Toby Greene boot to Luke Dahlhaus face.

[Eski3]

That's ridiculous. Free kicks should not be paid whether the player is a campaigner or not.

I meant he used his boot cos hes a campaigner, not the reason it's a free

 

[Ancient Tiger]

So i see you can read, just can't comprehend.
He has every right to protect himself, he put his leg up to do that.
IMO he didn't kick him in the head, it wasn't his intent to hit him in the head, so if he is rubbed out and fights it, he will win imo.

Whether intentional or careless it was still high and of moderate force. Intentional means it goes straight to the tribunal. Careless means he is still looking at weeks. They are the rules and the way the MRP works, if they are going to be consistent.

 

[Igloo]

So why didnt the moron not run into his leg?

Rewatch it. He was looking directing at Tobes while running at him. Not the ball.


Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Well that's not true at all. I suggest you rewatch it. He's looking at Haynes first, who then handballs, then he follow the ball, then glances to see what the incoming traffic is, back to the ball, then back to Greene just before he gets kicked in the face. He didn't just run directly at Greene.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Sticking a boot out is actually worse than sticking a fist out. Can you stick out a fist and hit your oncoming opponent in the face to protect space? I doubt it. You would still get reported for that.

 

[sjohns12]

Toby Greene certainly has earnt a name for himself.

Much like Ballantyne and Crowley did for freo and the umpires said they would be watching them closely from the start of the match.

Question is , is it fair for umpires and match review panel to go in with pre conceived views on players and watch them more closely than others rather than just let it unfold and treat them like any other player on the ground?

Is Toby greenes latest report based on him being Toby Greene?

Personally I saw it as a free kick for high contact and no more. Hypothetical: what happens if a player runs back with the flight of the ball and you run and jump and your knee connects with his jaw? Whether it's a marking contest or just a contest to win the footy is irrelevant imo.

He definitely has the right to protect his space, but you can adequately do that with a knee, and that is far more second nature for footballers then using a boot. Add to that Greene's track record, and I think its perfectly fair to question his intentions.

 

[Roddy]

He certainly gets people talking. And talking. And talking.....

 

[DemonTim]

So i see you can read, just can't comprehend.
He has every right to protect himself, he put his leg up to do that.
IMO he didn't kick him in the head, it wasn't his intent to hit him in the head, so if he is rubbed out and fights it, he will win imo.

He put his foot out to do that, and hit a player high
Again, you're yet to show the relevance, you admit the act is against the rules (begrudgingly I think), but go on and on about when you played and how he's allowed to protect himself
You used anecdote and hyperbole to create a straw man. No one has said he can't protect himself.

 

[Colonial]

Well that's not true at all. I suggest you rewatch it. He's looking at Haynes first, who then handballs, then he follow the ball, then glances to see what the incoming traffic is, back to the ball, then back to Greene just before he gets kicked in the face. He didn't just run directly at Greene.

Watched it plenty. He protected his space and jumped straight up.

He just ran directly into him.

Nothing in it.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[LoungeLizard]

Whether intentional or careless it was still high and of moderate force. Intentional means it goes straight to the tribunal. Careless means he is still looking at weeks. They are the rules and the way the MRP works, if they are going to be consistent.

Oh i know what you mean, but i just think he has a case if he wants to fight it.
If he was marking the ball, we would probably not be having this convo.
IMO he is protected more by the rules in a marking contest, so less reason to put his leg out, but in this situation, he was open to getting poleaxed.

 

[Wesley2]

It was irresponsible to stick the boot out, but to argue he kicked another player in the face is disingenuous. He hung the boot out but there was no kicking motion.

 

[Bokonon_]

I dont think the umpires needed to watch him closely to see him kick someone in the face.

He didn't kick him though, he did stick his leg out.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Studs in the face is a good place to start.

Running in to a brick wall would also qualify, but it would be absurd to blame the brick wall.

 

[Bokonon_]

How can you have a thread asking if someone has been harshly treated when the MRP hasn't made a decision yet? This is beyond silly

 

[Igloo]

He didn't kick him though, he did stick his leg out.

Pretty obvious further extension of the leg there during the twist. That's a kick.

 

[Bleeeeeeeeep]

I can understand the anger but he didn't kick him. He raised his foot and Dalhus ran into it.
Don't like it but I don't think he kicked him.

 

[sruss]

what do people think it will be graded as? it's obvious he made intentional contact, but it's probably a stretch to prove that he intentionally made contact with the head. would that make it intentional, or careless?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Basically this.

It's not a defendable football action of any sort & anyone who thinks Greene didn't know exactly what he was doing is kidding themselves, the guy has superb agility & football nouse & decided to kick place his boot in someones face.

3 down to 2.

This is Toby Greene we are talking about . There will be no " down to".

 

[iBeng]

Jackie Chan attempting to mark an AFL ball, circa 2017 (Colourised)

 

[mick500]

How can you have a thread asking if someone has been harshly treated when the MRP hasn't made a decision yet? This is beyond silly

He was reported on the spot. Imo it was a free kick and no more. I think the over the top response of the report was in part due to it being Toby Greene. That's the point.

 

[Clems Knee]

Oh i know what you mean, but i just think he has a case if he wants to fight it.
If he was marking the ball, we would probably not be having this convo.
IMO he is protected more by the rules in a marking contest, so less reason to put his leg out, but in this situation, he was open to getting poleaxed.

If he was marking the ball, he wouldn't have put his foot out like that because he would have had already completed the mark before Dalhaus arrived and if Dalhaus went to tackle him, he would have got 50 metres. if he kicked him after the completion of the mark while Dalhaus was moving to stand the mark, then that would have been reportable too (and the free kick reversed). if the opposition was involved in the marking contest, then the rules allow for a different interpretation, because we all love a speccie.

At the very least, this was a high fend off causing injury to an opposition player. Just as you are not allowed to fend off with a fist to the head (or body), you should not be allowed to fend off with a boot and studs.

Go away.

Do you two have history?

 

[DemonTim]

Not sure how it's adjucated elsewhere but umpires in our league constantly warn against using a knee into the opposition in ruck contests. You can't drive it straight into the opponent, is this universal? so a foot SHOULD be worse in that situation.

 

[DemonTim]

If he was marking the ball, he wouldn't have put his foot out like that because he would have had already completed the mark before Dalhaus arrived and if Dalhaus went to tackle him, he would have got 50 metres. if he kicked him after the completion of the mark while Dalhaus was moving to stand the mark, then that would have been reportable too (and the free kick reversed). if the opposition was involved in the marking contest, then the rules allow for a different interpretation, because we all love a speccie.

At the very least, this was a high fend off causing injury to an opposition player. Just as you are not allowed to fend off with a fist to the head (or body), you should not be allowed to fend off with a boot and studs.


Do you two have history?

Not that I know of, he just seems very sensitive of his opinion.

 

[sruss]

true, Dahlhaus did play out the game, maybe a free kick was enough?

 

[DemonTim]

true, Dahlhaus did play out the game, maybe a free kick was enough?

Don't think that will be the reason if he gets off.
Duncan hit papley, and he didn't even go off. And that was enough for a week with no bad record

If he gets off it'll be if the MRP deem it reasonable contact to protect himself.

 

[Bokonon_]

Pretty obvious further extension of the leg there during the twist. That's a kick.

Well I beleive it clearly wasn't MRP will make the call.