Ziebell bump on Cloke

Topkent

Confirmed ITK Drafting King
Aug 29, 2010
61,046
84,953
Canada
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Winnipeg Jets
Whats the difference between hookers hit amd ziebells? If anything hookers was later and seemd to get him in the head only difference is sloane got up and wasnt injured! Im not saying hooker should get anything but if were looking at jz why not that one! Jeez if preuss can get away with a fine surely jacks is thrown out

The bloke preuss hit wasn't injured. That's all the afl care about is the image
 

rooboy29

All Australian
Jun 11, 2016
867
583
AFL Club
North Melbourne
The bloke preuss hit wasn't injured. That's all the afl care about is the image
Ive always thought the mrp, tribunals etc were in place to stop thugs belting blokes not for incidental acts that always seem to go for! Toby greene continually wacks blokes in the mouth yet nothing ever seems to happen due to force and not injuring blokes
 
It kinda blows my mind that this is a major discussion point to be honest. Frustrated at the injury but it's a down-field free at the absolute most.
Media trying to blow it out of proportion to sell papers, nothing more.
 

Egga

Cancelled
North Melbourne - 2018 Luke Davies-Uniacke and Paul Ahern Player Sponsor North Melbourne - 2016 Daw & Anderson Player Sponsor North Melbourne - 2015 Daw & MacMillan Player Sponsor North Melbourne - 2014 Daw, Black, Gibson Player Sponsor North Melbourne - 2013 Daw, Black and Gibson Player Sponsorship
Nov 10, 2009
3,418
8,489
AFL Club
North Melbourne
To be found guilty, the MRP needs to find that the act was unreasonable.

Given the bump was to the body it can only be unreasonable if it was late. Whether or not he had other options is irrelevant.

There is no definition of 'late' in the AFL rules for a bumping report. However, the MRP could defer to the free kick rule that says a bump is late if it is "after a player disposes of the ball". If this definition is strictly applied then Ziebell would have to be suspended as Cloke had clearly kicked the ball before he was bumped.

Ziebell's defence if he contested it could be that a bump is legal if it is within 5 meters of the ball. If this definition is strictly applied then Ziebell should get off, as the ball is within 2-3 meters at the time of impact. Ziebell's defence could also argue that two umps saw the bump and thought it was in play.

But, let's face it, Ziebell's defence will never see the light of day. No one ever contests an MRP ruling because its safer to contest an election against Bashir Assad. I don't think he should be suspended and presumeably the umpires don't either. But given he's been suspended before by the MRP for "going for the football", I figure he'll get suspended again under the 'bad look' clause because the MRP is a farce.
 

Sedat!

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 3, 2003
5,564
3,309
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Ziebell free to play. Incident assessed as in play (in the act of kicking) and contact therefore not unreasonable. That was the key issue with this incident

Tad lucky IMO that it was classed as in play and not late but it would have been a marginal call either way. Fair enough.
 

DemonTim

Cancelled
10k Posts The Trident - Awarded to posters who do a hell of a lot on the Dees board
Jul 18, 2013
11,363
8,296
AFL Club
Melbourne
The melts on SEN were amazing this morning. "He could've killed Cloke" "he should be suspended for as long as Cloke is out" "he's a sniper 4-6 weeks"

Please stop ******* with the game. The only people who should be consulted on issues like this are people who play. Not the loudest whingers in public.
 

Sedat!

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 3, 2003
5,564
3,309
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
The melts on SEN were amazing this morning. "He could've killed Cloke" "he should be suspended for as long as Cloke is out" "he's a sniper 4-6 weeks"

Please stop ******* with the game. The only people who should be consulted on issues like this are people who play. Not the loudest whingers in public.
Both sides of the argument have spoken endless horse s**t about this case since Friday. Garbage like 'death of the bump' and 'game is turning into netball' is as idiotic and irrelevent as 'Cloke could have been killed' and 'Cloke injured for 4 weeks so Ziebell should cop 4 weeks'.
 

DemonTim

Cancelled
10k Posts The Trident - Awarded to posters who do a hell of a lot on the Dees board
Jul 18, 2013
11,363
8,296
AFL Club
Melbourne
Both sides of the argument have spoken endless horse s**t about this case since Friday. Garbage like 'death of the bump' and 'game is turning into netball' is as idiotic and irrelevent as 'Cloke could have been killed' and 'Cloke injured for 4 weeks so Ziebell should cop 4 weeks'.
Well id agree with the first two if he got rubbed out for a bump like this...
 
Please stop ******* with the game. The only people who should be consulted on issues like this are people who play. Not the loudest whingers in public.
Thats the problem really.

They keep telling us they're making these changes for us and the players, but really they're bowing to media influence for most things.
 

Sedat!

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 3, 2003
5,564
3,309
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Well id agree with the first two if he got rubbed out for a bump like this...
The act of bumping wasn't on trial here, the timing of the bump in question was - and the MRP assessed it as in play therefore contact not unreasonable. For mine it is right on the edge of in play/late - I can see why the MRP ultimately deemed it as in play, and equally I would have seen how they might have classed it as late therefore not reasonable contact.
 
Last edited:

stevie26

Club Legend
Mar 3, 2016
1,657
1,821
SE Asia
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sydney women's team
Wrong decision IMO. Very bad precedent now for AFL MRP. Open slather now for cheap snipers like Ziebell in the AFL to come in late to shirtfront a player who cannot protect himself because he is wide open going for a mark. To all those posters who are sticking up for Ziebell in this thread, you will certainly change your tune if something similar happens to one of the players in your team. For what it's worth i thought Zac Jones deserved a week for his late bump on Cloke and posted this on my team's board.
 

DemonTim

Cancelled
10k Posts The Trident - Awarded to posters who do a hell of a lot on the Dees board
Jul 18, 2013
11,363
8,296
AFL Club
Melbourne
The act of bumping wasn't on trial here, the timing of the bump in question was - and the MRP assessed it as in play therefore contact not unreasonable.
I'd say if this was considered outside the rules of the game then the bump would be gone. The ball was 2 metres away. The bump was 0.3seconds after disposal. If that is illegal then when is a bump in play? When the player still has the ball and isn't disposing of it, so you wouldn't bump anyway?
 

DemonTim

Cancelled
10k Posts The Trident - Awarded to posters who do a hell of a lot on the Dees board
Jul 18, 2013
11,363
8,296
AFL Club
Melbourne
Wrong decision IMO. Very bad precedent now for AFL MRP. Open slather now for cheap snipers like Ziebell in the AFL to come in late to shirtfront a player who cannot protect himself because he was wide open going for a mark. To all those posters who are sticking up for Ziebell in this thread, you will certainly change your tune if something similar happens to one of the players in your team. For what it's worth i thought Zac Jones deserved a week for his late bump on Cloke and posted this on my team's board.
"Wide open going for a mark"

Maybe actually have a clue what you're on about. He had just disposed of the ball, not marked it. Jesus you're outraging over something you don't even understand. Stick to calling KB on SEN. he loves outrage
 

Sedat!

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 3, 2003
5,564
3,309
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I'd say if this was considered outside the rules of the game then the bump would be gone. The ball was 2 metres away. The bump was 0.3seconds after disposal. If that is illegal then when is a bump in play? When the player still has the ball and isn't disposing of it, so you wouldn't bump anyway?
2 metres/0.3 seconds from when the ball left Cloke's boot is still a decent gap. It was late enough that the bump had absolutely no impact on the kick, and the ball was already out of screen shot when the bump connected with Clokey. It's right on the edge IMO.

Still have no idea why he chose to bump in the first place - when you are 2 metres away by far the best chance to affect the kick is to dive and attempt to smother. The choice to bump was completely useless in stopping the ball and preventing what was a crucial goal in context of the game.
 

DemonTim

Cancelled
10k Posts The Trident - Awarded to posters who do a hell of a lot on the Dees board
Jul 18, 2013
11,363
8,296
AFL Club
Melbourne
2 metres/0.3 seconds from when the ball left Cloke's boot is still a decent gap. It was late enough that the bump had absolutely no impact on the kick, and the ball was already out of screen shot when the bump connected with Clokey. It's right on the edge IMO.

Still have no idea why he chose to bump in the first place - when you are 2 metres away by far the best chance to affect the kick is to dive and attempt to smother. The choice to bump was completely useless in stopping the ball and preventing what was a crucial goal in context of the game.
0.3 of a second is very very little time in terms of decision making when running at that speed.

Plenty of times it's the anticipation of a bump coming that causes a failure in disposal. Players get worried they're about to cop it and * up the kick. Cloke didn't, but it's a pretty common thing.
 

ABitWoofy

Premiership Player
Aug 11, 2008
3,003
2,707
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Wrong decision IMO. Very bad precedent now for AFL MRP. Open slather now for cheap snipers like Ziebell in the AFL to come in late to shirtfront a player who cannot protect himself because he is wide open going for a mark. To all those posters who are sticking up for Ziebell in this thread, you will certainly change your tune if something similar happens to one of the players in your team. For what it's worth i thought Zac Jones deserved a week for his late bump on Cloke and posted this on my team's board.

Nope. Think you'll find the consensus on our board is that the correct decision has been made.
 
Back