MRO Thread

[bornadog]

What about Mundy’s deliberate two fingers in Bont’s eyes?

I thought that was an accident

[Happy Days]

I suspect the AFEL will ignore the punching of Cody’s nuts to any real degree, say a $2,000 fine. But this is where I think the system is flawed.

Cody gets punched in the buts, and the AFEL get $2,000. Why doesn’t the player with the sore nuts get the money? Why does the AFEL deserve to keep the $2,000? It doesn’t mate much sense.




Yes. $1,000 per testical.

It was unbelievably sad and dog from Wilson and it should get a week. It’s the second one in two weeks after Mills hit Stocker, so this is a chance to knock it on the head.

[bulldogtragic]

It was unbelievably sad and dog from Wilson and it should get a week. It’s the second one in two weeks after Mills hit Stocker, so this is a chance to knock it on the head.

Thats what Wilson was thinking.

[SquirrelGrip]

I thought that was an accident

In what possible circumstance in a ga,e of footy do you have two fingers out near the eye other than to do what he did? Dispicable act. Worse than what happened to Cody.

[jeemak]

In what possible circumstance in a ga,e of footy do you have two fingers out near the eye other than to do what he did? Dispicable act. Worse than what happened to Cody.

Must admit I did want to see it again after it happened, because it did look out of place in context of where the ball was at the time.

[divvydan]

Wilson will get a week if they consider it to have enough impact to warrant a report at all. It's an intentional action and groin is considered the same level of severity as head high so even with low impact it's 1 week.

[SonofScray]

The eye poke in real time looks accidental, just hands and fingers flailing as Bont tries to dish it out. On slo-mo though, it looked bad, a real clawing action.

[soupman]

Look I'm not saying there is anything in this but Razor Ray was the umpire that spotted the goin tap and gave the 50 against Wilson.

He was also the umpire who didn't give Wilson a holding the ball free when he got Hannan pretty good, and was also the umpire that got Wilson for that holding the man free on the goal line, both of which seemed harsh. Could he have been dealing out a bit of karma to Wilson on purpose?

[EasternWest]

Look I'm not saying there is anything in this but Razor Ray was the umpire that spotted the goin tap and gave the 50 against Wilson.

He was also the umpire who didn't give Wilson a holding the ball free when he got Hannan pretty good, and was also the umpire that got Wilson for that holding the man free on the goal line, both of which seemed harsh. Could he have been dealing out a bit of karma to Wilson on purpose?

Honestly I hope not.

[Happy Days]

Look I'm not saying there is anything in this but Razor Ray was the umpire that spotted the goin tap and gave the 50 against Wilson.

He was also the umpire who didn't give Wilson a holding the ball free when he got Hannan pretty good, and was also the umpire that got Wilson for that holding the man free on the goal line, both of which seemed harsh. Could he have been dealing out a bit of karma to Wilson on purpose?

What I thought was even more Razor Ray was taking the Weightman 50 to one metre out instead of the goal line. He just can't not be involved.

[divvydan]

Wilson offered a week.

[Axe Man]

Match review: Docker suspended for striking Dog (https://www.afl.com.au/news/628092/match-review-docker-suspended-for-striking-dog)

Charge laid:
Nathan Wilson, Fremantle, has been charged with Striking Cody Weightman, Western Bulldogs, during the fourth quarter of the Round 12 match between Fremantle and the Western Bulldogs, played at Optus Stadium on Sunday June 6, 2021

In summary, he can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Intentional Conduct, Low Impact, Groin Contact. The incident was classified as a one-match sanction as a first offence. The player can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.

[jazzadogs]

What I thought was even more Razor Ray was taking the Weightman 50 to one metre out instead of the goal line. He just can't not be involved.

Bizarre, given the tackle and free kick were inside the 50m line.

[bornadog]

Match review: Docker suspended for striking Dog (https://www.afl.com.au/news/628092/match-review-docker-suspended-for-striking-dog)

Charge laid:
Nathan Wilson, Fremantle, has been charged with Striking Cody Weightman, Western Bulldogs, during the fourth quarter of the Round 12 match between Fremantle and the Western Bulldogs, played at Optus Stadium on Sunday June 6, 2021

In summary, he can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Intentional Conduct, Low Impact, Groin Contact. The incident was classified as a one-match sanction as a first offence. The player can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.

Excellent, was a dirty act

[bulldogtragic]

Tom Hawkins

Intentional. High. Low impact. No injury. 50m penalty. Bad record.

Is that a fine?

[bornadog]

Tom Hawkins

Intentional. High. Low impact. No injury. 50m penalty. Bad record.

Is that a fine?

Sick of this bloke constantly hitting high and getting away with it. I didn't see this last one but he has a bad record

[bulldogtragic]

Sick of this bloke constantly hitting high and getting away with it. I didn't see this last one but he has a bad record

Swinging arm. Lucky it didn’t properly connect.

[bulldogtragic]

Parfait not playing us.

[comrade]

Parfait not playing us.

He won't go for that, didn't land anywhere near his head/neck.

[bornadog]

He won't go for that, didn't land anywhere near his head/neck.

Very similar to Caleb's one I thought

[comrade]

Very similar to Caleb's one I thought

The action was similar but the Port player landed on his back. Berry dove into the ground on his head.

[Axe Man]

Parfait not playing us.

I thought he was slightly unlucky a free was even paid, shouldn't even be looked at.

[Go_Dogs]

Mackay decision straight to the tribunal is interesting on so many levels.

Changes the game forever if he gets rubbed out.

[divvydan]

Incident is ungraded too, so MRO doesn't think it's a reportable offence but has sent it directly to the tribunal anyway. If anyone ever wanted proof that the outcome carries more weight than the action/intent, then this is it.

[Go_Dogs]

Incident is ungraded too, so MRO doesn't think it's a reportable offence but has sent it directly to the tribunal anyway. If anyone ever wanted proof that the outcome carries more weight than the action/intent, then this is it.

Yes, agree. It’s basically saying despite having rules to the game (and I think it being clear no rule was broken - but will now to those who actually now the rules better than me), we don’t know what they are. YOU make a decision. Very AFL.

I would assume he gets off and the act of sending to the Tribunal is a PR / optics piece.

EDIT:

18.3.1 Spirit and Intention
A Player who makes the football their sole objective shall be provided every opportunity to do so.

18.3.2 Free Kicks - Prohibited Contact
…(f) Charges an opposition player

Charge or Charging: the act of a Player colliding with an opposition Player where the amount of physical force used is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances, irrespective of whether the Player is or is not in possession of the football or whether the Player is within five metres of the football.

18.3.3 Permitted Contact
A Player may use their hip, shoulder, chest, arms or open hands provided that the football is no more than five metres away from the Player and the Player does not make Prohibited Contact as per Law 18.3.2 above.

[Go_Dogs]

So looking at the rules, I think the Tribunal will need to decide:
1. when he made the decision to attack the ball at speed (probably at least 10m out to build up momentum)
2. should he / would he have known there would be a contest at the ground ball (probably safe to assume there would be)
3. given that, was the force reasonable and necessary (well, he had eyes for the ball and wanted to be first there so attacked it with speed. Should he have slowed down rather than trying to win the ball at such ferocity because there was a likelihood that someone else would be there contesting it too?)

I think there is sufficient ambiguity in the Rules and the facts of this one that it could go either way. Hopefully it doesn’t result in weeks.

[GVGjr]

What did McKay actually do wrong? What has he been charged with?

I'm all for protecting players but on face value it's two players going hard for the ball.
I can't see it was intentional or reckless but happy to hear others views.

[jeemak]

This is from the AFL's reporter:

https://www.afl.com.au/news/631742/why-the-afl-will-argue-for-lengthy-mackay-ban-at-tribunal

In a statement released on Monday, the League clarified that its legal counsel will argue that Mackay's bump was "unreasonable in the circumstances" after it was referred directly to the Tribunal by the Match Review Officer.

The statement read: "As such, the AFL will argue that, regardless of whether Player Mackay was (1) contesting the ball, (2) bumping Player Clark or (3) both, he still contravened the general prohibition on unreasonable conduct (including in contesting the ball)."

That doesn't really sit well with me.

[bornadog]

What did McKay actually do wrong? What has he been charged with?

I'm all for protecting players but on face value it's two players going hard for the ball.
I can't see it was intentional or reckless but happy to hear others views.

I agree with you, this is a charge because of a broken jaw, otherwise it would be play on.

[GVGjr]

I agree with you, this is a charge because of a broken jaw, otherwise it would be play on.
I guess so but if McKay had collected a team mate with the same result rather than an opposition player would he still be off to face the tribunal or would it be accepted as just part of the game?

It smacks of wanting to be seen to be doing something rather than a well thought out charge.

It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Bulldog Joe]

I agree with you, this is a charge because of a broken jaw, otherwise it would be play on.

It is the perennial problem with the AFL.

Charge based on outcome when it should be intent.

The player deserving a 3 week suspension this week was Mumford who had intent to hurt North players in 2 separate incidents.

[GVGjr]

This is from the AFL's reporter:

https://www.afl.com.au/news/631742/why-the-afl-will-argue-for-lengthy-mackay-ban-at-tribunal

In a statement released on Monday, the League clarified that its legal counsel will argue that Mackay's bump was "unreasonable in the circumstances" after it was referred directly to the Tribunal by the Match Review Officer.

The statement read: "As such, the AFL will argue that, regardless of whether Player Mackay was (1) contesting the ball, (2) bumping Player Clark or (3) both, he still contravened the general prohibition on unreasonable conduct (including in contesting the ball)."

That doesn't really sit well with me.

How do we coach players to avoid this? The end result might really change the fabric of the game.

[jeemak]

How do we coach players to avoid this? The end result might really change the fabric of the game.

Do you think his main objective was to get the ball then? Or do you think it was an opportunistic act that enabled him to collect an opposition player with a bump at the same time as possibly taking the ball?

I think it was the latter.

[Hotdog60]

I watched the video replay and as far as I could see it was two players gone hard for the ball. All the is in my opinion is a accident in a contact sport.
If MacKay backs away or shirks the issue he would have been on the phone with the coach.
This reeks of the below the knees sliding in rule were one player gets a broken leg in wet conditions and the AFL just about kills the in and under player.

[GVGjr]

Do you think his main objective was to get the ball then? Or do you think it was an opportunistic act that enabled him to collect an opposition player with a bump at the same time as possibly taking the ball?

I think it was the latter.

I'm happy to be proven wrong here but from my perspective it looked to me to be two players trying to get too the ball first. I don't think he lined him up to bump him or hurt him but it was a very physical collision where one player got his jaw broken.

I still can't grasp what he did wrong. If Clark gets up unscathed is it even a free kick?

[Mofra]

If you watch the incident in real-time (not slowed down), Clark and MacKay just seem to be going for the ball and Clark didn't see him coming. I didn't think there was malice in it and perhaps a couple of years ago it isn't even looked at.

The AFL tend to look at results rather than intent which is a terrible way to adjudicate. If it was a more aware player there instead of Clark and MacKay did exactly the same thing it probably ends up being a shoulder to shoulder contest, a play on and it's forgotten ten seconds later.

[EasternWest]

It is the perennial problem with the AFL.

Charge based on outcome when it should be intent.

The player deserving a 3 week suspension this week was Mumford who had intent to hurt North players in 2 separate incidents.

Nah he's just clumsy, just what big boys do.

[Grantysghost]

Do you think his main objective was to get the ball then? Or do you think it was an opportunistic act that enabled him to collect an opposition player with a bump at the same time as possibly taking the ball?

I think it was the latter.

Tend to agree, you can be doing two things at once. I thought at the pace he hit the contest at there was a risk of damage and he had some intent there to hit the player and smashed his jaw. Whether he should be suspended I don’t know, but he plays for the Crows so yes, 4 weeks.

The bump has been dead for ages, can’t recall the last good one. Time to let it go.

[comrade]

Footy collision or dangerous bump, that's what will need to be clarified and decided upon. Most former/current players seem to fine with the action (David King the loudest exception). Pundits like Robbo and Whately think it deserves multiple weeks as a minimum and any head high contact of that nature should and will be stamped out of the game.

Personally, I think it's a footy collision and doesn't deserve a suspension. It's a fast paced, contact sport and you can't avoid these types of contests sometimes, unless we want to coach it out of the game entirely which I'm not sure is good.

Compare that to the de Goey incident on Oliver, I'm happy JDG got a week for that. Deliberate, went for the head and even though Oliver put some mayo on it, he's lucky it wasn't worse.

[jeemak]

I'm happy to be proven wrong here but from my perspective it looked to me to be two players trying to get too the ball first. I don't think he lined him up to bump him or hurt him but it was a very physical collision where one player got his jaw broken.

I still can't grasp what he did wrong. If Clark gets up unscathed is it even a free kick?

Well it's easy to say that when it's literally impossible to prove you wrong! :)

I'm not saying that he did anything wrong, it's a game where this stuff might happen, you might be on the wrong end of it and that's a risk you accept. I was always taught to protect myself and I don't think players do that enough these days and I'm not sure Clark did. I'm not blaming Clark either.

But I can't watch that at any speed and not immediately see that Mackay wanted to hurt him. Players want to hit bodies and hurt them, I don't care what they might say in public, they all want to hit bodies and hurt them.

[GVGjr]

Well it's easy to say that when it's literally impossible to prove you wrong! :)

I'm not saying that he did anything wrong, it's a game where this stuff might happen, you might be on the wrong end of it and that's a risk you accept. I was always taught to protect myself and I don't think players do that enough these days and I'm not sure Clark did. I'm not blaming Clark either.

But I can't watch that at any speed and not immediately see that Mackay wanted to hurt him. Players want to hit bodies and hurt them, I don't care what they might say in public, they all want to hit bodies and hurt them.

I'd bet money that I will be proven wrong tomorrow night :)

So back to a question I posed earlier. If McKay collects a team mate with the same result does he go to the tribunal or get suspended?
If the answer is no then the broken jaw and therefore the result of the collision isn't really the consideration.

De Goey went hard at the player and with evil intent and got a week.

One last observation, if Naughton had have collected an opposition player when he concussed English would we be comfortable for him to cop his whack because he lifted his dangerous knee in a contest when perhaps he could have avoided it?

[jeemak]

I'd bet money that I will be proven wrong tomorrow night :)

So back to a question I posed earlier. If McKay collects a team mate with the same result does he go to the tribunal or get suspended?
If the answer is no then the broken jaw and therefore the result of the collision isn't really the consideration.

De Goey went hard at the player and with evil intent and got a week.

One last observation, if Naughton had have collected an opposition player when he concussed English would we be comfortable for him to cop his whack because he lifted his dangerous knee in a contest when perhaps he could have avoided it?

Now that's a topic worth discussing. Is jumping into people's heads with your knees a great idea in a sport that wants to reduce the prevalence of concussion? Of course it isn't but we want to see high marks and the chances of it happening are slim. But I can see future where that sort of action is penalised if an injury is sustained.

As for team mates colliding I don't think there'd be a suspension, but again I don't think it would happen in lieu of believing that Mackay both set out to win the ball and hurt his opponent.

For the record I reckon you'll win that bet.

[GVGjr]

Now that's a topic worth discussing. Is jumping into people's heads with your knees a great idea in a sport that wants to reduce the prevalence of concussion? Of course it isn't but we want to see high marks and the chances of it happening are slim. But I can see future where that sort of action is penalised if an injury is sustained.

As for team mates colliding I don't think there'd be a suspension, but again I don't think it would happen in lieu of believing that Mackay both set out to win the ball and hurt his opponent.

For the record I reckon you'll win that bet.

So the extent of the injury is only a consideration if it happens to an opposition player? It's not reckless, dangerous or unreasonable if it's a team mate on the receiving end :)

It's a complex issue.

[1eyedog]

Now that's a topic worth discussing. Is jumping into people's heads with your knees a great idea in a sport that wants to reduce the prevalence of concussion? Of course it isn't but we want to see high marks and the chances of it happening are slim. But I can see future where that sort of action is penalised if an injury is sustained.

As for team mates colliding I don't think there'd be a suspension, but again I don't think it would happen in lieu of believing that Mackay both set out to win the ball and hurt his opponent.

For the record I reckon you'll win that bet.

This can simply be remedied by incorporating the over 50s veteran superleague rules of no bent knees in a marking contest.

[jeemak]

So the extent of the injury is only a consideration if it happens to an opposition player? It's not reckless, dangerous or unreasonable if it's a team mate on the receiving end :)

It's a complex issue.

It is complex but I'm not sure the two are comparable, if you take the view that Mackay intended to hurt Clark which I think he did.

[jeemak]

This can simply be remedied by incorporating the over 50s veteran superleague rules of no bent knees in a marking contest.

Absolutely it can. I wonder if it will be.

[bornadog]

How do we coach players to avoid this? The end result might really change the fabric of the game.

Interesting listening to Adam Treloar on the incident (see here (https://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/video/959439/adam-treloar-on-afl-360-june-15th-?videoId=959439&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1623818484001)). He coaches some under 17 players and the action by Mackay is exactly what he teaches them to do, ie go in hard for the ball.

I think he needs to be found not guilty otherwise footy will be a disaster. No one will want to go for the ball, they will hold back.

[bulldogtragic]

If we are opening up injury being the determinant of suspension, why just the head? Rocca’s tackle/sling cost Bob and us 12 months of his prime footy through injury. But that was just an ‘act of god’. Or players get pushed near the boundary and hit the advertising boards hard and cop a hand injury. What is you chase too hard and a player pings a hammy?

Feels like a slippery slope when non-overtly unlawful acts are penalised based on an injury outcome. If that happens then for fairness, the rules of the game should be re-written that all players on the field who cause injury shall be suspended. Then everyone is clear. Remove the concept of an ‘accident’.

Even the law acknowledges the risk to injury:

“In the sporting context, a person who agrees to play a particular sport acknowledges and agrees to certain forms of bodily contact, usually within the defined rules of the sport and will have therefore given consent.

Not only is a player considered to have consented to contact within the rules of the sport but also implied consent to receive certain contact which may be outside the rules of the sport but what a player might reasonably expect during a game. For example a high tackle in rugby league is outside the rules of the sport but is reasonably expected and may occur in a fast paced game.”

The law accepts shit does happen sometimes. Injury isn’t the determinate of a legal intervention. Yet this could possibly be the new league standard. I’m half serious above. Shit or get off the pot. Suspensions for anyone involved in injuries, everyone without exception, or, focus or intent and actions that are clearly defined as illegal acts under the rules. I don’t see anything from the footage that warrants suspension. A guilty verdict creates a mess. An acquittal still creates a decent mess. There needs to be certainty from my perspective. I fear this poorly run monopoly won’t do the necessary work to provide it to the players, clubs, fans and stakeholders. It’ll be an ongoing lottery and when it happens in a final series or towards a Brownlow, we’ll I hope we have Peter Gordon retained…

[jeemak]

Interesting listening to Adam Treloar on the incident (see here (https://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/video/959439/adam-treloar-on-afl-360-june-15th-?videoId=959439&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1623818484001)). He coaches some under 17 players and the action by Mackay is exactly what he teaches them to do, ie go in hard for the ball.

I think he needs to be found not guilty otherwise footy will be a disaster. No one will want to go for the ball, they will hold back.

Got to the four minute mark and threw up......Robbo asked if it was opportunistic which is what I called it and now I fear I think like Robbo and my night is ruined.

[bulldogtragic]

Interesting listening to Adam Treloar on the incident (see here (https://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/video/959439/adam-treloar-on-afl-360-june-15th-?videoId=959439&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1623818484001)). He coaches some under 17 players and the action by Mackay is exactly what he teaches them to do, ie go in hard for the ball.

I think he needs to be found not guilty otherwise footy will be a disaster. No one will want to go for the ball, they will hold back.

Yep. If there are genuine ‘accident’ traffic collisions, where a driver isn’t charged despite not breaking a law just because there’s car damage. If there’s a driver at fault whose clearly broken laws then sure. But if they haven’t, common sense dictates that sometimes damage occurs without needing a culprit to blame. The notion of ‘act of god’ is in all parts of society, surely the afel subscribe to the concept? Or not?

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Yep. If there are genuine ‘accident’ traffic collisions, where a driver isn’t charged despite not breaking a law just because there’s car damage. If there’s a driver at fault whose clearly broken laws then sure. But if they haven’t, common sense dictates that sometimes damage occurs without needing a culprit to blame. The notion of ‘act of god’ is in all parts of society, surely the afel subscribe to the concept? Or not?

They think they are god so no.

[divvydan]

Mackay found not guilty, the conduct was not consider to be unreasonable.

[comrade]

Good call.

[bulldogtragic]

Right outcome.

[KT31]

Mackay found not guilty, the conduct was not consider to be unreasonable.
Thank @#$& for that.

[Grantysghost]

The fabric of football lives another day. I thought he got there late, turned his body to bump and broke his jaw but it was a 50/50 and I'm glad the game has been saved. From what Robbo was saying it was Rowe v Wade stuff.

You have to be able to contest the ball, but there is also a responsibility not to be overly reckless in doing so.

It really reminded me of how Pickett used to clean up blokes, hit with incredible acceleration and force. But players are well drilled in ensuring they go the ball now and don't follow through with the shirt front so it was really a work of art.

Tldr sh1t happens. He kind of meant to hit him but ok with result.

[bornadog]

Correct result

[boydogs]

Yeah that could have gone either way. Kind of turned his body to bump, kind of left the ground, got him high with very high impact, but almost carrying the ball at the time

[jeemak]

Good result, and the one I wanted to see.

We just have to acknowledge that even if it's unspoken by the cleansed masses in the AFL bubble the intent was to get the ball and hit the man as hard as possible and that's what's happened.

Acceptance of risk is a two way street and both players entered the field of play accepting that they may come off injured as a result of collisions like this. Clark should have protected himself more thoroughly and known entering that contest could have resulted in severe injury like it did. He chose not to for one reason or another. Mackay wanted the ball but also wanted the man and if we're going to discuss this type of issue we need to be mature about the fact that going as hard as you can, turning your body and hitting someone who may not have done the same things to prepare themselves will result in instances like this.

[Topdog]

We just have to acknowledge that even if it's unspoken by the cleansed masses in the AFL bubble the intent was to get the ball and hit the man as hard as possible and that's what's happened..

Is that not always the case? In order to properly protect yourself and also to ensure that you can get an effective gather of the ball you use your body and remove the abiilty of the other player to get it / tackle you.

[jeemak]

Is that not always the case? In order to properly protect yourself and also to ensure that you can get an effective gather of the ball you use your body and remove the abiilty of the other player to get it / tackle you.

Yes absolutely, and players also want to hurt their opponents because it's a game of attrition.

[bornadog]

Watch a knee jerk reaction from the AFL and a rule change happen

[soupman]

It won't be looked at but should Selwood cop something for his two incidents last night?

The one where he grabbed Macrae's hair and push his head into the ground is pretty dog and worthy of a fine at least. Is it really that different to the infamous Rance and Tom Lynch ones where they did the same to players from behind?

And the stomping one looked deliberate on the only watch through we got (no replays unfortunately). I know I may have come at it from a biased pov but it was pretty poor from a known f*ckhead.

Surely ho cops at least a fine from one or both of these incidents.

Selwood is also my most hated player fwiw, so again I might not be the most objective about all this. Toby Greene is up there but is much more enjoyable to watch when he is doing good stuff than Selwood.

[The bulldog tragician]

It won't be looked at but should Selwood cop something for his two incidents last night?

The one where he grabbed Macrae's hair and push his head into the ground is pretty dog and worthy of a fine at least. Is it really that different to the infamous Rance and Tom Lynch ones where they did the same to players from behind?

And the stomping one looked deliberate on the only watch through we got (no replays unfortunately). I know I may have come at it from a biased pov but it was pretty poor from a known f*ckhead.

Surely ho cops at least a fine from one or both of these incidents.

Selwood is also my most hated player fwiw, so again I might not be the most objective about all this. Toby Greene is up there but is much more enjoyable to watch when he is doing good stuff than Selwood.
He is detestable. His whole demeanour is so petulant. And that action of standing on Duryea’s leg is not in keeping with his overblown reputation as courageous. But, there will be no action taken, because, you know, Geelong…

[bornadog]

Cats skipper facing scrutiny over ‘dirty acts’ in Friday night thriller (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/geelong-cats/afl-news-2021-joel-selwood-suspension-geelong-vs-western-bulldogs-hitting-opponents-video-social-media-reaction-match-review-officer/news-story/51d2423deb210cc583e62e2d49ab3cd9)

Geelong captain Joel Selwood could come under scrutiny from the Match Review Officer for two ugly incidents during Friday night’s nail biting win over the Western Bulldogs.


Selwood played a critical role in the side’s thrilling win over the Dogs at GMHBA Stadium, finishing with 29 touches and 10 clearances, but two pieces of vision circulating on social media have ignited calls for action against the 33-year-old.


First, Selwood could be seen clumsily flinging his fist at the head of Dogs opponent Bailey Dale, while later in the match appeared to scrape against the head and eye region of Taylor Duryea before stumbling over his left leg.

[EasternWest]

Cats skipper facing scrutiny over ‘dirty acts’ in Friday night thriller (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/geelong-cats/afl-news-2021-joel-selwood-suspension-geelong-vs-western-bulldogs-hitting-opponents-video-social-media-reaction-match-review-officer/news-story/51d2423deb210cc583e62e2d49ab3cd9)

Geelong captain Joel Selwood could come under scrutiny from the Match Review Officer for two ugly incidents during Friday night’s nail biting win over the Western Bulldogs.


Selwood played a critical role in the side’s thrilling win over the Dogs at GMHBA Stadium, finishing with 29 touches and 10 clearances, but two pieces of vision circulating on social media have ignited calls for action against the 33-year-old.


First, Selwood could be seen clumsily flinging his fist at the head of Dogs opponent Bailey Dale, while later in the match appeared to scrape against the head and eye region of Taylor Duryea before stumbling over his left leg.

How's the language being used. Sheesh.

[Doc26]

Cats skipper facing scrutiny over ‘dirty acts’ in Friday night thriller (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/geelong-cats/afl-news-2021-joel-selwood-suspension-geelong-vs-western-bulldogs-hitting-opponents-video-social-media-reaction-match-review-officer/news-story/51d2423deb210cc583e62e2d49ab3cd9)

Geelong captain Joel Selwood could come under scrutiny from the Match Review Officer for two ugly incidents during Friday night’s nail biting win over the Western Bulldogs.

Selwood played a critical role in the side’s thrilling win over the Dogs at GMHBA Stadium, finishing with 29 touches and 10 clearances, but two pieces of vision circulating on social media have ignited calls for action against the 33-year-old.

First, Selwood could be seen clumsily flinging his fist at the head of Dogs opponent Bailey Dale, while later in the match appeared to scrape against the head and eye region of Taylor Duryea before stumbling over his left leg.


How's the language being used. Sheesh.

The media commentary and language on Selwood remains astonishing. Great player but I will never understand how his darker side is rarely called out for what it is as he has form in this area.

[The bulldog tragician]

The media commentary and language on Selwood remains astonishing. Great player but I will never understand how his darker side is rarely called out for what it is as he has form in this area.

Yep. The fix is on.

[comrade]

Mumford and Selwood both get treated the same.

[bornadog]

The media commentary and language on Selwood remains astonishing. Great player but I will never understand how his darker side is rarely called out for what it is as he has form in this area.
I would be embarrassed if our captain did that

[jeemak]

Clumsily! Good grief.

Why can't we just call out dirt bags as dirt bags? Things would be so much easier and you'd eventually end up with less dirt bags doing dirt bag things.

[Testekill]

The AFL won't do anything because Selwood is one of their golden boys. But two incidents of him scraping his fingers along the eyes of someone on the ground and clearly intentionally standing on someone's ankle is inexcusable.

[Happy Days]

He has to go for this. Its just so cheap and shit and pathetic.

[Testekill]

3000 in fines overall. For gouging two different players faces when he already has a demonstrated track record of doing it.

[DOG GOD]

3000 in fines overall. For gouging two different players faces when he already has a demonstrated track record of doing it.

What a joke. Dirty friggin dog.

[The bulldog tragician]

https://www.afl.com.au/news/633194/match-review-selwood-charged-twice-for-separate-incidents

Pathetic. Won’t act as a deterrent to cheap shots. The same amount as “engaging in a melee” where players come in and push and shove.

[bulldogtragic]

Swept under the rug. Very on brand…

[bornadog]

You can gouge someone's face, step on their shin and make it bleed and you get a fine, yet if you tackle someone you get a week.

AFL is just *!*!*!*!ed by the morons that run it

[angelopetraglia]

It's a joke. Dog acts like hitting someone in the head when they are on the ground and defenseless is just a fine. Straight lining the ball in a genuine contest gets sent straight to the tribunal.

What message are we sending to our children?

[merantau]

Just a fine for Saint Joel the Sly. Look away handball - tick. Look away tread on an opponent's shin anyone - tick. Our boy from Bendigo is full of tricks. Claw at an opponent's face when he's trapped beneath you and the umpire's blind-sided. What's the issue? Cats got claws don't they?

[Ghost Dog]

It's a joke. Dog acts like hitting someone in the head when they are on the ground and defenseless is just a fine. Straight lining the ball in a genuine contest gets sent straight to the tribunal.

What message are we sending to our children?

Yeah if the head is sacrosanct, this decision is pretty annoying.
I would have liked to see a fine around 7K for the face, same as the Green decision.
3K for that is basically getting off for free.
Does this rule him ineligible for the Brownlow?
I'm glad social media can highlight what a dirty player he is.
Anyone who has watched footy over the years has seen plenty of that from Selwood.

[Mitcha]

It's a joke. Dog acts like hitting someone in the head when they are on the ground and defenseless is just a fine. Straight lining the ball in a genuine contest gets sent straight to the tribunal.

What message are we sending to our children?

Just on the message to the kids, isn’t Saint Joel a NAB little league ambassador??? Yeah great message, should have chosen a solid upstanding citizen for that role like Bont maybe.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Deliberate calculated abuse of fellow footballers by Selwood.
Deliberate and calculated by Selwood = very bad character.
The AFL honchoes know this and support it.
Selwood + AFL honchoes = Disgrace to football.
There is only a pretence of duty of care.
Acts of cowardice.

[The bulldog tragician]

Deliberate calculated abuse of fellow footballers by Selwood.
Deliberate and calculated by Selwood = very bad character.
The AFL honchoes know this and support it.
Selwood + AFL honchoes = Disgrace to football.
There is only a pretence of duty of care.
Acts of cowardice.

Also, the standing on Duryea's leg happened right in front of the umpire and was immediately pointed out by Doc, whose leg began bleeding. A 50 metre penalty should have been awarded. Scores were level, in a tight match like that who knows what difference it might have made.

[comrade]

Also, the standing on Duryea's leg happened right in front of the umpire and was immediately pointed out by Doc, whose leg began bleeding. A 50 metre penalty should have been awarded. Scores were level, in a tight match like that who knows what difference it might have made.

I thought the leg thing was clumsy but not deliberate. Raking Doc's eyes just before that is a different story.

[The bulldog tragician]

I thought the leg thing was clumsy but not deliberate. Raking Doc's eyes just before that is a different story.

Well clumsy things (stumbling over a player who’s marked or not pulling up in time) still attract a 50, but I also think his step back wasn’t exactly accidental. You’re standing over a player whose legs are underneath you - you should have an inkling where they are, but I admit I always want to believe the worst of Selwood and he rarely lets me down

[comrade]

Well clumsy things (stumbling over a player who’s marked or not pulling up in time) still attract a 50, but I also think his step back wasn’t exactly accidental. You’re standing over a player whose legs are underneath you - you should have an inkling where they are, but I admit I always want to believe the worst of Selwood and he rarely lets me down

You're probably right but there is some reasonable doubt. He's a complete grub though, and it's ridiculous how inflated his reputation is given the off ball sniping, umpire whinging and ducking he gets away with.

[bornadog]

DURYEA ON THE SELWOOD INCIDENT: As Chris Scott said, sometimes we have to own up to our mistakes. He owned up to the first one but I think Chris is trying to make an excuse for the second one. No hard feelings and just have to move on and cop your punishment. No hard feelings

Scott has tried to defend Selwood: read here (https://www.afl.com.au/news/634960/cats-defend-icon-of-the-game-after-stinging-joel-criticism)

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Scott sounds like a parent defending his little angel who can do no wrong when everyone knows the kid is a little sh*t.

Selwood has a history of this stuff. Scott is blind to it.

[The bulldog tragician]

A whole lot of stumbling going on apparently. And mistakes.

He was the third one in when Dale went to ground. You can see the furtive look on his face as he goes in with his hand.

Poor Joel’s the victim though. So misunderstood.

[EasternWest]

A whole lot of stumbling going on apparently. And mistakes.

He was the third one in when Dale went to ground. You can see the furtive look on his face as he goes in with his hand.

Poor Joel’s the victim though. So misunderstood.

https://i.postimg.cc/2VfPJFy6/images.jpg (https://postimg.cc/2VfPJFy6)

[Go_Dogs]

We should clumbsly leave him subbed off in the first 5 mins next time we play them.

Thought he’d have to go for the eye gouge. Joke.

[bornadog]

Daniher fined for staging

[divvydan]

Liam Ryan offered a week for his bump on JJ. Assessed as careless conduct and medium impact.

[jeemak]

Liam Ryan offered a week for his bump on JJ. Assessed as careless conduct and medium impact.

It was definitely intentional.

[bornadog]

It was definitely intentional.

Coach should have a go at him for not tackling

[divvydan]

It's the same as De Goey on Oliver and got the same outcome.

[Axe Man]

I can't even remember the Bailey Smith tackle, was it fine worthy?


Shaun Atley, North Melbourne has been charged with Engaging in a Melee, during the first quarter of the Round 16 match between the Western Bulldogs and North Melbourne, played at Marvel Stadium on Sunday, July 4, 2021.

In summary, he can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea.

A first offence for Engaging in a Melee is a $1500 sanction. An early plea enables the player to accept a $1000 sanction.

Josh Bruce, Western Bulldogs has been charged with Engaging in a Melee, during the first quarter of the Round 16 match between the Western Bulldogs and North Melbourne, played at Marvel Stadium on Sunday, July 4, 2021.

In summary, he can accept a $1500 sanction with an early plea.

A second offence for Engaging in a Melee is a $2500 sanction. An early plea enables the player to accept a $1500 sanction.

Bailey Smith, Western Bulldogs has been charged with Rough Conduct (Dangerous Tackle) against Ben Cunnington, North Melbourne during the second quarter of the Round 16 match between the Western Bulldogs and North Melbourne, played at Marvel Stadium on Sunday, July 4, 2021.

In summary, he can accept a $2000 sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Careless Conduct, Low Impact, High Contact. The incident was classified as a $3000 sanction as a first offence. The player can accept a $2000 sanction with an early plea.

Link (https://www.afl.com.au/news/643195/match-review-verdict-in-for-star-eagle-fines-galore-for-melees)

[bornadog]

Club is challenging fines for Bruce and Smith.

[bornadog]

Club is challenging fines for Bruce and Smith.

Challenge has been unsuccessful. The AFL Tribunal has upheld both charges, with Bruce and Smith receiving fines.

[bulldogtragic]

Challenge has been unsuccessful. The AFL Tribunal has upheld both charges, with Bruce and Smith receiving fines.

So now they each pay the AFEL $1,000 more. Yeah for the AFEL.

[SonofScray]

Was there footage of the tackle on Cunnington? Can’t recall anything untoward.

[Mitcha]

Looking at the dangerous/sling tackles from the Richmond/Brisbane game on the weekend that resulted in fines I am in disbelief that Caleb Daniel was suspended for a tackle which the controlling umpire at the time paid him a free kick for holding the ball. The tackle on Daniher in particular was much more of a violent and dangerous action. Two sets of rules.

[bornadog]

Looking at the dangerous/sling tackles from the Richmond/Brisbane game on the weekend that resulted in fines I am in disbelief that Caleb Daniel was suspended for a tackle which the controlling umpire at the time paid him a free kick for holding the ball. The tackle on Daniher in particular was much more of a violent and dangerous action. Two sets of rules.

I noticed in the game where we played Richmond, their tackling was bordering on dangerous. Every time they tackle they throw their opponent on the ground, and as you say get away with it.

[bornadog]

Zaine Cordy, Western Bulldogs, has been charged with Misconduct against Clayton Oliver, Melbourne, during the second quarter of the Round 19 match between Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs, played at the MCG on Saturday, July 24, 2021.

In summary, he can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Misconduct. The incident was classified as a $1500 sanction as a first offence. The player can accept a $1000 sanction with an early plea.

[bulldogtragic]

Was that for shoving his fat head into the ground?

[Testekill]

Yup, yeah it's something that we don't want in the league but Oliver also acted like Cordy punched him in the back of the head based on how he held his head on the ground for a good 5 seconds.

[EasternWest]

Yup, yeah it's something that we don't want in the league but Oliver also acted like Cordy punched him in the back of the head based on how he held his head on the ground for a good 5 seconds.

Isn't shoving Oliver's head into the ground considered community service?

I kid. Or do I?

[Grantysghost]

Isn't shoving Oliver's head into the ground considered community service?

I kid. Or do I?

It's up there with the first goal in the GF for mine.

#jesuiszaine

We should have a whip-round for the fine.

[bornadog]

How does Pickett get away with concussing Ed?

[EasternWest]

How does Pickett get away with concussing Ed?

Please.

[Grantysghost]

How does Pickett get away with concussing Ed?

I thought he was reckless coming in that hard with the head down, probably a bit like the Mackay one. But when I watched the replay it wasn't malicious or intended to hurt, just one of those unfortunate intersections.
Pickett has such incredible acceleration he hits with huge force.
Ed won't be the last to see stars after an encounter I'd suggest.

[boydogs]

I thought Oliver was staging, the umpire was right there and should have reversed it if Cordy did as alleged

[Mantis]

I thought Oliver was staging, the umpire was right there and should have reversed it if Cordy did as alleged

The vision was pretty clear that Zaine pushed his head into the ground.. a seriously dumb act.

[Bulldog Joe]

The vision was pretty clear that Zaine pushed his head into the ground.. a seriously dumb act.

Seriously dumb, but completely understandable for that head,

[Happy Days]

I thought Pickett should've gotten a week. He led with his head into a tackle that he made almost no attempt to stick, which is some early 2000's NFL idiocy. He's lucky that Ed was the only one concussed.

[bornadog]

I thought Pickett should've gotten a week. He lead with his head into a tackle that he made almost no attempt to stick, which is some early 2000's NFL idiocy. He's lucky that Ed was the only one concussed.

At least someone agrees with me.

That was no tackle, or accidental contact. Charging in like that with head forward is irresponsible.

[Bulldog4life]

At least someone agrees with me.

That was no tackle, or accidental contact. Charging in like that with head forward is irresponsible.

Agree with you too BAD. Had his head up going for the ball saw Ed then lowered his head. Like a battering ram would.

[SquirrelGrip]

The vision was pretty clear that Zaine pushed his head into the ground..

I think Zaine was trying to plant a potato and see what would grow...

https://i.postimg.cc/qMMm2kxz/Potato-Head.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[Grantysghost]

At least someone agrees with me.

That was no tackle, or accidental contact. Charging in like that with head forward is irresponsible.

He kind of ducked at the last second, I watched it again I wasn't as upset as first viewing. I really like Ed so wasn't happy.

Check it out here : https://www.afl.com.au/video/653443/young-bulldog-subbed-out-with-concussion?videoId=653443&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1627127005001

[bornadog]

He kind of ducked at the last second, I watched it again I wasn't as upset as first viewing. I really like Ed so wasn't happy.

Check it out here : https://www.afl.com.au/video/653443/young-bulldog-subbed-out-with-concussion?videoId=653443&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1627127005001

Why didn't Pickett try and tackle? He has a duty of care?

[Grantysghost]

Why didn't Pickett try and tackle? He has a duty of care?

I think he was in two minds and maybe went to tackle late.

I'm with you it was reckless, not even a free is baffling to me.

But not sure he should be rubbed out after I watched again, lots of shoulder contact but he did concuss him.

[Axe Man]

I don't think Pickett even gets Ed high so I'm not sure what exactly he should be charged with? I think Ed's concussion is a whiplash type injury, your brain can bounce around in your skull from a big hit without direct head contact.

[Axe Man]

Why didn't Pickett try and tackle? He has a duty of care?

Looked like an attempted tackle to me, just didn't stick it with the force of the impact.

[EasternWest]

Looked like an attempted tackle to me, just didn't stick it with the force of the impact.

It's literally an attempted tackle. If one of our players did it we'd be lauding his gutsy attack.

[bornadog]

delete

[Happy Days]

It's literally an attempted tackle. If one of our players did it we'd be lauding his gutsy attack.

Leading with the head though? I thought it was incredibly stupid.

[EasternWest]

Leading with the head though? I thought it was incredibly stupid.

Stupid, sure? Reportable? Of course not.

[Axe Man]

What a joke Buddy can throw a “clumsy” (deliberate) elbow at an opponents head and get off with a fine. Low impact through pure luck that Ryan wasn’t concussed.

[ratsmac]

What a joke Buddy can throw a “clumsy” (deliberate) elbow at an opponents head and get off with a fine. Low impact through pure luck that Ryan wasn’t concussed.

Yet Daniel gets a week for a tackle that looked dangerous.

I'm still pissed off about that. Bulldogs are the only club to never get decisions overturned at the tribunal

[bornadog]

What a joke Buddy can throw a “clumsy” (deliberate) elbow at an opponents head and get off with a fine. Low impact through pure luck that Ryan wasn’t concussed.

The whole system makes no sense to me. A dangerous tackle, where the player is not concussed (refer Daniel) is a week and elbowing someone in the face is a fine. So many example of inconsistencies.

[Grantysghost]

What a joke Buddy can throw a “clumsy” (deliberate) elbow at an opponents head and get off with a fine. Low impact through pure luck that Ryan wasn’t concussed.

Rules for some and rules for others. Fyfe got off something similar didn’t he ? Insane that’s just intentionally meant to hurt someone.

[Flamethrower]

What is it going to take to get suspended for elbowing another player in the head when trying to break a tackle? A Philip Hughes like incident where the elbow causes a massive brain haemorrhage? Not good enough AFL.

[GVGjr]

Rules for some and rules for others. Fyfe got off something similar didn’t he ? Insane that’s just intentionally meant to hurt someone.

There is no question that there are rules for some.
It's a real disappointing part of the game.

[Hotdog60]

You can go the other extreme with the Phil Davis flop that gave Jack Redpath 3 weeks


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6T2dMpUAxM

Jack was never lucky at the panel so yes rules for some.

[comrade]

You can go the other extreme with the Phil Davis flop that gave Jack Redpath 3 weeks


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6T2dMpUAxM

Jack was never lucky at the panel so yes rules for some.

That is a *!*!*!*!ing outrage.

[bornadog]

That is a *!*!*!*!ing outrage.

He got two weeks for pushing Davis, then one on appeal and then one for playing in the VFL when told he could.

[bornadog]

In my opinion, Viney should get weeks for this. Sick of players doing this, it is so dangerous, and can cause serious injury.

https://resources.afl.com.au/photo-resources/2021/08/02/28bfe1ec-35e4-4e21-8df0-7e728a4f91ba/Screen-Shot-2021-08-02-at-6.10.04-pm.png?width=952&height=592

[bulldogtragic]

In my opinion, Viney should get weeks for this. Sick of players doing this, it is so dangerous, and can cause serious injury.

https://resources.afl.com.au/photo-resources/2021/08/02/28bfe1ec-35e4-4e21-8df0-7e728a4f91ba/Screen-Shot-2021-08-02-at-6.10.04-pm.png?width=952&height=592

Put heavy pressure on the exact spot Phil Hughes got hit and died. Needs a big statement from the AFEL.

[bornadog]

Put heavy pressure on the exact spot Phil Hughes got hit and died. Needs a big statement from the AFEL.

Dare I say George Floyd

[GVGjr]

2 weeks holiday should be heading his way
He's lucky because it should be more

[The Underdog]

That’s absolutely disgraceful from Viney. Just recklessly dangerous, a non football act with a potential for something serious to come of it.

Also heard Dunstall on 360 talking about how it isn’t a good look. How about stop worrying about optics and worry about punishing actual thug acts that can cause actual injury?

[Happy Days]

Dare I say George Floyd

Dunno about this one.

[Happy Days]

Anyway this is a massive blow for the rest of the competition. Viney playing for the Dees only hurts the Dees.

[SquirrelGrip]

Also heard Dunstall on 360 talking about how it isn’t a good look. How about stop worrying about optics and worry about punishing actual thug acts that can cause actual injury?

Tim Watson said exactly the same thing on Channel 7. It’s not how it looks guys, it’s bloody dangerous and could kill someone!

[divvydan]

As bad as it looks (and it really is bad), based on previous history of misconduct incidents, it's hard to see it ending up as more than a fine.

[jeemak]

But he's such a tough ball player Viney, you don't want to see players like that miss games...........

[bulldogsthru&thru]

As bad as it looks (and it really is bad), based on previous history of misconduct incidents, it's hard to see it ending up as more than a fine.

and to show you we’re serious about this sort of stuff, we’re banning controlled boxing as a form of training.

[The Underdog]

But he's such a tough ball player Viney, you don't want to see players like that miss games...........

#topbloke

[Mitcha]

Disgraceful from Viney, looks worse on video as he held it there forcefully for at least five seconds. I instantly thought of Phil Hughes when I saw it. Must get weeks and would be laughable if just a fine. Not sure how Melbourne go having to make a change to their 23 this week, unchartered territory.

[Grantysghost]

Didn't Brian Lake get a few weeks for something vaguely similar. Going the neck / throat when in a vulnerable position. (get they are different actions). Petrie if I recall.

[DOG GOD]

Viney = complete dog act. Could’ve caused serious damage to Collins throat. Anything under 2 weeks is a joke.

[Mantis]

I have no faith in the MRO/tribunal so no idea what Viney gets.. Personally it's 2 weeks as a minimum, but when players can throw elbows back and hit their opponents flush and get a paltry fine, well you get the drift.

[Testekill]

Didn't Brian Lake get a few weeks for something vaguely similar. Going the neck / throat when in a vulnerable position. (get they are different actions). Petrie if I recall.

Yeah Lake got 4 for what he did to Petrie, Brent Harvey got 3 for doing something similar to Picken.

[divvydan]

No clear consensus of what's going to happen after arguments. AFL says contact was to the neck/throat and wants a minimum of 2 games. Viney says contact was to the jaw and therefore no likelihood of injury and I presume wants a fine. With the way the tribunal works these days, there's an injury report but the victim isn't a witness so no one can ask Collins (I would expect most players to back other players).

Jury deliberating. First issue that needs to be solved is the point of impact.

[bulldogtragic]

Guilty. Awaiting sentencing.

[bulldogtragic]

Two weeks.

West Coast & Adelaide the opponents for those games.

[Testekill]

What an absolute joke, the fact that he was trying to argue that it was Collins' jaw just means that he didn't think what he did should have been punishable.

[divvydan]

At least he got something for it. Was probably worth 3-4 but they did a good job with their defense at putting doubt in the mind of the jury. That, combined with the AFL giving 2 weeks as an option, meant it would never be more.

[Grantysghost]

Taylor Walker under investigation for a racial slur in a SANFL game.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/adelaide-crows-star-taylor-walker-investigated-over-alleged-racial-slur/news-story/4385a3d21d4943379050895281b9e4a4

[GVGjr]

Taylor Walker under investigation for a racial slur in a SANFL game.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/adelaide-crows-star-taylor-walker-investigated-over-alleged-racial-slur/news-story/4385a3d21d4943379050895281b9e4a4

I really hope this is a misunderstanding.

[Jeanette54]

I get that Toby Greene's hit on Dangerfield will be scrutinised by the MRO, but it appears that somehow Selwood's hit on a player has once again been swept under the carpet. How does he do it? Was it just because Taylor got up, and continued to play ? Its about time the intention was judged, not just the outcome.

[Happy Days]

Selwood's a dirty player and always has been, but it's getting worse as he comes to grips with that step he's lost.

Only silver lining of him likely escaping suspension is that it doesn't really impact on Geelong's chances of winning or losing.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I get that Toby Greene's hit on Dangerfield will be scrutinised by the MRO, but it appears that somehow Selwood's hit on a player has once again been swept under the carpet. How does he do it? Was it just because Taylor got up, and continued to play ? Its about time the intention was judged, not just the outcome.

Bush league. Will never happen.

[KT31]

Corey Norris
@coreynorris9
·
4m
Breaking: GWS star Toby Greene offered a 2 match ban for elbow on Dangerfield. Careless, high contact, high impact. Giants will challenge at tribunal. Joel Selwood escapes with $3000 fine for bump on Taylor.
@9NewsMelb

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Unbelievable. Greene gets a 2 match ban for a fend-off yet Selwood gets a fine for a purposeful and negligent bump to the head. Absolute garbage!

[bulldogtragic]

Why expect anything more from this system. Don’t hurt a Geelong player with a natural footy action. And how dare you hurt a Geelong player by putting your unprotected head into his hip & elbow.

[bornadog]

Unbelievable. Greene gets a 2 match ban for a fend-off yet Selwood gets a fine for a purposeful and negligent bump to the head. Absolute garbage!

Greene's was high impact. Selwood fined as Taylor got up and no damage

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Greene's was high impact. Selwood fined as Taylor got up and no damage

Who is advising the AFL to continue to deliver verdicts based on outcomes of the victims rather than intent? Imagine trying to shoot a bunch of people but getting away with a fine because I was such a bad shot and missed everyone.

[bornadog]

Who is advising the AFL to continue to deliver verdicts based on outcomes of the victims rather than intent? Imagine trying to shoot a bunch of people but getting away with a fine because I was such a bad shot and missed everyone.

I am not saying I agree, but that is the current rule and the reason Selwood could not get more.

GWS are appealing the verdict.

[jeemak]

Who is advising the AFL to continue to deliver verdicts based on outcomes of the victims rather than intent? Imagine trying to shoot a bunch of people but getting away with a fine because I was such a bad shot and missed everyone.

But isn't that what happens in society? Do you get the same sentences for murder and attempted murder?

Now I actually think they should look at intent more at the tribunal, but outcomes have to form a large part of the assessment.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

But isn't that what happens in society? Do you get the same sentences for murder and attempted murder?

Now I actually think they should look at intent more at the tribunal, but outcomes have to form a large part of the assessment.

Well yeah I suppose. But maybe not to the same extremes. If Taylor got concussed, how many weeks does Selwood get. Edit: if Taylor got concussed and it was another player other than Selwood who did the bump, how many weeks is it?

[ratsmac]

As much as I hate Green I think he's pretty stiff. Dangerfield slipped as he came in to tackle which caused the contact to his throat. Grubby Green is still guilty of raising the elbow however he would've elbowed his chest had Dangerfield not slipped. Oh well too bad Toby

Selwood makes me sick, not surprised one bit he got off with a fine. Hopefully he's one to count his pennies and the $3000 really hurts

[azabob]

Greene's was high impact. Selwood fined as Taylor got up and no damage

I guess Sam Taylor’s black eye would indicate some force of some degree.

[Bulldog Joe]

I guess Sam Taylor’s black eye would indicate some force of some degree.

The black eye for Taylor looked more like something from the previous week.

[jeemak]

The thing with Greene, and I'm not comparing it to the Selwood issue (but they're probably both the same in this way anyway), is that he would have known exactly where he was hitting Dangerfield slip or no slip because that is who he is and it's what he does.

[EasternWest]

The thing with Greene, and I'm not comparing it to the Selwood issue (but they're probably both the same in this way anyway), is that he would have known exactly where he was hitting Dangerfield slip or no slip because that is who he is and it's what he does.

I agree with you but I don't reckon "being a known arsehole" is one of the criteria the result is judged on.

[Go_Dogs]

I agree with you but I don't reckon "being a known arsehole" is one of the criteria the result is judged on.

Well it should be for Greene. 5 extra weeks because.

[chef]

Selwood is as dirty as Greene, it's just hes a protected species.

[EasternWest]

Well it should be for Greene. 5 extra weeks because.

Ha ha I don't disagree.

Although maybe he knew something we didn't know at the time when he booted Dahlhaus in the face.

[GVGjr]

Selwood is as dirty as Greene, it's just hes a protected species.

He gets away with a lot doesn't he?

[bornadog]

Interesting


Mason Redman, Essendon, has been charged with Rough Conduct (Dangerous Tackle), against Marcus Bontempelli, Western Bulldogs, during the fourth quarter of the Round 21 match between the Western Bulldogs and Essendon played at Marvel Stadium on Sunday, August 8, 2021.

In summary, he can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.

Based on the available evidence, the incident was assessed as Careless Conduct, Medium Impact, High Contact. The incident was classified as a one-match sanction as a first offence. The player can accept a one-match sanction with an early plea.

[Grantysghost]

Interesting

Wasn't a lot in it.

Erm I mean should be life for trying to hurt our Marcus!

[Happy Days]

That’s stiff. He only brought him to ground that way because he’s so much smaller than Bont. If he tackles him any other way then Bont likely breaks the tackle, takes 4 bounces and kicks a goal.

[jazzadogs]

That’s stiff. He only brought him to ground that way because he’s so much smaller than Bont. If he tackles him any other way then Bont likely breaks the tackle, takes 4 bounces and kicks a goal.

There better not be any delayed concussion for Bont. Last thing we need.

[Sedat]

The thing with Greene, and I'm not comparing it to the Selwood issue (but they're probably both the same in this way anyway), is that he would have known exactly where he was hitting Dangerfield slip or no slip because that is who he is and it's what he does.
It should be 2 weeks based on the action, with a 2 week discount based on who he hit.

[divvydan]

TBH, at the time, I thought both of Bont's free kicks (this one and the holding man from which he kicked a goal) were pretty horrible decisions in our favour.

[chef]

He gets away with a lot doesn't he?

If the roles were reversed you would think Selwood would still get a fine and Toby a suspension.

[boydogs]

Yeah free kick at best for the Bont tackle

[jeemak]

It should be 2 weeks based on the action, with a 2 week discount based on who he hit.

This is just another example of you holding back your feelings mate, I wish you'd be a bit more open with them.

[jeemak]

I agree with you but I don't reckon "being a known arsehole" is one of the criteria the result is judged on.

But Wayne Carey says is it, even though the subject gets more leniency than any other player in the league for face kicking and clawing.

[bulldogtragic]

But Wayne Carey says is it, even though the subject gets more leniency than any other player in the league for face kicking and clawing.

And a known arsehole, Carey is an authority on the topic.

[EasternWest]

But Wayne Carey says is it, even though the subject gets more leniency than any other player in the league for face kicking and clawing.

Yeah but Carey bashes women, so I place no weight in anything he says.

[bulldogtragic]

Yeah but Carey bashes women, so I place no weight in anything he says.

Plus grabs women by the breast and insults them. And gives a character reference to Jason Moran, I assume for executing Alfonse.

[Happy Days]

The Greene cycle of offending is really good stuff. Does a heap of dirty shit, develops a rep for it, and now can't be judged fairly on the dirty shit that he does because his rep precludes any fair assessment apparently.

I don't know about you guys but in any of the footy I ever played I never once, in any situation including that one that Toby was just in, felt the need to lead with my elbow. I love Toby but of course he knew what he was doing.

[Axe Man]

The Greene cycle of offending is really good stuff. Does a heap of dirty shit, develops a rep for it, and now can't be judged fairly on the dirty shit that he does because his rep precludes any fair assessment apparently.

I don't know about you guys but in any of the footy I ever played I was never once, in any situation including that one that Toby was just in, felt the need to lead with my elbow. I love Toby but of course he knew what he was doing.

Completely agree. I can't believe the defence of Toby Greene of all people on here. I have played a lot of footy and have never fended off with an elbow in my life. Watch Dusty, although most don't have his strength you want to keep the tackler away from you with an extended arm. An elbow or forearm is only intended to maim.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I’m not so against the Toby Greene decision. It’s more in relation to the inconsistencies in the Selwood bump and Dangerfields incident in the GF last year.

[jazzadogs]

Yeah free kick at best for the Bont tackle

The alternate angles are a bit more damning - he does lift Bont clear off the ground and throws him back down head first. My initial impression from the TV angle was holding the ball, but the side angle shows it was the correct call.

Still don't necessarily agree with the suspension, but it's consistent with Caleb earlier in the year.

[bornadog]

The alternate angles are a bit more damning - he does lift Bont clear off the ground and throws him back down head first. My initial impression from the TV angle was holding the ball, but the side angle shows it was the correct call.

Still don't necessarily agree with the suspension, but it's consistent with Caleb earlier in the year.

This ^^^

MRO has to be consistent with these. Crozier copped a weak for something similar as well. Sick of only Dogs players getting done.

[bulldogtragic]

Toby Greene 1 Week after charge downgraded.

[divvydan]

Weak decision, it's either a reportable offence and 2 weeks or it's not and he's clear to play.

[bulldogtragic]

Weak decision, it's either a reportable offence and 2 weeks or it's not and he's clear to play.

Yep, having it both ways. Concocted result which does nothing for the credibility of the tribunal.

[bornadog]

Mason Redman's rough conduct charge has been downgraded to low impact.

Maybe we should have challenged Caleb's charge as I see no difference

[The Adelaide Connection]

If I was a conspiracy theorist i’d suspect that with lost coin from crowds the AFL desperately wants the Tigers to boost up broadcast numbers come finals. Greene had to go. Operation #freekickrichmond coming up.

[bornadog]

Toby Greene 1 Week after charge downgraded.

Appeal has also failed

[SonofScray]

Poor Toby. If on,y we knew the real boy, we’d have more compassion for a great kid.

[Axe Man]

Hard to disagree with Barrett here:

IF ...
Adrian Anderson has been defending players at Tribunal hearings for a while now ...

THEN ...
my head still never ceases to involuntarily slowly shake when it happens. Represented Toby Greene this week, unsuccessfully. As footy ops boss of the AFL, Anderson introduced the confusing and inconsistent Match Review Office system. In my eyes, there's certain roles certain people shouldn't take.

[Happy Days]

The AFL tribunal hearings are laughable and have the same energy as children putting on a show for their parents in the living room. Paying QCs $10k a day to put forward arguments about vague legal concepts that don't actually have any basis in the rules of sport as if not playing a game for two weeks is some greivous human rights violation that demands due process.

I mean what are we even doing.

[Grantysghost]

The AFL tribunal hearings are laughable and has the same energy as children putting on a show for their parents in the living room. Paying QCs $10k a day to put forward arguments about vague legal concepts that don't actually have any basis in the rules of sport as if not playing a game for two weeks is some greivous human rights violation that demands due process.

I mean what are we even doing.

It's like they're arguing Rowe v Wade level proceedings.

[bulldogtragic]

It's like they're arguing Rowe v Wade level proceedings.

James Rowe v Doug Wade ?

Rowe should have the right to choose to bump or not.

[Grantysghost]

James Rowe v Doug Wade ?

Rowe should have the right to choose to bump or not.

Haha very good :)

[Axe Man]

James Rowe v Doug Wade ?

Rowe should have the right to choose to bump or not.

I would prefer to see Normie Rowe v Ron Casey.


https://youtu.be/FrZerquOC30

How many weeks?

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Poor Toby. If on,y we knew the real boy, we’d have more compassion for a great kid.

The sickening love of Toby continues.
Carey writing "We know Toby plays on the edge"
Playing on the edge is a good thing. Using your skills to stick your boots into an opponents face is criminal as is eye gouging. The injuries he inflicts are as deliberate as his goals.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-curious-case-of-toby-greene-is-he-judged-fairly-20210812-p58i5j.html

[bulldogsthru&thru]

GWS crying about Geelong not cooperating with the hearing. They didn’t send Dangerfield for evidence. What goes around comes around.

I don’t get the love for Greene either. He’s a dirty player.

[jeemak]

GWS crying about Geelong not cooperating with the hearing. They didn’t send Dangerfield for evidence. What goes around comes around.

I don’t get the love for Greene either. He’s a dirty player.

It's because the commentariat is full of Neanderthals, and people who commit acts of domestic violence against women and indecently assault them are idolised, as are people who are violent on the football field.

[Happy Days]

It's because the commentariat is full of Neanderthals, and people who commit acts of domestic violence against women and indecently assault them are idolised, as are people who are violent on the football field.

Yeah but Greene's good as at footy though

[Jeanette54]

It will be interesting to see what happens with the Hawkins tackle on Joyce, Geelong seems to have a long history of "favourable outcomes" at hearings. The verdict from Woofers on Cordy's tackle on Saturday seems to be universally accepted as probably worthy of a week. Hawkin's effort appears very similar, and resulted Joyce’s head hitting the ground in the tackle, and he was subbed out of the game with concussion.

Of course Patrick Dangerfield will also make another appearance, he must have been granted parking privileges by now. What's the betting ? One dog gone, two cats let off. Odds on favourite.

[bulldogtragic]

Hunter $2,000 (First quarter on Shiel)
Cordy $2,000

Danger. No penalty, did nothing wrong
Hawkins. No penalty, did nothing wrong

[jeemak]

Hunter $2,000 (First quarter on Shiel)
Cordy $2,000

Danger. No penalty, did nothing wrong
Hawkins. No penalty, did nothing wrong

Is this for real?

[bulldogtragic]

Is this for real?

According to the AFEL APP.

Right???

[G-Mo77]

Cordy very lucky. I saw that one with Hunter and thought they may peek at it. Good results, neither suspended.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-news-2021-mro-decisions-questioned-michael-christian-dangerous-tackles-concussions-tom-hawkins-zaine-cordy-first-crack/news-story/b9e19954e783c4dc549074d53c659726?fbclid=IwAR3fL_8bGSenenpISp LUgwpJTugJ477o8gviqi0hZse6CRQsAHUnWWu75gI

Why are Geelong so protected?

[EasternWest]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-news-2021-mro-decisions-questioned-michael-christian-dangerous-tackles-concussions-tom-hawkins-zaine-cordy-first-crack/news-story/b9e19954e783c4dc549074d53c659726?fbclid=IwAR3fL_8bGSenenpISp LUgwpJTugJ477o8gviqi0hZse6CRQsAHUnWWu75gI

Why are Geelong so protected?

Good blokes.

[Grantysghost]

Good blokes.

It's the lifestyle.

[comrade]

It's the lifestyle.

Cotton On.

[Mitcha]

My theory is that everyone at the AFL is absolutely petrified by the arrogant entitled flog that coaches Geelong. I also believe that the fact that the head of the AFLPA also happens to play for them gets them a better run than most.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Good blokes.

Makes sense. Zaine is a turd.

[azabob]

Naughton free to play. Caleb Daniel fined $1,500 for talking trash to Ray Chamberlain

[KT31]

Naughton free to play. Caleb Daniel fined $1,500 for talking trash to Ray Chamberlain

Should have been given a bonus, Razor is a prize knob.

[bulldogtragic]

Naughton Free to do nothing again. Essendon thrilled with the MRO.

[bornadog]

Naughton free to play. Caleb Daniel fined $1,500 for talking trash to Ray Chamberlain

Any fines for faking?

[EasternWest]

Naughton Free to do nothing again.

Harsh but fair.

[bornadog]

Any fines for faking?

I just watched again here: https://www.afl.com.au/news/667531/match-review-naughton-learns-fate-dog-charged-for-umpire-abuse

Jonas faked that, when we had moment and going forward. Disgraceful.

[Jeanette54]

Naughton free to play. Caleb Daniel fined $1,500 for talking trash to Ray Chamberlain

Well someone had to, there was no crowd to do it.

[Bulldog4life]

[QUck OTE=KT31;754444]Should have been given a bonus, Razor is a prize knob.[/QUOTE]

Razor thinks he should get involved.The game is not about him. The best umpires you don't even know they are there. Years ago umpire Glenn James used to give it back to the player and then have a beer together after the game.

[SonofScray]

Goodbye Greene, you grub.

[Go_Dogs]

Goodbye Greene, you grub.

Has to be a week doesn’t it. Was clearly deliberate, unnecessary contact. AFL can’t condone it (even if Greene “would never touch him”).

[SonofScray]

Has to be a week doesn’t it. Was clearly deliberate, unnecessary contact. AFL can’t condone it (even if Greene “would never touch him”).

The best scenario for them is 1 week.

That was a deliberate, petulant and disrespectful act towards the umpire at best. A deliberate, aggressive attempt to intimidate at worst. If it was the latter, my view is that should be 5+ weeks. You simply cannot do that to the umpires.

[westdog54]

The best scenario for them is 1 week.

That was a deliberate, petulant and disrespectful act towards the umpire at best. A deliberate, aggressive attempt to intimidate at worst. If it was the latter, my view is that should be 5+ weeks. You simply cannot do that to the umpires.

100%. Stevic is standing still. At the last moment Greene turns in towards him.

He's not going to weasal his way out of this one.

[westdog54]

Referred direct to the Tribunal.

I hope Andrew Dillon tears him to pieces when he gives his evidence.

[bulldogtragic]

Referred direct to the Tribunal.

I hope Andrew Dillon tears him to pieces when he gives his evidence.

Future umpires will be watching this intently. After declaring him innocent all pre-game today, the new footage clearly shows physical contact was made. Then, um, let’s see what the umpires tells the tribunal...

[GVGjr]

Future umpires will be watching this intently. After declaring him innocent all pre-game today, the new footage clearly shows physical contact was made. Then, um, let’s see what the umpires tells the tribunal...

Good luck for junior umpires getting enough respect if he gets away with it.

[G-Mo77]

Good luck for junior umpires getting enough respect if he gets away with it.

Well that's the thing, he gets off, what's not stopping the next charged up boofhead playing country footy taking it one step further. The book should be thrown at this grub! Anything less than 4 - 6 weeks is pathetic.

[bulldogtragic]

Good luck for junior umpires getting enough respect if he gets away with it.

Good luck if it’s only 1-2 weeks. This is going to be the standard of what you can get away. Anything less than a message that serious deters anything like this happening to any other umpire is a whole lot of bad. 3++ is the minimum for mine. But wait for the “do we really want to see players potentially miss a Grand Final because of this”. The answer should be “yes” if GWS keeping winning.

[bulldogtragic]

Well that's the thing, he gets off, what's not stopping the next charged up boofhead playing country footy taking it one step further. The book should be thrown at this grub! Anything less than 4 - 6 weeks is pathetic.

And when that happens, the AFEL media machines denying the obvious link. It’s not hard to have high standards about umpire safety I hope.

[westdog54]

https://twitter.com/7AFL/status/1431836162637844482?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembe d%7Ctwterm%5E1431836162637844482%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.afl.com.au%2F

This is the side angle.

He's *!*!*!*!ed.

[Doc26]

And Zach Merrett, you’re next :mad:. Libba extremely fortunate to escape concussion, and for that matter a concussion test.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

How are there people sticking up for him? He should get weeks. You can’t allow that disrespect.

[Doc26]

How are there people sticking up for him? He should get weeks. You can’t allow that disrespect.

It is astounding isn’t it. I heard boofhead Brereton today on Fox somehow interpret from the footage that Matt Stevic was apologising to Greene for being in his way. Really !!

How has this great divide come about between the media’s ( positive ) spin on Greene against that of the wider fan base sentiment? They talk as if they are speaking for us, somehow believing that WE want to see this grub do his thing or WE believe that he’s being vilified.

The AFL media spin on Greene is FAKE NEWS.

When my kids are so often confused by what they’re hearing from this Mötley Crüe of so called experts, requiring their parents to step in to provide parental guidance, you know something is terribly wrong.

Hoepfully these Fox and 7 neanderthals go the same way as the Footy Show, cave men and dodo birds.

[bornadog]

Surely this is looked at

https://twitter.com/AFL/status/1431877389525475330