Mega Thread Port Forum 'General AFL Talk' Thread Part 8

[DaTBird187]

I just can’t see how one can say Jonas was worse unless trolling fans.

Timing was similar, injury less! Crazy I’m annoyed

It pains me to say it, but it was. The problem with the Jonas hit, is that he had so many alternatives to doing what he did. He wasn't in the air, he wasn't pushed into the contest and he wasn't trying to protect himself. What exactly was he looking to achieve?

Cameron's was awful too, but I look at Tom and ask why?

 

[Schulzenfest]

Never mind Jonas, Lindsay got one week less than that for a bump to the shoulder and a jumper punch.

 

[OneGreatClub]

IMO they are similar acts, with subtle differences that generally cancel out in a comparison,

BUT

TJ looked worse because of that classic freeze frame image posted everywhere

JC actual outcome far far worse

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And of course Jonas’ being called a dog act all over the media

 

[bomberclifford]

Cameron's was way worse. Front on elbow to the face. **** me.

 

[chachi11]

Never mind Jonas, Lindsay got one week less than that for a bump to the shoulder and a jumper punch.

Lol **** me

 

[Killer Power]

Wasn't Jonas' initially 5 weeks but they had that stupid penalty thing where if you didn't accept it straight away for the 'early plea' you had an extra week added to it or have I got that confused?

They're pretty on par, aside from the actual injury itself, and I'm personally against judging based on the injury caused because it opens pandoras box.

When don’t they judge on repercussions though? Exact same behaviour is treated differently depending on outcome. Club medical reports being taken into account is the obvious example.

 

[mic59]

When don’t they judge on repercussions though? Exact same behaviour is treated differently depending on outcome. Club medical reports being taken into account is the obvious example.

I would have thought that should have been taken into account here. Some articles I heard said that Andrews was reported to have bleeding on the brain. It may have not been all that serious, journalists do tend to be sensationalist, but it sounds like something that at least could have been very serious.

 

[Killer Power]

I would have thought that should have been taken into account here. Some articles I heard said that Andrews was reported to have bleeding on the brain. It may have not been all that serious, journalists do tend to be sensationalist, but it sounds like something that at least could have been very serious.

The Lions confirmed he had bleeding on the brain in a statement yesterday

 

[240volt]

Looks like west coast won’t get any players back this week so the crows might get up and looking at the ladder it will be good for us if they do.
I know it didn’t sound right to me also.

 

[mic59]

IMO they are similar acts, with subtle differences that generally cancel out in a comparison,
BUT
TJ looked worse because of that classic freeze frame image posted everywhere
JC actual outcome far far worse
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The TJ incident was bad, but not as thuggish as this one, it was more a case of taking every wrong choice . I was in a direct line with it and once TJ moved towards Gaff I could see that unless he moved away he would collide with him. Why he didn't just stop, allow Gaff to take the mark and stop him from running off is a mystery to me. Gaff would have been within goalkicking range but would have been on a nearly impossible angle.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Looks like west coast won’t get any players back this week so the crows might get up and looking at the ladder it will be good for us if they do.
I know it didn’t sound right to me also.

I must admit, I am conflicted but I see your point.

 

[edgie]

...Why he didn't just stop, allow Gaff to take the mark and stop him from running off is a mystery to me. ...

It's a mystery to you why one of our players didn't concede a contest in scoring range in an important game?

Like, what?

It's not like surrender or a six week suspension were his only choices?

Sent from mTalk

 

[mic59]

It's a mystery to you why one of our players didn't concede a contest in scoring range in an important game?
Like, what?
It's not like surrender or a six week suspension were his only choices?
Sent from mTalk

I wouldn't expect one of our players to withdraw from a contest where he had a chance of a spoil but with his late challenge there were only three things that could have happened, none of them acceptable. 1. The report and suspension that happened, 2. A 50-metre penalty, 3. Jonas mistimes and Gaff runs around him. I'm just saying there are times to contest the ball and times to limit the damage.

 

[Portmanteau]

Cameron was committed the contest and was going to make some form of contact, Jonas could arguably have avoided it. Not actually even suggesting Cameron's is lesser, or not worse/as bad, but it's probably more defensible given that subtle difference. Clocking a bloke from behind basically leaves you with no chips to play.

 

[edgie]

Was the Jonas hit the point of the elbow or more forearm?

Sent from mTalk

 

[mic59]

Eagles starting to look very shaky. After scoring 13 goals in total in the last two games, Mark LeCras may be out to join Jack Darling and Josh Kennedy. As well as that, Adelaide look like they may retain Rory Sloane, Tom Lynch, Rory Laird, Luke Brown and Lachlan Murphy.

 

[Portology]

he apologized privately, and via Text... Took the piss weak option like he did when he hit Andrews.

As did Jonas, initially, distance being what it is. Ebo had Gaff's number of course. Anyway that just amplifies my impression - I think Cameron was lucky on two grounds.

1) Inconsistency.

Jonas also ruled intentional and severe. All concerned agreed Jonas showed immediate and genuine contrition. 6 weeks. There's a poignant few seconds of Jonas and I think Ebo post game in the rooms in that video we made of the year. Shows Jonas somewhat stunned and shaking his head and sort of trying to believe he didn't do that act deliberately - he mumbles words to the effect that he didn't mean it.

2) No high enough impact category exists.

Gaff was out for a couple of minutes. Horrifying. And played the next week IIRC, to everyone's relief. So Cameron's impact undeniably far more severe but since it's been thrown into the same bucket as Jonas's brain snap ... that can only mean a higher impact category doesn't exist. Lucky for Cameron. You have to ask why there isn't a, well, what would you call it, a "Matthews/Bruins" or "Hall/Staker" impact category. Accidents happen, but once some entity rules your actions "intentional" by their standard of proof... anyway, I Am Not A Lawyer as everyone says :/

EDIT: Gaff did miss one game. Not that that changes the comparison significantly

 

[NoddyHolder]

Eagles starting to look very shaky. After scoring 13 goals in total in the last two games, Mark LeCras may be out to join Jack Darling and Josh Kennedy. As well as that, Adelaide look like they may retain Rory Sloane, Tom Lynch, Rory Laird, Luke Brown and Lachlan Murphy.

I'm ok with Lachlan Murphy staying. He lets the fines slide when I get my videos back late at Blockbuster west lakes

 

[philthy05]

I'm ok with Lachlan Murphy staying. He lets the fines slide when I get my videos back late at Blockbuster west lakes

Not to shit on your joke or anything but I would have lead with something more believable than a blockbuster video store still being open in west lakes

 

[Portology]

It pains me to say it, but it was. The problem with the Jonas hit, is that he had so many alternatives to doing what he did. He wasn't in the air, he wasn't pushed into the contest and he wasn't trying to protect himself. What exactly was he looking to achieve?

Cameron's was awful too, but I look at Tom and ask why?

I see what you're saying, but you're missing the point, which is the opaqueness of the categories, and the inconsistency in Jonas getting more games. Both incidents ruled intentional, high and severe. Jonas's represents a greater "failure of decision making" because that little bit more of time to choose but I think intentional not treated like "well just how intentional was that?". Cameron's has by far the higher impact but there's no higher impact category to smack him with AFAIK. Gaff did miss one game - will correct my earlier post. So by the rules as I understand how does Jonas get 6 but Cameron only 5?

 

[DaTBird187]

I see what you're saying, but you're missing the point, which is the opaqueness of the categories, and the inconsistency in Jonas getting more games. Both incidents ruled intentional, high and severe. Jonas's represents a greater "failure of decision making" because that little bit more of time to choose but I think intentional not treated like "well just how intentional was that?". Cameron's has by far the higher impact but there's no higher impact category to smack him with AFAIK. Gaff did miss one game - will correct my earlier post. So by the rules as I understand how does Jonas get 6 but Cameron only 5?

It was with the old system when you got an extra week if you contested. Jonas was 5 weeks technically.

 

[Papa G]

Has anyone mentioned that the Messiah Blighty named Matthew Robran ahead of Rex Walker on his best Crows team of all time? Lol.

 

[Grave Danger]

It was with the old system when you got an extra week if you contested. Jonas was 5 weeks technically.

Was it extra for contesting, or no early guilty plea reduction if you contested? Same result, but I don't think they gave you extra for having the temerity to not plead guilty - just didn't give you the discount.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

Has anyone mentioned that the Messiah Blighty named Matthew Robran ahead of Rex Walker on his best Crows team of all time? Lol.

He's right Robran was more flexible and not as slow as the Queen Mary

 

[Papa G]

He's right Robran was more flexible and not as slow as the Queen Mary

I would have picked John Klug