VFL VFL: Geelong Season 2021

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was a pop in the jaw. Way more likely to get really injured in a sling tackle which don't get any weeks these days.
5 weeks is about right cause of how it looks and he got a swollen jaw.
I would of thought 4.
I agree with your first two sentences but you absolutely cannot have junior footy copying that. I don't care if he was completely uninjured, it has to be far more than a sling tackle.
 
Agree with your assessment as the current rules are. But I’d be keen for them to adopt a severe penalty for any punch. Say, 8 weeks. You’d pretty quickly see the end of it. It has no place in the game.
I think most fans would prefer an approach that focuses on ‘action and intent’ and not ‘outcome’.
System came in under Anderson. Adrian was a lawyer by trade, so no surprises we’ve got a very lawyer friendly tribunal environment.
 
I think most fans would prefer an approach that focuses on ‘action and intent’ and not ‘outcome’.
System came in under Anderson. Adrian was a lawyer by trade, so no surprises we’ve got a very lawyer friendly tribunal environment.
The problem with action and intent is that it's very hard to prove. Action and outcome is about the only thing you can actually measure
 

Two Planks

Norm Smith Medallist
May 14, 2012
8,167
12,868
AFL Club
Geelong
Agree with your assessment as the current rules are. But I’d be keen for them to adopt a severe penalty for any punch. Say, 8 weeks. You’d pretty quickly see the end of it. It has no place in the game.

You can get life for murder but people still do it.
 

Spazz Cat

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 10, 2013
24,890
30,162
AFL Club
Geelong
I agree with your first two sentences but you absolutely cannot have junior footy copying that. I don't care if he was completely uninjured, it has to be far more than a sling tackle.
I dunno. Everyone looks at things differently I guess.
A Luke Hodge elbow into the point post had a realistic chance of paralysing someone for life.
Only a few weeks.
I'd hate for any kids to copy that. (Not that I believe kids are gonna start punching people cause Paddy McCartin only got 4 weeks)
 
I dunno. Everyone looks at things differently I guess.
A Luke Hodge elbow into the point post had a realistic chance of paralysing someone for life.
Only a few weeks.
I'd hate for any kids to copy that. (Not that I believe kids are gonna start punching people cause Paddy McCartin only got 4 weeks)
I won't argue that hodge should have got more for that attempted murder charge because I agree, but a kid would struggle to imitate that no matter how many times they tried. A kid doesn't really register the number of weeks, the kid registers how society responds to it.
 

Spazz Cat

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 10, 2013
24,890
30,162
AFL Club
Geelong
I won't argue that hodge should have got more for that attempted murder charge because I agree, but a kid would struggle to imitate that no matter how many times they tried. A kid doesn't really register the number of weeks, the kid registers how society responds to it.
Well kids are in real trouble then. Wayne Carey and Leigh Mathews are widely considered the 2 greatest players of all time.
One did shocking things on field one did off field.
Both are on TV too. As is Luke Hodge.
 
McCartin gone for 5 weeks - the league was arguing for 6 weeks, while his lawyers were arguing for 4 weeks down to 3 as he had pled guilty
thats total s**t.

Gaff got 8 weeks for the exact same thing but he got it done with one punch.

This thug went twice - meaning he missed the first time and swung again to ensure he made contact

Gaff swung once and got 8 weeks. i dont get it. 5 weeks seems very light to me

GO Catters
 
Dec 11, 2009
29,510
36,574
AFL Club
Geelong
So virtually uninjured then. Swelling and a little bleeding is bloody nothing.

Brayshaw had a broken jaw and required surgery. 5 is a perfect balance.

Whether he was injured or not is beside the point. You don't need a broken jaw to suffer a brain injury.

Either the AFL is serious about head trauma or not.

It was a cowardly, deliberate, direct punch to the head. That's all they need to consider, if they were fair dinkum, and should be given about 8 weeks.

Then, if someone suffers a broken jaw etc they should add another 4 weeks and round it off to a 12 week stint on the sidelines for the idiot to think long and hard about it.

THAT would demonstrate the AFL's determination and sincerity, and protect future players, rather than the limp wristed slaps they're handing out atm.
 
Dec 11, 2009
29,510
36,574
AFL Club
Geelong
thats total sh*t.

Gaff got 8 weeks for the exact same thing but he got it done with one punch.

This thug went twice - meaning he missed the first time and swung again to ensure he made contact

Gaff swung once and got 8 weeks. i dont get it. 5 weeks seems very light to me

GO Catters

Fully agree.

It just highlights the AFL's quivering and insincerity about eliminating this rubbish from the game.
 
Dec 11, 2009
29,510
36,574
AFL Club
Geelong
Well kids are in real trouble then. Wayne Carey and Leigh Mathews are widely considered the 2 greatest players of all time.
One did shocking things on field one did off field.
Both are on TV too. As is Luke Hodge.

Matthews was a straight up coward. No respect for him at all.

Carey was a pervert who drank his own bathwater.
 

Spazz Cat

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 10, 2013
24,890
30,162
AFL Club
Geelong
Whether he was injured or not is beside the point. You don't need a broken jaw to suffer a brain injury.

Either the AFL is serious about head trauma or not.

It was a cowardly, deliberate, direct punch to the head. That's all they need to consider, if they were fair dinkum, and should be given about 8 weeks.

Then, if someone suffers a broken jaw etc they should add another 4 weeks and round it off to a 12 week stint on the sidelines for the idiot to think long and hard about it.

THAT would demonstrate the AFL's determination and sincerity, and protect future players, rather than the limp wristed slaps they're handing out atm.
So Scarlett should of got 8 weeks for punching Ballantyne?
 

Spazz Cat

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 10, 2013
24,890
30,162
AFL Club
Geelong
Matthews was a straight up coward. No respect for him at all.

Carey was a pervert who drank his own bathwater.
Yet they're both on TV. The whole "Someone think of the children" argument is kind of dumb.
Noone really gives a f**k about showing consequences for actions.
 
So Scarlett should of got 8 weeks for punching Ballantyne?
That was 2013 and im not sure its apples to apples then and now

Both thugish acts - sure

The metrics of that have shifted considerably over the last 9 years...

Gaff and McCartin much closer acts to compare IMO

GO Catters
 

Spazz Cat

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 10, 2013
24,890
30,162
AFL Club
Geelong
That was 2013 and im not sure its apples to apples then and now

Both thugish acts - sure

The metrics of that have shifted considerably over the last 9 years...

Gaff and McCartin much closer acts to compare IMO

GO Catters
I disagree. In 2013 a punch to the head was frowned upon just as much as it is now.
And the penalties are no different either.
It was 2013 not the 70's.
If anything it's worse now. Because now everything is based on outcome.
In 2013 it wasn’t.
 
The sooner the AFL & associated leagues apply greater emphasis to the action than the outcome the better

Isn't a key idea behind the MRP & Tribunal to deter players from partaking in unwanted acts out on the football field, but what we are repeatedly seeing is that it's not the act being punished but the outcome of the act

An obvious example is the Burgoyne tackle against Dangerfield early last season, it was an obvious sling tackle & the sort of action the AFL talks about not wanting to see out on the field, but Burgoyne's punishment was a $1000 fine due to be deemed "low impact" as Dangerfield played out the game. We saw similar tackles occur later in the season where the tackler was suspended because the player being tackled ended up in a worse state than Dangerfield

So it's not so much the action which saw the player in trouble but the result of the action and that's where things become a raffle in terms of the punishment received by the MRO or tribunal

Maybe there should be some tweaking of the rules so that there is a standardised suspensions based on the action/s of an individual and then there's additional weeks based on the outcome

If the AFL doesn't want to see sling tackles then make it an automatic 2* week suspension based on the action, the outcome or impact then adds loading to the initial suspension

A punch to the jaw (especially one so far behind play) is a straight up 6* week suspension, with loading added for the severity/impact

A player electing to bump & making head high contact is 2* weeks, with loading added etc

Start actually punishing the action with a suspension, then add loading based on the impact


*arbitrary numbers
 

Spazz Cat

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 10, 2013
24,890
30,162
AFL Club
Geelong
The sooner the AFL & associated leagues apply greater emphasis to the action than the outcome the better

Isn't a key idea behind the MRP & Tribunal to deter players from partaking in unwanted acts out on the football field, but what we are repeatedly seeing is that it's not the act being punished but the outcome of the act

An obvious example is the Burgoyne tackle against Dangerfield early last season, it was an obvious sling tackle & the sort of action the AFL talks about not wanting to see out on the field, but Burgoyne's punishment was a $1000 fine due to be deemed "low impact" as Dangerfield played out the game. We saw similar tackles occur later in the season where the tackler was suspended because the player being tackled ended up in a worse state than Dangerfield

So it's not so much the action which saw the player in trouble but the result of the action and that's where things become a raffle in terms of the punishment received by the MRO or tribunal

Maybe there should be some tweaking of the rules so that there is a standardised suspensions based on the action/s of an individual and then there's additional weeks based on the outcome

If the AFL doesn't want to see sling tackles then make it an automatic 2* week suspension based on the action, the outcome or impact then adds loading to the initial suspension

A punch to the jaw (especially one so far behind play) is a straight up 6* week suspension, with loading added for the severity/impact

A player electing to bump & making head high contact is 2* weeks, with loading added etc

Start actually punishing the action with a suspension, then add loading based on the impact


*arbitrary numbers
I agree. The worst thing is that it's only fully gone this way over the past few years.
So its obviously a trend that'll keep getting stronger.
It wasn't that long ago the action was important too.
You used to get suspended for tripping once just because of the potential to cause a bad injury.
Could get suspended for a sling tackle even when the player didn't get concussed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back