Of course that's different
MRP / Trib. Sam Powell-Pepper bump on Mark Keane
- Thread starter Bald
- Start date
- Tagged users None
To be out there promoting AFL cracking down head knocks after championing Maynard says it all
Engimal v3
**** m**nl*nd*rs
Scum
It really does say it all that you can't see the difference between the two incidents
Surely if you're an entitled and protected Pies supporter you just lie low and accept the Maynard gift instead of offering tortured defence justifying his thuggery
And then to swan about lecturing the AFL to come down hard on head contact
FFS
And then to swan about lecturing the AFL to come down hard on head contact
FFS
Yep, we’ve learned that under the old rules Maynard (and others) were allowed to approach a contest at speed recklessly without concern for their opponent. And now they’re not in one specific way.
FireKrakouer
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest.
- Jul 5, 2011
- 15,320
- 23,140
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Any reasonable person can see the difference between Maynard leaping at the ball vs SPP electing to bump the player. I think 4 weeks is excessive given that Keane was being swung in a tackle at the time which likely caused the impact to be higher and more forceful than SPP had intended.
Having said that, these are elite athletes who simply need to adapt. We saw with the rule change about falling into a player's back how quickly 99% of players could adapt. If you elect to bump it is your own responsibility to ensure that you do not hit your opponent in the head. Doing so during the pre season is probably worth the +1 weeks for the stupidity factor.
Run the thought experiment in your head where Maynard had hypothetically been a player for your team and had caused this freak accident while attempting a smother during a final. It is comparing apples with oranges and the AFL have now rightly closed this loophole. Accusing Maynard, who showed immediate remorse, of ending Bradshaw's career is absurd. Why did 1 straw break the camel's back? Because of the million other straws underneath it m8.
Having said that, these are elite athletes who simply need to adapt. We saw with the rule change about falling into a player's back how quickly 99% of players could adapt. If you elect to bump it is your own responsibility to ensure that you do not hit your opponent in the head. Doing so during the pre season is probably worth the +1 weeks for the stupidity factor.
Run the thought experiment in your head where Maynard had hypothetically been a player for your team and had caused this freak accident while attempting a smother during a final. It is comparing apples with oranges and the AFL have now rightly closed this loophole. Accusing Maynard, who showed immediate remorse, of ending Bradshaw's career is absurd. Why did 1 straw break the camel's back? Because of the million other straws underneath it m8.
I’m not the defending one of our players for sniping an opponent in a practice match, a week after a player was forced into medical retirement.
If a West Coast player did what SPP did, I’d be thankful it was 4 weeks and not more.
- Mar 3, 2022
- 4,965
- 6,479
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Can Pies people stfu about Maynard. And we thought Tigers fans made it all about themselves in every thread, Pies fans showing themselves to be another level of that m
FireKrakouer
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest.
- Jul 5, 2011
- 15,320
- 23,140
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Lol can you read? "Pies people" have only mentioned Maynard in response to Karens like yourself bringing him up.
- Mar 3, 2022
- 4,965
- 6,479
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
You're boring and it's embarrassing that you'd be in here having the same argument that is going on in just about every thread so that Collingwood fans can feel relevant
- Jul 8, 2015
- 11,019
- 7,575
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Reading some of the comments in this thread is a laugh.
So many clueless scrubs in here it's not funny.
SPP is a top lad! 100%
The decision of 4 weeks was made by either a pure-bred scumbag, a Port hater or someone with advanced alzheimers.
So many clueless scrubs in here it's not funny.
SPP is a top lad! 100%
The decision of 4 weeks was made by either a pure-bred scumbag, a Port hater or someone with advanced alzheimers.
- Jul 8, 2015
- 11,019
- 7,575
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Nope.
‘Top lads’ don’t get suspended for feeling up random chicks while on the drink
4 seems right
No need come in at an uncontrollable rate. Fact he copped him high is on SPP...and any player these days.
Best defence afl has against concussion and maintaining contact is to set fairly strict accountability.
So this, maynard incident, sicily tackle, etc. will all come under scrutiny.
Accident/unintentional or not, any instigation of contact will require control so as to avoid concussion.
Ideally the tribunal bars the biomechanist defences moving forward too
No need come in at an uncontrollable rate. Fact he copped him high is on SPP...and any player these days.
Best defence afl has against concussion and maintaining contact is to set fairly strict accountability.
So this, maynard incident, sicily tackle, etc. will all come under scrutiny.
Accident/unintentional or not, any instigation of contact will require control so as to avoid concussion.
Ideally the tribunal bars the biomechanist defences moving forward too
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,673
- 99,041
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
The Maynard decision is comparable because both players charged into contests too hard and entirely through their own choice put themselves in a position where heavy contact with a vulnerable player was unavoidable, and then put their shoulder into their opponent's head. SPP didn't "choose to bump" and the tribunal even agreed that he didn't choose to bump, he simply put himself in a position where he was going to make heavy contact and couldn't do anything but brace. Maynard's is the same in that regard.
"The rules have changed" is ridiculous. The rules were plenty to suspend Maynard but the Tribunal will fall over themselves to let a player off if a spot in the Grand Final is on the line.
If 4 is the new standard for this sort of incident, I'm absolutely fine with that. But we all know if this same bump occurred in semi final week, or during the season to a Brownlow favourite, the tribunal probably finds a way to get the player off. The club will challenge it in that scenario and the tribunal will accept basically whatever the club says to avoid rubbing a guy out for a GF or costing him a brownlow.
"The rules have changed" is ridiculous. The rules were plenty to suspend Maynard but the Tribunal will fall over themselves to let a player off if a spot in the Grand Final is on the line.
If 4 is the new standard for this sort of incident, I'm absolutely fine with that. But we all know if this same bump occurred in semi final week, or during the season to a Brownlow favourite, the tribunal probably finds a way to get the player off. The club will challenge it in that scenario and the tribunal will accept basically whatever the club says to avoid rubbing a guy out for a GF or costing him a brownlow.
Engimal v3
**** m**nl*nd*rs
I'm afraid so
- Jul 8, 2015
- 11,019
- 7,575
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Is that you Elspeth??
- Jul 8, 2015
- 11,019
- 7,575
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Agree to disagree
I’m not defending the strike or questioning the suspension, but your personal attack on the player.
- Aug 21, 2007
- 7,621
- 10,154
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Collingwood, Glenelg, East Side Hawks
That’s definitely a step too far. Play the ball and not the man and all that.
