Incredibly poor aim from someone he's looking at front on then. Dunno how you aim for the chest, barely graze the top of the shoulder and land squarely on the face.
MRP / Trib. MRP and Tribunal - 2024 - Rd 5 - Charlie Cameron 1 week?
- Thread starter Chief
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Chief
~ Shmalpha ~
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #230
Baker's ban upheld - Tribunal results, AFL Round 3 - AFL News
In a significant development for Richmond Football Club, premiership star […]
www.bigfooty.com
- May 13, 2014
- 1,670
- 1,845
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Who was the Port player that slammed into the back of Amiss?
Never had eyes for the ball and never in the contest. At least needs a looking at.
Never had eyes for the ball and never in the contest. At least needs a looking at.
What are we thinking here, if Butters gets off, Crouch must get off.
If Crouch is suspended, Butters must be suspended.
Dawson a fine at best.
If Crouch is suspended, Butters must be suspended.
Dawson a fine at best.
Progressive Aggresion
Team Captain
- Jan 30, 2022
- 558
- 1,509
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
As a port fan... yeah Crouch should've probably gotton off as well. Both him and butters had their eyes on the ball so neither of them should've faced suspension.
I reckon they frowned more at Crouch's hit because it resulted in a delay of game and also conceded a free kick.
I reckon they frowned more at Crouch's hit because it resulted in a delay of game and also conceded a free kick.
People think this game going no contact in 20 years is an alarmist take but Crouch getting a week proves it. Literally did everything right, Carlton player doesn’t protect himself and gets hurt. Was Crouch just meant to squib it?
Seriosly, Butters not even cited. FMD.
hawkman
Hall of Famer
I thought the Butters one was worse than the Crouch one with the speed that Butters came in he had less chance of winning the ball and more chance of causing injury
Last edited:
It’s the Freo who gives a * card! Umps didn’t even pay a free kick.
spudmaster
Brownlow Medallist
A bit surprised by that. Don't mind him not getting a week but not even cited?
Can someone explain the difference between the Crouch & the Butters one?
It’s either both or none for me.
And either way I’m OK. Just need consistency.
It’s either both or none for me.
And either way I’m OK. Just need consistency.
spudmaster
Brownlow Medallist
Butters a potential high-Brownlow vote getter - needs to stay eligible.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Probably Butters getting hands on the ball at the same time it’s what has saved him
Butters went the ball first where as Crouch braced the shoulder for impact first and then ball.
Fraction of a second difference at speed but think that’s the only difference.
Both very lucky it could have been 4+ for each if the outcome was different.
Butters only saved by the fact he actually got his hands on the ball before he made impact. Split seconds.
Fraction of a second difference at speed but think that’s the only difference.
Both very lucky it could have been 4+ for each if the outcome was different.
Butters only saved by the fact he actually got his hands on the ball before he made impact. Split seconds.
Butters got to the ball first, went to grab it and his bum clipped Banfields chin.
Crouch was second to the ball, turned his hip to brace for contact and collected the Carlton player front on in the head with his shoulder whilst collecting it.
That was the reason explained in citing.
- May 8, 2014
- 973
- 1,236
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Very little difference and definitely no consistency. I know Wright concussed the player, so fair enough penalty, but these two actions are much, much more dangerous. If someone does get hurt in a situation like these two, it could be catastrophic. Maybe then the AFL will make a stand.
- May 13, 2014
- 1,670
- 1,845
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Butters could have broken someone's jaw, Crouch could have broken, someone's neck.
Similar threads
