Rohan hit on Neale

[Sttew]

The grey area you speak of is 'the look to the game'. Two players clashing going for the ball v a player throwing a round house behind play to a player not even looking is a really REALLY bad look. Not a football action, its an action of a thug.

Like Gaff's jaw breaker?

 

[WestCoast05]

You dont think Scott approached the Lions playing group instead of his own?

Possibly, I'd have to rewatch it to be sure.
I do recall the Geelong players and Brisbane players were close to each other anyway and Scott seemed to be in the midst of his own players. He moved forward when responding to Neale (from memory).

But either way my point stands - it still don't think a player should be disrespecting a head coach like that even if that coach has gotten too close.

Just a reminder that Neale has given a chip or shove to the throat of Rohan and the gotten him rubbed out for 2 weeks for a retaliation shot to the shoulder and chest, and has then has pretended to have a broken jaw.
The same player in the same game has the mouthed off at a coach and then gotten than coach a fine.

I think Scott should have gotten nothing and Rohan a fine if anything. And the for the record Neale shouldn't get anything to - just pointing out he's the instigator.

 

[WilloTree]

In play versus behind play is always a factor.

Intentional v careless.

The grey area you speak of is 'the look to the game'. Two players clashing going for the ball v a player throwing a round house behind play to a player not even looking is a really REALLY bad look. Not a football action, its an action of a thug.

Maybe we need to be taking both seriously. But, the AFL doesn't care so until then we guess, play chook lotto and throw our hands up at the ineffectiveness of it all.

A good administration provides clarity, consistency and competency. Is the AFL any of these?

 

[Obeanie1]

Possibly, I'd have to rewatch it to be sure.
I do recall the Geelong players and Brisbane players were close to each other anyway and Scott seemed to be in the midst of his own players. He moved forward when responding to Neale (from memory).

But either way my point stands - it still don't think a player should be disrespecting a head coach like that even if that coach has gotten too close.

Just a reminder that Neale has given a chip or shove to the throat of Rohan and the gotten him rubbed out for 2 weeks for a retaliation shot to the shoulder and chest, and has then has pretended to have a broken jaw.
The same player in the same game has the mouthed off at a coach and then gotten than coach a fine.

I think Scott should have gotten nothing and Rohan a fine if anything. And the for the record Neale shouldn't get anything to - just pointing out he's the instigator.

Nah. No way.

Neale didnt get Rohan suspended. Rohan threw a roundhouse strike to the upper shoulder that hit Neale's neck and jaw.

That is all on Rohan. How anyone can defend his action is beyond logic never mind try to blame the guy he hit who wasnt even watching.

 

[Obeanie1]

Maybe we need to be taking both seriously. But, the AFL doesn't care so until then we guess, play chook lotto and throw our hands up at the ineffectiveness of it all.

A good administration provides clarity, consistency and competency. Is the AFL any of these?

Um no. AFL have alot of maturing to do.

It is too entreanched and manipulated by a select few who themselves are in it not for the good of the game but to make money for themselves. Never mind the puppet strings leading to the Vic govt and MCG management.

 

[Obeanie1]

Like Gaff's jaw breaker?

Actually no. Totally different scenario and one best described by Brayshaw's father who commented on it.

But I wont bother quoting Brayshaw's own father as you have your 'hooped shaded glasses' on. Not worth the effort.

 

[Sttew]

Actually no. Totally different scenario and one best described by Brayshaw's father who commented on it.

But I wont bother quoting Brayshaw's own father as you have your 'hooped shaded glasses' on. Not worth the effort.

I really don't give a rat's .... Just exposing your sheer hypocrisy