MRP / Trib. Rance - 3 Weeks with Guilty Plea

[BlueTouchPaper]

yep agree with you. if they are justifying the concussion rule, why not go at farren ray with his hit on selwood? clearly selwood came off worse than waite? they arent consistent at all. farren's impact with slewood wasnt deliberate either was rance's.

Rance's was clearly delibrate - He was attempting to block Waite's lead.

However, perhaps Ray's action wasn't considered a bump, such that his shoulders were so far lower than his hips (ie the typical action of picking up the ball)?

 

[The BRICKSTER]

****ing joke. You can barely tell what happened from that footage on the afl site. Its shot from 100+meters away. You dont know what part of Rance has hit Waite from as far as I can tell. Waite should have more awareness, the clumsy ****.

Rance is by far our most improved player over the last 6 months and to continue trending upwards he needs games, not weeks on the sideline.

The MRP continues to stamp itself as the biggest joke and blight on our great game. Them and the rules committee need to go.

 

[davis_756]

I don't know if I'm allowed to do this or not but I couldn't really care, I found this post over on the Carl**** board and thought this was sig worthy and just utter bullshit from one of there so called 'Senior' posters.

The General

Intruding I know but TG isn't the most sensible Carlton poster.

Rance is bad luck, thats what your going to get if you knock someone out behind play 40m off the ball. There was really no reason for him to do it.

Waite on the other hand usually gets the stiff end of the stick from the MRP, he swung his leg backwards in frustration with the constant niggling he was receiving.

If his boot had actually got Mcguane was it? In the balls then he would have gone but the contact made was with the calf and at an impact level someone with blue balls wouldn't have even felt, hard to get suspended without making serious contact.

 

[The Goon]

Rance's was clearly delibrate - He was attempting to block Waite's lead.

However, perhaps Ray's action wasn't considered a bump, such that his shoulders were so far lower than his hips (ie the typical action of picking up the ball)?

The problem I have is with the reckless conduct. Also, can anyone clarify why there's both high contact AND high impact?

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

High contact >> Seems self evident from the footage, however such that concussion is considered as a 'head injury' if you read the rules, any contact that results in a head injury is considered high contact (ie Push a bloke in the back into the fence, hits his head)

High impact >> Enough to concuss a player? Not too sure - It appeared very hard when I was at the game and it was well off the ball. I assume they just put those sorts of things into this category when tallying up the 'points'.

 

[the ranger]

the "high" in high contact refers to the part of the body that is hit..the "high" in high impact refers to the degree of force in the hit

 

[Greggy]

Show me the head high contact and I'll agree with MRP.

 

[Bojangles17]

what bloody lot of rot that is...should have been exonerated, contact was completely unavoidable

 

[The Goon]

High contact >> Seems self evident from the footage, however such that concussion is considered as a 'head injury' if you read the rules, any contact that results in a head injury is considered high contact (ie Push a bloke in the back into the fence, hits his head)

High impact >> Enough to concuss a player? Not too sure - It appeared very hard when I was at the game and it was well off the ball. I assume they just put those sorts of things into this category when tallying up the 'points'.

So it's sort of...
Reckless: Because????
H Contact: Because he hit the head?
H Impact: Because of the severity of the injury (=concussion)?

IMO it wasn't reckless, he didn't seem to raise himself before the impact.

It's also unclear who actually made high contact. Who was the other Richmond player? Looks like Waite bounced off Rance and was actually KO'd by the impact with the second player - perhaps even by his foot.

This should definitely be challenged.

 

[_RT_]

Intruding I know but TG isn't the most sensible Carlton poster.

Rance is bad luck, thats what your going to get if you knock someone out behind play 40m off the ball. There was really no reason for him to do it.

Waite on the other hand usually gets the stiff end of the stick from the MRP, he swung his leg backwards in frustration with the constant niggling he was receiving.

If his boot had actually got Mcguane was it? In the balls then he would have gone but the contact made was with the calf and at an impact level someone with blue balls wouldn't have even felt, hard to get suspended without making serious contact.

So given Waite was 'knocked out' and suffered a 'serious' concussion he'll be missing on Saturday night.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Should definately not be challenged. The MRP have made that clear time and time again.

I'd say it was reckless in that it was outside of the rules of the game, rules that are designed to protect players who are not expecting contact (ie 40m from the ball) and who are facing the play whilst their opponents were not.

 

[tigers_of_old_08]

I haven't really seen the Rance incident, but as devils advocate, didn't Waite leave the ground with concussion, and it happened about 40m behind play? I wonder how we'd feel if it was Jack on the receiving end.

3 weeks is excessive, and Waite wanted to come back on the ground.

 

[The Goon]

Should definately not be challenged. The MRP have made that clear time and time again.

I'd say it was reckless in that it was outside of the rules of the game, rules that are designed to protect players who are not expecting contact (ie 40m from the ball) and who are facing the play whilst their opponents were not.

What about the fact that you cannot determine who made the high contact?

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

I cannot? Or you cannot?

At the ground, it was apparent that Rance made contact to his chin. The boundary umpire was 10 metres away - he might've been called on to explain the situation.

Rance made a bee-line for Waite after losing Walker on the lead - What happened thereafter was all of Rance's doing. As I explained earlier, my understanding of the rules is that if you make forceful and deliberate contact, any contact immediately thereafter you are also culpable for.

 

[Jack 17]

Waite should consider himself as lucky as what McGuane should.

If he made contact, McGuane wouldn't have been able to throw that kidney punch after the fact - as we (or most of us would) know, it doesn't take much to level a bloke in that scenario.

Calm down, try Kerr, Hall, Baker and plenty more.

Waite's doing himself no favours, though. He's climbing the ladder steadily.

So it's OK to kick then. Nothing but a dog act? P1ss off back to your board.

 

[The Goon]

I cannot? Or you cannot?

At the ground, it was apparent that Rance made contact to his chin. The boundary umpire was 10 metres away - he might've been called on to explain the situation.

Live in Sydney mate - all I've got to go on is the video, so if you say it's clear the concussion was through Rance's bump I'll take your word for it. From the video though it looks like contact to the head (as opposed to chin) was from the rebound into the second player. It also looks like the second player may have accidentally clipped him in the head with his foot on the way through too. Unless there's clear testimony to the contrary I'd say there's ample confusion to make a case for a reduction of the penalty. Whether thats wise or not I won't comment on.

 

[tunksy]

told hi 3 times jack 17 well done! totally agree. shut ya trap carltank supporter, look at waite did and read waht you wrote!

 

[Punt Road Feral]

Just quietly im happy with what Rancy has done.

Yes he made intentional contact but at the same time i dont think he intentionally went for head high contact.

I want to see our defenders put body on forwards when they make leads and make them relise they wont get things as easily as they have in the past.
I'd be more dissapointed in him if he just let Waite go past him on a lead without any contact.
Unfortuantely with the way the games headed this is something that might even be lost to the great game of footy in the AFL have their way

 

[SleepingGiant]

The funny thing is it is because the MRP is filled with ex carlton players or carlton fans. This causes them to be biased in favour of Carlton players. Hence we will recieve worse treatment.

What will be done about it? probably nothing. Nobody here is going to have enough muscle to flex to stop it. Somehow we need to protest. This is an absolute ****ing joke and it's going to hurt Rance's and our development and our chance to succeed as a club when other teams can potentially injure our players and we cannot be physical back. Jackson and Cotchin were a number of other examples. Lets fight this bullshit.

 

[MightyTiger]

I cannot? Or you cannot?

At the ground, it was apparent that Rance made contact to his chin. The boundary umpire was 10 metres away - he might've been called on to explain the situation.

Rance made a bee-line for Waite after losing Walker on the lead - What happened thereafter was all of Rance's doing. As I explained earlier, my understanding of the rules is that if you make forceful and deliberate contact, any contact immediately thereafter you are also culpable for.

Horse shit, Rance stayed on his line and Waite double backed into the corridor and both Rance and Waite collided with each other.

Rance didn't even tuck in his shoulder to prepare for the hit.

 

[Groupie_]

******* pathetic! Just watched it now. Theres nothing wrong with that bump!

This game has gone SOFT! Cant get away with anything anymore.

 

[MightyTiger]

Intruding I know but TG isn't the most sensible Carlton poster.

Rance is bad luck, thats what your going to get if you knock someone out behind play 40m off the ball. There was really no reason for him to do it.

Waite on the other hand usually gets the stiff end of the stick from the MRP, he swung his leg backwards in frustration with the constant niggling he was receiving.

If his boot had actually got Mcguane was it? In the balls then he would have gone but the contact made was with the calf and at an impact level someone with blue balls wouldn't have even felt, hard to get suspended without making serious contact.

Have you ever heard of 'Attempted Striking' ?

Regardless of making contact or not his intent is evident by the footage, Waite clearly leans forward and swings his leg backwards to make contact with McGuane, regardless of the forcefulness of the contact Waite should have copped a suspension.

 

[docko911]

Has there been an update to the rules because it didn't look half as bad as Nick Maxwells bump on Patrick McGinnity and he didn't get suspended even though Mcginnity had a broken jaw.

Was there even high contact or did waite just give himself whip lash.

 

[turtle27]

******* pathetic! Just watched it now. Theres nothing wrong with that bump!

This game has gone SOFT! Cant get away with anything anymore.

Selwood and Brown might disagree with you.

 

[jihg]

Rance's was clearly delibrate - He was attempting to block Waite's lead.

However, perhaps Ray's action wasn't considered a bump, such that his shoulders were so far lower than his hips (ie the typical action of picking up the ball)?

And yet Ray turned his hip into Selwoods head and Selwood was injured yet Ray had plenty of other options but took the action that was most likely to cause significant injury to the other player and minimising it to himself.

But of course this being the Carlton board and all I fully expect Waite to be blindly defended in he was attacked without any provocation and he is the fariest player in the comp.