Pearce V DBJ collision

[Maddo11]

Captain in hot water after bruising DBJ collision

Captain in hot water after brutal DBJ collision

Dockers skipper Alex Pearce looks likely to face MRO scrutiny following this heavy contact on Darcy Byrne-Jones which saw tempers flare

www.afl.com.au

Keeps his eyes on the ball but doesn't ever really attempt to mark or spoil, just clatters into thee contest and takes DBJ out

Hard to say that Pearce did enough to avoid or lessen the contact and will likely be rubbed out for a few weeks

 

[TheUnicorn]

It seems fine to me, just a footy incident. Although I remember Wright getting suspended for a while for leaving the ground or something, though he didn't brace like Wright did. With how inconsistent the MRO are, who the hell knows... It could be thrown out or be a 6 week holiday.

 

[RonnieRaven]

Footy incident
should get nothing could get three

 

[Bugz]

He's going to get 3-4 weeks.

I don't agree with it, but it will happen.

 

[amazingjoshy]

I must be watching a different incident

In big trouble imo

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

Didn’t even get him in the head or high. Just unlucky. Not sure what else he’s meant to do. Can’t pull out. Has to protect himself too.

We don’t want guys hurting themselves to avoid hurting someone else and getting suspended.

 

[The Feeder Club]

It looked like nothing live, but watching the replay now, I reckon he's in trouble. He shouldn't be, but he is
Seems similar to the Peter Wright one against Sydney last year, Wright shouldn't have been suspended but the AFL have set the precedent that the guy backing back has all the rights and the guy running in towards the ball has a duty of care, even if his eyes are on the ball.
I'm fearlng the worst. 3-4 weeks

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Same as Wright last year. Was competing for the ball but they will claim DBJ was in a vulnerable position running back and had to show greater care not to cause a collision and resulting injury. Likely 3-4 weeks same as Wright.

 

[Tugga27]

Didn’t even get him in the head or high. Just unlucky. Not sure what else he’s meant to do. Can’t pull out. Has to protect himself too.

We don’t want guys hurting themselves to avoid hurting someone else and getting suspended.

Didn't get him in the head but concussed him.
Ok.....

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

Didn't get him in the head but concussed him.
Ok.....

You can absolutely get concussed from not getting hit in the head. Big impacts still cause the brain to rattle around in the skull.

 

[Dewy006]

From the replay it looks like his eyes were tracking the ball till the very last second when he sensed a player coming back with the flight. You could mount an argument it was just a football collision. The AFL won’t care though and he will get a couple of weeks.

 

[Hawks_4478]

3 weeks

 

[Purple Suit]

From the replay it looks like his eyes were tracking the ball till the very last second when he sensed a player coming back with the flight. You could mount an argument it was just a football collision. The AFL won’t care though and he will get a couple of weeks.

Exactly, the kick landed between the two players. Pearce wasn’t late to the contest, he was just not backing into it.

The Wright example was a fraction later.

Not sure what his options were and he’s not a dirty player.

 

[PiCkLeJuiCe]

Classic 3 weeks.

Any challenge here will be a waste of time and effort.

 

[kingswood71]

Complete lack of awareness by Alex. In the second or so while the ball was coming in, he should have slowed so as to obtain a 360 view of all the area surrounding him and slowed to assess if a Port player was approaching. He shouldnt have been visually tracking the flight of the ball coming in, rather he should have lowered his eyes to make sure that he had an unobstructed path toward the ball. If he had of done that, he would have seen the Port player running back with the flight and he could have elected to stop thus avoiding contact. If he had of chosen to just stop, the Port player would have collided with him and he would have earnt a free kick for front on contact.

 

[SC_Power]

I reckon judging by the media “good guy” “football incident” “split second” narrative already in the media, Pearce will get off.

My admittedly biased view
Pearce is late to the contest, has his feet on the ground when Byrne Jones attempts the mark, jumps in the air to make contact, shoulder just glances the jaw
Byrne-Jones hits his head quite forcefully on hitting the ground, which is where the concussion is most likely from. But that is an outcome of Pearce’s illegal bump, so it’s part of the assessment.

Will be part of the defence that his eyes were tracking the ball and hence was a football collision, however if a player doesn’t have awareness of where players are in front of them then I’m unsure how that can be a defence. There’s no quick change of direction, or a bouncing ball, or players being pushed in different directions.

Put it this way: Ask yourself if this incident would have occurred if Pearce was contesting a Fremantle teammate running back with the ball.

 

[kingswood71]

I reckon judging by the media “good guy” “football incident” “split second” narrative already in the media, Pearce will get off.

All 3 are correct....but he wont get off.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Sometimes it's just a case of two guys going for the football and one being 15kg's heavier

Nothing wrong by Pearce. I even doubt DBJ's mum would be super upset at Alex about that, last second took his eye off the ball, but probably saw something in his way last second.

Not like he braced for the impact either, Didn't really have time to,

 

[Johnny Bananas]

There's nothing in this. If Pearce gets punished, the MRO is a disgrace. (Well, we already know they are, but it'll confirm it further).

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Put it this way: Ask yourself if this incident would have occurred if Pearce was contesting a Fremantle teammate running back with the ball.

I don't think that's a good question to ask here. There isn't a single other reportable act that we'd ask ourselves the same question for.

 

[SC_Power]

I don't think that's a good question to ask here. There isn't a single other reportable act that we'd ask ourselves the same question for.

I think the question on awareness of the other player is definitely a discussion point. It’s not a tackle, a bump, a strike, a shoulder charge which is an action on an opponent.

An argument that it was an unavoidable football incident because his eyes were 100% on the ball and was unaware of the opponents proximity, means it could quite as easily been an teammate coming back towards him.

 

[D-N-R]

Captain in hot water after bruising DBJ collision

Captain in hot water after brutal DBJ collision

Dockers skipper Alex Pearce looks likely to face MRO scrutiny following this heavy contact on Darcy Byrne-Jones which saw tempers flare

www.afl.com.au

Keeps his eyes on the ball but doesn't ever really attempt to mark or spoil, just clatters into thee contest and takes DBJ out

Hard to say that Pearce did enough to avoid or lessen the contact and will likely be rubbed out for a few weeks

The idea that because his arms aren't extended means he didn't attempt to mark the ball is flawed. He looks like he was going to mark it on his chest had the opponent not got in the way. He has his eyes on the ball until his opponent comes into his view, which is too late in the contest to do much about it.

Should be nothing.

 

[HTPunter]

The person who had the most disregard for Darcy’s safety, was Darcy.

Obviously his attack on the ball is what clubs & coaches would love/encourage.

However To me this is the equivalent of DBJ crossing the road in an 80 zone without looking. Pearce has cleaned him up. Maybe he was going 81, 82. But ultimately he wasn’t lacking in his duty of care - the guy who blindly put himself in the position was the one lacking in a duty of care for himself.

It will still likely be 3 weeks because the AFL genuinely think retrospectively suspending players for any incident that caused a concussion is enough to say they can’t be sued…all the while encouraging players to put themselves in positions to receive concussions.

 

[dmc333]

If he'd punched the ball and smashed him he'd be fine.

The split second last look of "oh shit, what do I do here? uhhhhhhh" means he's out.

 

[SC_Power]

The person who had the most disregard for Darcy’s safety, was Darcy.

Obviously his attack on the ball is what clubs & coaches would love/encourage.

However To me this is the equivalent of DBJ crossing the road in an 80 zone without looking. Pearce has cleaned him up. Maybe he was going 81, 82. But ultimately he wasn’t lacking in his duty of care - the guy who blindly put himself in the position was the one lacking in a duty of care for himself.

It will still likely be 3 weeks because the AFL genuinely think retrospectively suspending players for any incident that caused a concussion is enough to say they can’t be sued…all the while encouraging players to put themselves in positions to receive concussions.

So, in short, it’s Byrne Jones’ fault that he got to the ball first?

Not ducking. Not leading with his head in the tackle. But marking a ball that he got to before an opponent.

Cool, let’s make sure that interpretation is added to the AFL guidelines. Running with the ball to take a mark is to be advised against. We need to define an acceptable angle of approaching a mark? Not 180 of course, is 150 acceptable? 90? 45? Please let us know.

And if Pearce didn’t know that Byrne Jones was there, how was Byrne Jones supposed to know that Pearce was there? Was he meant to pull out because there might be a player coming, even though that apparently wasn’t an option for Pearce (who was beaten to the ball)?

So many questions that need answering….