Will Dangerfield appeal his 2 weeks?

jesterx

Premium Gold
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Posts
1,314
Likes
3,992
AFL Club
Richmond
#51
You think Martin should've got off for striking someone with a forearm to the head behind play?
no he's saying dangerfield should have as well because they were similar incidents.
Both players elbowed someone off the ball. Both made high contact. Dusty hit Kennedys shoulder and it then hit his head. Kennedy remained on his feet. Michael Christian says: “The incident was assessed as intentional conduct with medium impact and high contact.”

Danger elbowed de boer in the midriff. he doubles over. then hits him in the head and de boer goes to ground. Michael Christian says: one count of striking, which was assessed as intentional conduct with low impact to the body. second action the force was insufficient to constitute a charge, hence no further action was taken.

So the takeaway is that you can make high contact as long as you elbow the guy first and your name is Patrick Dangerfield. Also if the guy doubles over from the strike it's medium impact if it's Dustin Martin and low impact if it's Patrick dangerfield.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

betchsta

Club Legend
Joined
May 1, 2007
Posts
1,475
Likes
2,655
AFL Club
Geelong
#52
At the end if the day Dusty's elbow was downgraded to 1 week because of Kennedy's tesimony he felt no pain from the impact. It hinged on the strength of the impact.

There really Is no comparison. Iactualkythiught Dangerfield get off in the initial contact. De Bier was holding him moments before. I thiught hemightbefined fir the second.

In the end it was the reversed but I cant see a suspension in it.


download.png
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Posts
2,511
Likes
2,979
AFL Club
Geelong
#53
This threads getting better by the minute.

Nut is bashing a nut (and the keyboard) posting every few minutes, then the Hawks come in seemingly upset Richmond are upstaging them in the adversarial stakes.....


Keep it comin' folks....:D
 

Ricky Vaughn

Premiership Player
Joined
Feb 9, 2015
Posts
3,022
Likes
5,501
AFL Club
Geelong
#57
The AFL is a joke.
Dusty’s 1 action hit Kennedy first on the shoulder and was deemed low impact ...
Dangerfield 2 actions with both having the potential to cause serious injury.
The AFL is a joke.
Good luck to Dangerfield ...
Bad luck to us. The afl is a joke.
Some good points here, I just wish you were a little clearer on what you think the AFL is.
 

juss

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Posts
15,569
Likes
18,984
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
New York Jets
#58
I'm not fussed really. Happy to see players play, but thought they might go with the potential to cause injury card and give him a week. Happy they didnt, but then they must be consistent for future incidents.
 

Do the Dew

Senior List
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Posts
156
Likes
145
Location
US and A
AFL Club
Richmond
#59
It all comes down to intent vs result. I think Danger should get a week. He threw an elbow back (got fined - fair enough), then threw a blind fist back and was lucky that De Grub was hunched over, otherwise it would have got him squarely in the chops...very similar to the Houli 2017 incident (blind fist thrown back).

There was an incident last year (Rich v Ess) where Devon Smith threw a punch at Macintosh after quarter time (?), narrowly missing his face. Smith got nothing - don't even think he got fined - because the punch didn't connect. If it had, it could have been similar to Gaff's. Again, intent vs result. Michael Christian has commonly ruled that result > intent, however in real life and with some basic logic, it should be the other way around.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Ricketz

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Posts
2,745
Likes
2,295
Location
Wagga Wagga
AFL Club
Geelong
#63
Already, the MRO/media is replacing facts.

I don't mind if Dangerfield plays (it's honestly not going to change the result) - but to say he did NOT make contact with the second swing is patently false.
Lol, righto mate. I guess you had footage noone else did.

Jeeze, a lot of embarrassing comments being made here.
 

Ricketz

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Posts
2,745
Likes
2,295
Location
Wagga Wagga
AFL Club
Geelong
#65
no he's saying dangerfield should have as well because they were similar incidents.
Both players elbowed someone off the ball. Both made high contact. Dusty hit Kennedys shoulder and it then hit his head. Kennedy remained on his feet. Michael Christian says: “The incident was assessed as intentional conduct with medium impact and high contact.”

Danger elbowed de boer in the midriff. he doubles over. then hits him in the head and de boer goes to ground. Michael Christian says: one count of striking, which was assessed as intentional conduct with low impact to the body. second action the force was insufficient to constitute a charge, hence no further action was taken.

So the takeaway is that you can make high contact as long as you elbow the guy first and your name is Patrick Dangerfield. Also if the guy doubles over from the strike it's medium impact if it's Dustin Martin and low impact if it's Patrick dangerfield.
That just makes you and him stupid. The two incidents are nothing alike.

There was no intent, no impact, no risk of serious injury with Danger. Unlike Dusty, Danger didn't snipe an unprotected player from behind deliberately.
 

caloschwaby

The One and Only
Joined
Jan 3, 2017
Posts
2,428
Likes
2,561
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Celtics, Renegades, Packers
#66
According to the corrupt-to-the-core AFL, Mason Cox's bump is equivalent to Dusty's running to elbow an unsuspecting bloke to the HEAD, 80 metres AWAY from the ball.
Wouldn't be surprised to see them give slaps on the risk for similar situations in the future. Thanks AFL.
 

Obeanie1

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Posts
18,329
Likes
11,399
Location
Darwin
AFL Club
West Coast
#70
Dusty’s 1 action hit Kennedy first on the shoulder and was deemed low impact ...
Dangerfield 2 actions with both having the potential to cause serious injury.
The AFL is a joke.

No you are being the joke and a sook.

Low impact to the body is pretty clear.

Nothing like running past someone and elbowing them in the head.....behind play.

Delusional.
 

Obeanie1

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Posts
18,329
Likes
11,399
Location
Darwin
AFL Club
West Coast
#71
The cornerstone of Dusty's citing was the potential too injure.
Lasted a week.
Elbow to the head as he jogged past v elbow to the ribs standing still.

One had more force than the other. One was to the head the other the ribs / stomach area.

Really not hard to understand if you open both eyes.
 

Dez!

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Posts
30,157
Likes
20,662
Location
Melbourne, Victoria
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
#73
Dusty’s 1 action hit Kennedy first on the shoulder and was deemed low impact ...
Dangerfield 2 actions with both having the potential to cause serious injury.
The AFL is a joke.
Martin ran up to Kennedy to snipe him, he should've stayed at 2 weeks.

Dangerfield should've got 1 if the AFL were actually serious about removing any punches from the game.
 

Tiger_Of_Old

Premium Platinum
Joined
Nov 23, 2000
Posts
34,562
Likes
56,099
Location
Country Victoria
AFL Club
Richmond
#74
Elbow to the head as he jogged past v elbow to the ribs standing still.

One had more force than the other. One was to the head the other the ribs / stomach area.

Really not hard to understand if you open both eyes.
Show me where Potential has been used before last week?
If they wanted Potential in its decision making then why wasn't it brought in at the start of the year?
As you said an Elbow to the Ribs has the potential to crack a rib yes?
 

Demonic Ascent

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Posts
14,148
Likes
9,619
Location
Muckertal
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
NY Jets, Boston Celtics, WADA
#75
no he's saying dangerfield should have as well because they were similar incidents.
Both players elbowed someone off the ball. Both made high contact. Dusty hit Kennedys shoulder and it then hit his head. Kennedy remained on his feet. Michael Christian says: “The incident was assessed as intentional conduct with medium impact and high contact.”

Danger elbowed de boer in the midriff. he doubles over. then hits him in the head and de boer goes to ground. Michael Christian says: one count of striking, which was assessed as intentional conduct with low impact to the body. second action the force was insufficient to constitute a charge, hence no further action was taken.

So the takeaway is that you can make high contact as long as you elbow the guy first and your name is Patrick Dangerfield. Also if the guy doubles over from the strike it's medium impact if it's Dustin Martin and low impact if it's Patrick dangerfield.
There's absolutely no relation between the two incidents
 
Top Bottom