Selwood: Out (in more than one way)

[Baz_hawk]

Re: Selwood gets off!

The MRP is a joke. They deem Raines hit as intentional and high contact. Selwood's hit was both of these and should be classed as the same in hindsight. It's a disgrace that the instigator gets **** all because he is frustrated at being tagged while the tagger gives back as good as he gets and Selwood flops like a wet **** at the slightest of contact. When you get hit you do not flick your head back and prop your feet. I hope Raines takes this to the tribunal, I can't see it happening with the early plea reducing 2 games off the penalty.

 

[Jamie007]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Most AFL supporters hated Lloyd and Monfries for their constant diving tactics. Selwood looks like he will take the new "most hated" title for the way he plays.. Ducking his head constantly, and now diving to the ground when he gets a little slap on the face after he dished one out first.. Opposition players will quickly lose respect as they did for Monfries..

 

[Mercurial89]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Maric did the same thing as selwood they both got off.
Raines threw a similar punch to lake and he can miss the same amount.

I Fail to see too much of a problem?

People saying Geelong supporters are biased are themselves biased by their obvious hatred of selwood. Where was the outcry when Maric got off? And there was a similar incident where a player got off for a slap.

Just because both incidents happened at similar time doesn't make them the same. Force was the key here. Selwood lashed out but softly. Raines lashed out. Marginally harder and as a result will miss 1.

 

[bugalugs213]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Glad we picked Mitch Thorpe ahead of him what a pussy.

 

[brendan84]

Re: Selwood gets off!

He was replying to a guy that said it is a good day for football because a player on the team he supports, got no punishment for punching a player in the face behind play? I think he has every right to call him a tad silly.

Selwood gets off with a bad record for punching Raines in the face behind play.

Raines gets 3 weeks(1 week with the plea) with a 5 year clean record for hitting Selwood back?

This is a joke!!!

You should be filthy about it. Terrible decision.

 

[Tas]

Re: Selwood gets off!

I didn't see the incident, is there footage?

 

[CatFan79]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Is that all you got in defense of Selwood? Deflection if I've ever seen one.

Since when was any of this about Melbourne??

1. The impact was graded not sufficient for report, same as Ivan Maric.

2. Each incident is rated individually, thats the way the MRP operates which has nothing to do with Joel Selwood.

Seriously though, a Melbourne supporter questioning Selwood's toughness.. How could I resist..

 

[danielnajdek]

Re: Selwood gets off!

If Selwood had of ducked as he usually does then Raines wouldn't have hit him in the first place

 

[ashs35]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Since when has the MRP ever been consistent with anything? lol

 

[Catman]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Maric did the same thing as selwood they both got off.
Raines threw a similar punch to lake and he can miss the same amount.

I Fail to see too much of a problem?

People saying Geelong supporters are biased are themselves biased by their obvious hatred of selwood. Where was the outcry when Maric got off? And there was a similar incident where a player got off for a slap.

Just because both incidents happened at similar time doesn't make them the same. Force was the key here. Selwood lashed out but softly. Raines lashed out. Marginally harder and as a result will miss 1.

Best post yet.

 

[15hodge]

3 votes... J Selwood

 

[JasRulz63]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Just because both incidents happened at similar time doesn't make them the same. Force was the key here. Selwood lashed out but softly. Raines lashed out. Marginally harder and as a result will miss 1.

It's actually; marginally harder and as a result will miss 3 if he didn't have a good record. If Raines' record was as bad as Selwood's he would've missed four.

Raines got 3 weeks for his hit, looking at what he gets after discounts isn't right IMO, because the discounts are independent of the actual MRP decision.

 

[adey115]

Re: Selwood gets off!

"Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Geelong Cats Football Club, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of seven activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Four offence, drawing 325 demerit points and three-match sanction."

So that is what they said about Raines hitting Selwood. Based on that, would it not be fair to say the following about Selwood's hit on Raines:

""Based on the video evidence available, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points..."

Common sense would say yes wouldn't it? It was definitely high. It was definitely intentional. There was definitely impact to the head.

Nah, throw it out the window.... The MRP are completely inconsistent in the manner which they operate. Its roll the dice stuff.

 

[JasRulz63]

Re: Selwood gets off!

I didn't see the incident, is there footage?

[youtube]dsgoCjzo2l8[/youtube]

 

[robs_drunk]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Time to head to court great case for self defense

 

[CatFan79]

Re: Selwood gets off!

It's actually; marginally harder and as a result will miss 3 if he didn't have a good record. If Raines' record was as bad as Selwood's he would've missed four.

Raines got 3 weeks for his hit, looking at what he gets after discounts isn't right IMO, because the discounts are independent of the actual MRP decision.

Harder doesn't even matter all the time.. If you hit someone in the right place you don't have to hit them that hard to do damage.. Its the risk you take when you throw haymakers behind play..

I dont condone what Selwood did but when you look at the Lake and Maric incidents, the MRP have been consistant.

 

[brendan84]

Re: Selwood gets off!

3 votes... J Selwood

And the oscar goes to... J Selwood

 

[Stone in sock]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Can someone point me to the 'crying about Ivan Maric getting off for the same thing' thread???

Just as soon as you point out who got suspended for 3 weeks for hitting Maric back.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Amazing how the peanut gallery can judge the force of two separate blows from the comfort of their couch.

 

[ashs35]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Selwood barely even touched him, probly why he got off.

 

[Bosk]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Further proof the umpires & MRP love Selwood & Geelong.

 

[Eagles77]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Time to head to court great case for self defense

Just so you know, even in court they'd look at if he used excessive force even in self-defence. Could go either way

 

[Blues_Man]

Re: Selwood gets off!

I cant see why you are all getting your panties in a knott over what was a very good decision by the MRP ...the slap was not forceful.

Raines hit Selwood much harder and deserved his penalty.

 

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

Re: Selwood gets off!

Yeah the consistency thing is absolutely warped.
Firstly, I agree with Geelong supporters talking about Maric, the 2 incidents were pretty similar and it is a good point.
But what about Brian Lake? He gave a guy a love tap that wouldn't hurt a fly and he got a week?
And then Scarlett gets whacked with medium impact for his hit on Ballantye.

To me the worrying thing is they basically decide the forcefullness by how a player reacts to the hit, so if you fall to the deck then it is immediately worse. Or at least that was what I was now thinking, and then I remembered the Lake hit. So now I have absolutely no idea what they are doing. It looks to me like they really lack the ability to consistently apply the force involved in the strikes. Even Taylor Walker was given a low impact while Goodes got medium. I really don't know what is going on, but I do know that some players are lucky and others aren't.

Nobody can be absolutely sure that Selwood fell to the ground to try and get a free kick, if he did then he certainly wouldn't be the only one to do that in the given situation. I reckon 30-40% of AFL players would do the same thing. It is just unfortunate that Selwood knocked his head on the ground and seemed to be a bit shaken up because of it.

The other interesting point is that Raines could argue provocation as a defense in trying to get off the charge, but I reckon that will only diminish the points slightly, so if he contests the charge he would lose the discount he gets for pleading guilty. I don't think he is that unlucky though, it was a stupid hit. Having said that so was Selwoods. Could be slight bias in favouring the ball players over the taggers, that is the only thing I can think of.

 

[PieNSauce]

"Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Geelong Cats Football Club, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of seven activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Four offence, drawing 325 demerit points and three-match sanction."

So that is what they said about Raines hitting Selwood. Based on that, would it not be fair to say the following about Selwood's hit on Raines:

""Based on the video evidence available, the incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of six activation points..."

Common sense would say yes wouldn't it? It was definitely high. It was definitely intentional. There was definitely impact to the head.

Nah, throw it out the window.... The MRP are completely inconsistent in the manner which they operate. Its roll the dice stuff.

This! As a parent I couldn't give a fat rats cracker that someone deems contact to be negligible. WTF. Am I supposed to tell my kids? It's fine to hit someone but just don't do it too hard. FFS. What a load of cods. Someone has to challenge this ridiculous decision or the credibility of the MRP is completely out the window.