't anywhere near as bad as Pickett's despite getting more weeks though. I think the Mansell one is the more dubious one.

 

[Profop]

McCartin seemingly very lucky that McAdam doesn’t wear a head band that can spectacularly fly off during a collision cause that’s the only real difference I see between that contest and the Mansell one

I mean if anything Mansell and Aish were moving even faster with less time to react to the bounce of the ball

 

[Maddo11]

Let’s break it down:

View attachment 1782738
Before ball bounces, McAdam clearly has eyes for the ball, hard to tell where McCartin is as he’s out of frame.
View attachment 1782740
McAdam still over the ball, McCartin still out of frame.
View attachment 1782741
McAdam has hands positioned to pick up ball, McCartin just enters frame.
View attachment 1782742
Funny bounce happens, both players still have eyes for the ball.
View attachment 1782743
McAdam taps ball on, McCartin very clearly second to ball in a position to bump.
View attachment 1782746
Same as above.
View attachment 1782749
McAdam still in the action of tapping the ball, McCartin now clearly elects to bump instead of reaching for the ball.
View attachment 1782754
Bump occurs, McCartin still makes no attempt to win the ball.

In summary, the whole way through McCartin was second to the ball, even with the funny bounce McAdam does not overrun the ball as he taps it on, McCartin makes no attempt to win the ball, instead chooses to bump. He makes contact to the head, resulting in a fractured cheekbone.

Now I know this is split second stuff, but the AFL has been suspending players for split second decisions for years. Despite what you said McCartin is second to the ball, clearly initiates contact and does not attempt to win the ball, making contact to the head resulting in an injury. That has to be a suspension.

Arguing that he is not making an attempt to win the ball when it bounces so far off its path that McAdams, who as you clearly show in the first images is perfectly set up to gather, barely gets a finger to it is a bit dubious. Assuming the ball doesn't deviate and McAdams collects it, McCartin is in the perfect spot to tackle.

After the funky bounce he pivots off his right foot and takes a short step turning in the direction the ball went. Because of McAdams speed and positioning, McAdams doesn't have the same opportunity to slow. A collision occurs where McAdams is in an awkward exposed position due to his momentum and trying to reach for the ball.

What should McCartin have done differently? What realistic alternative did he have?

 

[Soggy2112]

What should McCartin have done differently? What realistic alternative did he have?

Not initiate contact and attempt to win the ball. If unable to do that as second to the ball position yourself to tackle.

You know, like every AFL player has been told to do after every single similar incident.

 

[Maddo11]

Not initiate contact and attempt to win the ball. If unable to do that as second to the ball position yourself to tackle.

You know, like every AFL player has been told to do after every single similar incident.

He keeps his chest pointed at the ball throughout the whole clip. He's squared up to mcadams and the ball if he needs to tackle but the ball bounces to his left, so he turns left. He can't not turn, because he can't stay square to McAdams and tackle because McAdams doesn't ever have the ball.

McAdams is rightfully at full tilt trying to knock the ball on and score. It's an accident and not worth a suspension.

Also saying "not initiate contact" is such a cop out. How does he do that? Hurdle? Slide? Tuck and roll out of the way?

 

[PenfoldsFan]

I'd just like the AFL to advise us all of the appropriate deviation angle a player must make and the correct amount of deceleration achieved so as to fall into the category of not at fault.
I mean, surely theres an exact number for both aspects so in future we can say for certain and not just make it up.
43% deceleration is good, is 42% bad, or is it 41%....40%...AFL?

 

[Joffaboy]

Clearly AFC haven't worked out how to pay off Gil behind closed doors...

Move the club to Sydney, you get to have 19 on the field with no penalty, Barry Hall admitting he was given a free card for them to win the 2005 GF, 10% cola, academy kids because, well sYdNeY, gifted games by the umpire so they make the finals, and players bumping opposition breaking their jaw and get off.
The AFL team gets a legup every second week.


On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app