Bullshit.
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 8
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 7 Winner: Bulldog rick
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Roast The AFL aren't taking concussion and head trauma seriously enough. Lalor/Ginbey incident.
- Thread starter Aristotle Pickett
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Impact should NEVER be considered until it's a reportable offence. That's the reason we are in this mess. Hopefully this year the MRP actually does this. This case is a good start for this, they got every charge right this week.
A lot of you people are being a bit hard on Aristotle Pickett I think.
I mean, he's only interested in protecting head injuries.
BTW, just saw one of his posts in the Noah Balta assault charge thread.
As you can see, it's ok to smack the snot out of someone.
As long as you're a Richmond player that is.
So all good.
On Jan 2, 2025 Aristotle Pickett said:
He snotted a 27yo male at the Mulwala Water Ski Club in NSW.
Reading between the lines, some guy has put women and children in danger by boating too close to people. Noah has had a word to him, the guy has attacked Noah and Noah has snotted him.
So all good.
I mean, he's only interested in protecting head injuries.
BTW, just saw one of his posts in the Noah Balta assault charge thread.
As you can see, it's ok to smack the snot out of someone.
As long as you're a Richmond player that is.
So all good.
On Jan 2, 2025 Aristotle Pickett said:
He snotted a 27yo male at the Mulwala Water Ski Club in NSW.
Reading between the lines, some guy has put women and children in danger by boating too close to people. Noah has had a word to him, the guy has attacked Noah and Noah has snotted him.
So all good.
Any act is capable of being a reportable offence though if executed the wrong way. That is what the rough conduct provisions are supposed to cover.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
No, they are two different things. The ACTION has to be reportable, that's the first thing, you are lumping it all together it's not and shouldn't be. It's best to think of it as below.
Part 1: The action itself, is it reportable in other words. Does it constitute a reportable offence and pushing sure as anything isn't
a) NO: No charge (this was this one)
b) YES: Go to part 2
Part 2: Impact
-Levels of impact from minor to severe with the latter referred.
1. I have distinguished between legal and illegal actions according to the rules of the game. The rest is just bullshit you made up.
2. Yep that's right, we should have rightfully expected a worse outcome than bottom of the free kick differential 3 x more often over the last 8 years than the other 17 clubs put together, lol.
3. Any dangerous action can be reportable for lack of duty of care if it is "not an action a reasonable player would consider prudent in the circumstances." An action within the rules of the game is highly likely to be automatically excluded from this, because it would be something the opponent knows is not prhibited by the rules. What Ginbey did was dangerous(clearly) and is prohibited by the rules(clearly.)
A push is absolutely capable of being a reportable offence if it is:
1. dangerous, &
2. not what a reasonable player would consider prudent in the circumstances.
The Tribunal guidelines allow for that.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
It's not, not unless you are pushing the bloke into a fence. This was purely and simply jostling for position that's all it was. Push the bloke into a fence then you'll cop something. You are wanting the bloke suspended for something that happens 100 times a game.
You show me where it says in the Tribunal Guidelines then that a push cannot be a reportable offence unless it is into a fence.
You are making up rubbish and trying to pass it off as fact.
If dangerous pushes that could be described as being such that a reasonable player would not consider prudent in the circumstances occur 100 times a game then that is 1.25 times for every minute on the clock.
So you watch some footage and show me a minute where this occurs twice. Or a quarter where it occurs twice might be a good starting point.
Last edited:
According to the rules of the game, tunneling, pushes in the back and high contact are all illegal.
You're just saying they are fine because your players got off.
If you're fine with those, then you're fine with Ginbey's, because he got off.
Thanks for coming.
Yes, because none of you have the basic understanding that your team was coached to play in a certain manner that gave away free kicks.
In fact, despite #freekickhawthorn being a thing during their premiership run, they did very similar things.
Who was Hardwick an assistant under, I wonder?
All of that is your opinion and not the opinion of the MRO or AFL.
Just because a few pleb journos in Vic had an issue with it, you'll find the majority consider it an unfortunate accident.
By your own opinion regarding Riewoldt, Cotchin and Hopper, then Ginbey's actions were worthy of nothing more than a free kick.
Understandably Tiges supporters are upset that Lalor got injured by this incident - it was a dog act and its becoming a more common way to injure players deliberately. It was a deliberate act to hurt Lalor by pushing him into the oncoming player - anyone that thinks otherwise has no idea.
I can see this incident will become the turning point for this type of action. Like the sling tackle used to be accepted as a football action, this will not be tolerated by the AFL. They have definitely dropped the ball in this case but because of the media and forums are highlighting it and getting upset they will re-look at it and may even be an appeal.
I guarantee by this time next year - that same action with the same consequences (concussion/broken jaw) will be given 4 weeks.
PS - I cringed when I saw Hopper do the same thing last year and thought he had a case to answer
I can see this incident will become the turning point for this type of action. Like the sling tackle used to be accepted as a football action, this will not be tolerated by the AFL. They have definitely dropped the ball in this case but because of the media and forums are highlighting it and getting upset they will re-look at it and may even be an appeal.
I guarantee by this time next year - that same action with the same consequences (concussion/broken jaw) will be given 4 weeks.
PS - I cringed when I saw Hopper do the same thing last year and thought he had a case to answer
Absolute, utter bullshit.
Stop getting opinions form the Richmond Reddit board.
If it was a deliberate act, AFL would've cited him.
I understand the rules currently stand that you are allowed to push another player into a contest but I can guarantee you that this time next year you will not. It was clearly a deliberate action but because there is no precedent and there was no outrage the AFL did what they normally do - once it becomes an issue in the media, they will act.
Not sure how you can say that was not a deliberate action - you're kidding yourself
The push was a deliberate action, the push into a teammate was not.
As I previously said to the in denial Meteoric; Do you honestly believe that Ginbey would intentionally push a player into his unprotect teammate's back(whilst in mid-air, no less) to cause injury?
Brock was far more likely to be the player injured in that scenario, not Lalor.
You have rocks in your head if you think Ginbey's intention was to push a player into his own teammate mid-air in a practice game.
Yeah thats a fair point. Its either really dumb or a dog act. Either way I think the AFL will be backed into a corner on this type of action - as they were with sling tackles.
I'd say it would need to be a semi-common occurrence.
The issue with sling tackles is that they eventuated by the AFL's own design, because umpires weren't blowing the whistle fast enough when players were tackled upright, so the only way to bring them to ground was a slinging move, which resulted in a number of concussions.
The fact this thread can only point toward to incidents in recent memory(Hopper/Ginbey), where only one player incurred a head injury, would indicate that it's simply not common enough to warrant a rule change, especially when most pundits agree that Ginbey was looking at the ball and was unaware of Brock to begin with.
I agree with most of that - it may end up being a more generic ruling such as 'any deliberate act resulting in head injury'.
"And there was no outrage "
The Tigers fans have presented us with a plethora of outrage all the while defending Noah for kicking the fukc out of a civilian. Different strokes for different blokes I guess.
The hypocrisy knows no bounds.
There's been maybe 10 Tigers supporters commenting on this thread - most have been pretty reasonable and a couple haven't. I think the AFL will need a bit more outrage. Maybe Lloydy and a few journos getting on board may help"And there was no outrage "
Different strokes for different blokes I guess.
The hypocrisy knows no bounds.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Fair comment and most AFL supporters are fairly one eyed.
But even you as a fair minded poster must admit that once the judge has judged and the jury are overwhelming in their voting, you have to accept the "Not guilty" outcome?
Some rubbish in this thread, but this is a just wow.
One of the most courageous things you can do in footy is go back unprotected into a high ball marking contest. And you're suggesting a teammate deliberately pushed an opponent into his own unprotected playing hoping to hurt who exactly?
The most likely injured person was the WC boy.
From the limited footage I think the long ball was kicked to Lalor. he was trying to hold Ginbey off the drop zone while Ginbey was trying to force Lalor into it too early. Generally called a contest. Anyway the other bloke drifts across, the rookie sees the impending collision, but it's too late to prepare for it as he is in a strength battle.
Who is the judge and jury? The BF poll? We're all in trouble if the BF experts and poll voters have any jurisdiction. Michael Christian is a muppet. I don't think we've heard the end of it tbh.
If there is any more media on it the AFL will act - not sure whether there is still any chance that there is an appeal? They'll be discussing it atm and will have something in place if anything like this happens again. By this time net year, that same act will get weeks I'm sure.
Well you just lost your "Fair minded poster" Badge haven't you.
Sheesh, that's what i get for being nice to a Richmond poster
So you're advocating for an outcome based off the rage of certain pundits in the media/supporters, despite the incident not considered worthy of a punishment?
This reeks of bias.
I'm not advocating anything. I'm saying thats the way the AFL works - they'll wait to see if theres outrage (mainly from the media) - if there is, then they'll act. What Christian says and what the BF poll says is irrelevant. Not sure which bit you are disagreeing with -
A - the BF poll is just a bunch of nobodies with biased opinions
B - Michael Christian is a muppet or
C - that the AFL is driven by media/public opinion
