Yidaki
AFL Behavioural Awareness Officer
- Jul 24, 2010
- 27,886
- 29,119
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Varcoe copped a week for going for the ball. Phillips played on without any issue. Mumford puts Murphy in hospital.
Oh, Shane Mumford....
- Thread starter Sttew
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Varcoe copped a week for going for the ball. Phillips played on without any issue. Mumford puts Murphy in hospital.
Smartest Brain
Premiership Player
Make sure you bring up how outraged you are about contact in a contact sport at your knitting circle.
Smartest Brain
Premiership Player
Every team loves players like Mumford because he is physical. Not the most skilled player but his ability to hurt other players legally, like in this act, is what makes him so valuable.
Not sure why people are surprised that hurting players legally, in a contact sport, helps you win games.
Mumford did not go in there to break anyones ribs or hurt them in some unfair or long term way and anyone who thinks he did is simply a nancy.
- Feb 11, 2011
- 532
- 2,855
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Minnesota Vikings
Blokes that lay a tackle are responsible for any injury caused but mummy cracks a few of Murphy’s ribs with his knee and gets nowhere near the ball and it’s fine because he didn’t mean it?
Cool
- Jun 16, 2018
- 8,733
- 15,673
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Have you actually played senior footy?
At any level. Country, metro, VAFA?
I doubt it.
Been a few years since I played but in my time, if a big guy on one side decided to pull a stunt like Mumford's on a much smaller player, he'd get his comeuppance before the final siren. Which is one of the reasons why it rarely happens.
You just don't pick on smaller dudes. It isn't acceptable.
At AFL level, players can't dish out justice. That is supposed to be the role of the MRP.
Murphy has been let down here, bigtime.
Wasn't he also the player who Hodge took out a few years ago at the beginning of a game?
I'm pretty sure Hodge got off that one as well.
Don't know what Murphy did to deserve it but he seems to be the opposite of a protected species. Open season on him.
The late swinging round arm is what has angered me, especially now that it has been ticked off as "okay".
What a putrid decision by the mro
Put a fair Bump a bloke and concus him, have a rest.
Steam roll knees first into a bloke on the deck, no eyes for the ball, put him hospital and its play on. Nothing to see here.
If mumford was going for the ball, no issue from me. He made no attempt to go for the ball and no attempt to avoid murphy.
Put a fair Bump a bloke and concus him, have a rest.
Steam roll knees first into a bloke on the deck, no eyes for the ball, put him hospital and its play on. Nothing to see here.
If mumford was going for the ball, no issue from me. He made no attempt to go for the ball and no attempt to avoid murphy.
And the ********s gets away with it while we lose Murphy for a month with broken ribs.
Everyone knows he intentionally did it, he intentionally tries to do these type of things every week but for some reason they let him get away with it. May as well play ice hockey and engage in fist fights to take out the oppositions best players.
Topkent
Confirmed ITK Drafting King
Rubbish. So stack should have got a week for injuring Vineys shoulder when he made no attempt to get the ball?
Big Footy must be Latin for the gathering of the soft campaigners.
Art Vandelay_
TheBrownDog
- Oct 28, 2012
- 104,265
- 141,936
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers - Tottenham
I have little issue with it, and yes it is clumsy.
I cannot see what reportable offence he commits. Bumping is allowed in footy still, you just 100% cannot hit the head.
I note there was an element of his knees being involved but don't think it was enough to constitute rough conduct via kneeing, to me it was a clumsy attempt to bump. Nothing more.
https://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/2019-Tribunal-Guidelines.pdf
Excessive. No imo.
Vulnerable position. Yes.
Could have expected contact. Yes. He had just released the ball so expecting a tackle/bump is reasonable in the circumstances.
- Jun 14, 2014
- 1,498
- 1,835
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
To a degree. Teammates remonstrating on your behalf is as old as time (especially if someone gets injured, regardless of size difference), but to say that little dudes are a protected species is overplaying it... smaller players rarely getting tackled or bumped by bigger blokes has more to do with bigger blokes usually being slow as hell, and if they're 'fast' for their size, it's only after they build up some speed while on the run, at least in my experience. Even then, the most physical stuff you're likely to face as a smaller player is from bigger guys, anyway... usually from almost copping an arm to the head or being rag-dolled as they try to shepherd you during a centre bounce or when the ball goes to ground in a pack...
Smartest Brain
Premiership Player
Yeah he does the same thing with the big guys too, its just they dont break like little china dolls. Size matters. Everyone who steps on the field, besides the biggest guys, knows there is someone bigger and stronger than them out there. On top of that, even a smaller player with the right bump, or move, can mess anyone else up.
Stop being outraged about nothing, it is embarrassing.
The Mumford decision is interesting because over quite a few seasons now, the AFL has conditioned us to believe that when a player is seriously hurt in a collision, then another player is almost always at fault. It happens with head clashes, sling tackles, bumps slightly off target. The AFL holds that there are few accidents in modern footy.
Take a similar scenario where Murphy is running in space down the wing and kicks the ball downfield. Mumford comes in late, cannons into Murphy and knocks him to the ground; it's an automatic free downfield. It turns out Murphy is injured and ruled out for the rest of the game, and has been sent to hospital as a precaution.
Does Mumford go up for charging? I think he does. But because it's in congestion with players on hands and knees, the perception from the AFL is completely different. If a player dished out an old-style Dipper elbow in a one-on-one clash that felled an opponent, he'd be looking at several weeks. But because Parker delivers a snide one to Ziebell in congestion, it goes through to the 'keeper. It's ridiculous. (I note Parker got four votes from one coach, and I'm betting it wasn't Scott.)
The system has become so convoluted, addled further this year by clumsy and inconsistent wordplay from Christian, that it requires a complete overhaul. Have an independent panel of experienced ex-players review literally hundreds of incidents and classify them as suspension/no suspension. Discard the outliers, define the reasons for their perceptions, and produce clear guidelines. Choose a set of reference incidents that exemplify the guidelines, which can be used by the MRO or cited as precedent by the defence at the Tribunal.
That's the easy part. Then stick to the guidelines.
Take a similar scenario where Murphy is running in space down the wing and kicks the ball downfield. Mumford comes in late, cannons into Murphy and knocks him to the ground; it's an automatic free downfield. It turns out Murphy is injured and ruled out for the rest of the game, and has been sent to hospital as a precaution.
Does Mumford go up for charging? I think he does. But because it's in congestion with players on hands and knees, the perception from the AFL is completely different. If a player dished out an old-style Dipper elbow in a one-on-one clash that felled an opponent, he'd be looking at several weeks. But because Parker delivers a snide one to Ziebell in congestion, it goes through to the 'keeper. It's ridiculous. (I note Parker got four votes from one coach, and I'm betting it wasn't Scott.)
The system has become so convoluted, addled further this year by clumsy and inconsistent wordplay from Christian, that it requires a complete overhaul. Have an independent panel of experienced ex-players review literally hundreds of incidents and classify them as suspension/no suspension. Discard the outliers, define the reasons for their perceptions, and produce clear guidelines. Choose a set of reference incidents that exemplify the guidelines, which can be used by the MRO or cited as precedent by the defence at the Tribunal.
That's the easy part. Then stick to the guidelines.
Last edited:
Anyone who thinks Mumford did not DELIBERATELY and with malicious intent crash his knees into Murphy is watching different vision to me. That is not a 'bump' a la hip n shoulder, this is a deliberate kneeing of a player lying prostrate on the ground who has disposed of the ball a half second before.
It has long been my view that any player who deliberately causes injury to another player should do the time the injured player is out of the game PLUS a penalty of x weeks for causing the situation in the first place.
In this case I would give Mumford 2 (lenient) and then have him begin that suspension only after the injured players club medical staff deem him fit to play again. Mumford should therefore miss 6 - 8 weeks (depending on Murphy's recovery) and maybe that will calm his instinct as a thug and a bully.
It has long been my view that any player who deliberately causes injury to another player should do the time the injured player is out of the game PLUS a penalty of x weeks for causing the situation in the first place.
In this case I would give Mumford 2 (lenient) and then have him begin that suspension only after the injured players club medical staff deem him fit to play again. Mumford should therefore miss 6 - 8 weeks (depending on Murphy's recovery) and maybe that will calm his instinct as a thug and a bully.
Man0gwaR74
All Australian
- Oct 6, 2018
- 879
- 600
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Banned
- #42
How could you blame him when he concusses Mitch Duncan for being too coward to get low for the spear tackle and connects with his head and Duncan doesn't even get a free kick from it. The AFL community then praise Mummy for his 'heroics', so he's been encouraged to be dangerous with his tackles!
Topkent
Confirmed ITK Drafting King
Eww go watch soccer
Tell ya what sport. I'm about 6ft tall and 120+Kg's. How about you lay prostrate on the ground and I run as fast as I can then crash my knees into your ribs. Tell me how you would feel about soccer then? I'll just say it was an accident.
Smartest Brain
Premiership Player
6ft and 120kg, probably top speed of 5km/h so I think he'll be right.
If you think Mumford was trying to break Murphys ribs you are a not being honest. Midfielders and ruckman fall over and collide into each other 100s of times each weekend, extremely similar to what Mumford did, that is why he got off. There is nothing to it.
Business as usual for the AFL
Your moniker really is a misnomer, huh?
