Ryder suspended for some reason

[Wahooti Fandango]

That video should be submitted for the appeal and the music retained (that is priceless).

 

[Big Blow Hard]

[youtube]lexwXyJ84Fs[/youtube]

Only from one angle does it look like head contact. If anything he collected him front of the shoulder. If this is not appealed something is seriously wrong.

 

[BringBackCransberg]

They have f***ed up the rules.

It is not about whether it is fair or not.

I can remember the furore around the Maxwell bump.

The rule works to deem any contact to the head as negligent. You can't argue that it was fair (which it was).

It then comes down to a question of the force of the contact and they have deemed it forceful contact on the basis that Dangerfield was concussed. In real time (these things should never be slowed down) Ryder barely seems to hit him. I think Dangerfield hit his head on the ground.

We really have to congratulate the people who have made rules penalising players for being taller than their opponents while at the same time rewarding the incompetence of a player (the player who is not able to adequately protect himself when common sense and footbal nouse demand that he protect himself - that is not to have too much of a go at Dangerfield, he is a gun, but if you don't protect yourself in a contact sport then you will get hurt).

You're right, the rule's f*****. Now I'm especially confused as to how Coughlan got off his hit on Winderlich. But that's another barrel of fish.

My immediate reaction to seeing Ryder's bump is "Good bump - poor bastard on the end of it". Reaction on seeing it a few more times: "From that first angle, it looks bad." Third reaction: "But it's not bad. It's football."

 

[AndyLesPaul]

[youtube]lexwXyJ84Fs[/youtube]

Your youtube channel?
If so, GREAT work.

 

[Windas_Magic]

Your youtube channel?
If so, GREAT work.

Nah, someone on BB posted it.

 

[Dez!]

What other rucking options does Essendon have left with Ryder being suspended?

Both Bellchambers and Laycock are injured aren't they?

 

[The_Young_Gun]

The review panel need to grow some balls!

That was soft as butter!

 

[OzBomber]

Yeah, haven't seen the match but just watched the footage and it's an absolute joke. Surely they're doing it for laughs to see us panic because we'll have only 1 ruckman left.

He'll get off on the appeal easily.

 

[Rack Watts]

WHAT THE!!!! Is that the bump on Dangerfield??????? OMG that was nothing.

 

[bitfootymad]

I feel for Essendon! this team is my second side, i have followed them like Geelong for the last 25 years! cos of Bomber Thompson, you guys must of been pissed pissed in the end with what would have been a good game to WIN yesterday??? now loose Ryder????matty knights might have to play, doesn't look like you have anything at Bendigo !! time to get rid of Bendigo, put your own side in like the Pies! good luck....

 

[Donakebab]

Fair bump. No doubt we will appeal and get this overturned.

Great video btw!

 

[OzBomber]

What other rucking options does Essendon have left with Ryder being suspended?

Both Bellchambers and Laycock are injured aren't they?

Spider Bock.

 

[retroparty]

IMO its time Knighter thought of a revolutionary tactic were we play 4 midfielders at the bounce instead 3 midfielders and a ruckman. Its worth having a try because we have Melbourne next week.

Lets see what happens. We could have 3 midfielders manning up and one (Watson or McVeigh, someone good at reading the play) to roam around and grab the ball from all the opposition ruckman's hitouts.

Seriously though, this decision is disgraceful. Surely we will contest and get off. It not fair if he gets suspended for something as innocent as that. I hate the MRP

 

[The Dustbin]

This is bull shit.

The footy gods have it in for us. Come on down Bock. Who mind you in today's Bendigo game was just ok.

 

[bOmBeR_BoY1]

If we appeal and the suspension still stands, I will...

Not worth going there.

 

[Kong]

Absolutely disgraceful. Great hit, sure. Free kick? Maybe, although I'd even question that. Suspension? You're having a laugh.
They'll successfully appeal it, surely.

 

[AndyLesPaul]

Absolutely disgraceful. Great hit, sure. Free kick? Maybe, although I'd even question that. Suspension? You're having a laugh.
They'll successfully appeal it, surely.

Agreed.

I love how it wasn't a free kick, and they just skipped that and made it a 2 match suspension.

Knights is smart, he should know how easy that would be to contest.
If we lose however, we are absolutely stuffed, and teams will make use of our ruck.

 

[Boucks09]

There is absolutely no point comparing this suspension to the Nick Maxwell bump on Patrick McGinnity because following the successful appeal of that ruling, the AFL changed the rules to provent the 'Collingwood' loophole from being used as a defense by other sides.

In regards to the rule I actually support it. It is fairly straight forward.

If you decide not to make the ball your first priority and instead decide to go the man (in this case lay a shepard) then you are required to act in a manner which does not result in head high contact. You are leaving yourself at the mercy of the rules. That is fairly simple to understand. The person playing the ball should always be protected from head high contact. The fact that Ryder is taller than Dangerfield is irrelevant, he has a duty of care to not make head high contact.

If for example Ryder was going for the ball and made the same contact, then it is a different situation but as he was not attacking the ball, this rule comes into play.

As the charge currently stands it is deemed to be medium level contact (in terms of force) and high contact which is why it is a 2 match ban rather than one. I think if we are going to challenge (which we will) we can argue that the contact was only low level (in force) and not high (with Ryder hitting the shoulder) which may end up in a reprimand.

For all of those calling decisions like this the 'end of the bump' and so forth, it is worth noting that it has always been wrong to hit a bloke in the head. You can still run through somebody and not be suspended if you execute a bump correctly. David Hille is a prime example of a how a big man should execute a hip and shoulder. He gets low and tucks in his arms and we have seen how damaging his bumps can be (watch Simon Black last year).

It will be very interesting to see how this goes. I feel we may get off but he will have something like 80 carry over points AT BEST. This is not as clear cut as a lot of you may think.

 

[AndyLesPaul]

David Hille is a prime example of a how a big man should execute a hip and shoulder. He gets low and tucks in his arms and we have seen how damaging his bumps can be (watch Simon Black last year).

Is there a youtube vid Boucks?

Completely agree btw.

 

[OzBomber]

There is absolutely no point comparing this suspension to the Nick Maxwell bump on Patrick McGinnity because following the successful appeal of that ruling...

...This is not as clear cut as a lot of you may think.

I think it's called shepherding.

 

[Synth]

So here's a crazy idea:

Have no ruckman. Play an extra midfielder

When the ball is bounced the extra midfielder runs in but doesn't jump...

 

[Boucks09]

I think it's called shepherding.

And the rule doesn't stop any player from bumping a player as a shepherd. The fact is though that if you decide to do that then you can't hit a bloke in the head.

People need to stop getting up in arms everytime something like this happens and actually look at the rule and why it is in place. Now does this apply to Ryder? Well it's hard to tell given that one angle shows him hitting Dangerfield in the shoulder, whilst the other makes it appear that Dangerfield gets head high contact.

Steven King got 6 (4 with an early plea) today for a bump which was head high but off the ball. The precedent is there and players know this. It is simple.

If you decide not to play the ball and bump an opponent you MUST NOT hit him in the head. If you are not able to get low enough to lay the bump correctly you should not do it anyway as you will be giving away a free kick.

P.S Andy I don't know if there is a David Hille video on You Tube. I saw it on BomberTV.

 

[james_omahoney]

As the charge currently stands it is deemed to be medium level contact (in terms of force) and high contact which is why it is a 2 match ban rather than one. I think if we are going to challenge (which we will) we can argue that the contact was only low level (in force) and not high (with Ryder hitting the shoulder) which may end up in a reprimand.

For all of those calling decisions like this the 'end of the bump' and so forth, it is worth noting that it has always been wrong to hit a bloke in the head. You can still run through somebody and not be suspended if you execute a bump correctly. David Hille is a prime example of a how a big man should execute a hip and shoulder. He gets low and tucks in his arms and we have seen how damaging his bumps can be (watch Simon Black last year).

It will be very interesting to see how this goes. I feel we may get off but he will have something like 80 carry over points AT BEST. This is not as clear cut as a lot of you may think.

Firstly Boucks I agree with what you're saying in regards to the rule. I have a question: If EFC argued the contact was not head-high, and the panel agreed, then how would it still be a reprimand? If you're innocent then you get off completely, right? No carrover points. Just an apology from the MRP .

The frontal shot looks bad but I think Ryder's body obscures what happens with his arm, as it appears there's some head-high contact there. However, when view from behind, to me it doesn't look like head-high contact at all.

I think most agree with the rule and its application, but it's whether or not the rule was actually breached which is in contention.

IMO should get off.

 

[BrunoV]

The response is disroportionate when you consider that there was no malice in Ryder's bump. As far as I am concerned the camera angles don't even prove that Ryder hit Dangerfield in the head. Knocking you head on the ground can give you concussion.

Dangerfield played so either the Adelaide medical staff got it wrong or Dangerfield was not seriously injured. I am going to back the Adelaide medical staff because I think they almost have a betterr track record than Sydney.

So now we look at the reasoning behind a decision like this (the rule). They are trying to stop the bump and this is a way to phase it out. If you are over 6'4 there is no logical argument to ever place a bumb. The hysterical response to contact to the head means that you will be suspended. You can't rely on the nouse of your opponent to protect himself at all so there is a high likelihood that a bump will end up going wrong and you will get suspended.

It is indirectly killing parts of the game. It is completely naieve to say otherwise. Will Kinghts tell Ryder to make the same choice if he is presented with the same situation next time? I would like to think not, Ryder is going to tower over most AFL players and there is a good chance that he wll be suspended because there are too many uncontrollable variables when executing a bump on someone you are taller than.

All this shit about going for the ball vs not going for the ball is also disturbing. Somewhere in the last 10 years football people forgot that there are many situations during a game when it is more imortant not to play the ball.

The reality is that these rule changes are brought in, and supported, by Helen Lovejoy 'wont somebody think of the children' types who either don't really understand the game (those who are so concerned about head high contact when the % of collissions resulting in serious damage can barly be seen on paper), need to comment on something (journalists like Caro who say that mothers won't let their children play - whose mum ever stopped them playing football if their father was OK with it?) or are tied into suporting the AFL in any move they make (media personalities like Kevin Bartlett).

 

[The Taylor Walker Show]

lol, what a joke!

thought it was a very good bump.

if it was my player i'd be fuming.