Campbell Brown - How many weeks should he get?

[GVGjr]

Over his career Campbell Brown has been known as a tough player. Yesterday certainly wasn't his finest game with two nasty and cheap shots. What has amazed me is the media really hasn't gone as hard at him as I thought they would.

If it was Hall that had delivered the same contact the same media would be curtailing his career and recommending a 12 week holiday for him. I know Hall has done worse but I do believe Brown has gotten off lightly so far. I wonder if there is a code in the media to cut the GC players a bit of slack and not to hang them out to dry.

Anyway, how many weeks should Brown get? I'll go with 5.

[Ghost Dog]

Good observation. If roles had been reversed, would have been all over the papers
Barry showed great self restraint.
5

[The Doctor]

Brown is a sniper and a dirty cheap shot. Likes to think he's the tough guy but he hits guys when they are unsuspecting or can't defend themselves. His father was equally pathetic.

I hate him. Give him 8.

[bornadog]

The one on Callan (second week in a row for Cal), was a gutless act, and the one on Hall, well he went in pretty hard and it could have been really nasty. I agree 5 weeks minimum but knowing the AFL 2 weeks.

[SlimPickens]

At least 4-5wks for the Ward hit and an extra 2 for Bazzas hit.

[Ghost Dog]

At least 4-5wks for the Ward hit and an extra 2 for Bazzas hit.

Only by missing Barry's head ( copped him on the shoulder ) means they will probably only dish out a week. I sincerely hope he gets 2

[ledge]

4 all up with the carry over and no % off.

[OLD SCRAGGer]

Should get 6 weeks! anything less than 4 will be a joke:mad::mad:

[LostDoggy]

Not sure how many weeks but the first hit on ward lifted their spirits and possibly stopped the game from being a real massacre.

[BulldogBelle]

Not sure how many weeks but the first hit on ward lifted their spirits and possibly stopped the game from being a real massacre.

And now for all his heroics, he'll spend 3 - 5 games on the sidelines.

[LostDoggy]

And now for all his heroics, he'll spend 3 - 5 games on the sidelines.
He did exactly what he was recruited for, the joke is what what they paid for and Hawthorn got for him.

If he gets only 3-5 then it might be worth it in the team sense by making the kids stand taller. They were definetely a better side after it.

[Flamethrower]

He should get at least 8 weeks for the assault of Callan Ward and 2 for the dangerous hit on Barry Hall. An inch to the left and he could have ended Bazza's career.

It is a disgrace that the AFL has no send off rule.

[LostDoggy]

It is a disgrace that the AFL has no send off rule.

What good what that have done as they missed the Callan Ward incident anyway and penalised the retaliators even though we had the ball. Its not in the AFL's interest for GC to get pumped every week and umpiring yesterday showed that.

I was surprised they actually paid a free to Barry, must be 3x before he gets one.

[KT31]

The one on Callan (second week in a row for Cal), was a gutless act, and the one on Hall, well he went in pretty hard and it could have been really nasty. I agree 5 weeks minimum but knowing the AFL 2 weeks.

5 to 6 weeks, but it is the AFL's new project team and that will reduce his sentence.
I'm predicting 2 or 3 weeks.

[mjp]

Not sure how many weeks but the first hit on ward lifted their spirits and possibly stopped the game from being a real massacre.

I agree. The game was only shown on delay over here - 4:30am, thanks Fox and Channel 10 - but it was an absolute massacre up until the melee. Brown picked his target, we reacted and the Gold Coast players found that they do have a bit of passion for one-another.

2 weeks for the Ward incident (low impact), 1 week for the high contact on Hall. 3 weeks - maybe only 2 with a guilty plea to both charges.

[immortalmike]

Not sure how many weeks but the first hit on ward lifted their spirits and possibly stopped the game from being a real massacre.

I disagree, I thought thegoal they scored from the free and 50 after spurred them on a bit more.


As for Brown, he should get 5 for the Ward hit and at least 1 for the head high bump as he has form in these areas. But considering the umpiring yesterday and the fact that one of our players getting knocked out behind play while Higgins lined up for a set shot somehow translated to a Gary Ablett free kick (seriously, how did this happen? I watched the replay and still can't figure it out) Brown'll get a week for everything.

[LostDoggy]

This bloke has a prior history but as you all point out, GC is the AFL's project this year, so maybe he will only get off with 3 weeks! Should be more like 6 though. He is an absolute sniper - did you see him on Game Day today? Said he has always played like this, and GC knew that when they recruited him and he wasn't about to change his style of play. Interestingly, Brad Sewell was on the panel, and was asked if Brown does this to a Hawthorn player this year, how would you react. He thought there would be remonstration from other players and if I remember correctly, said it was a part of Brown's game that he didn't really approve of!

[G-Mo77]

I only just saw the replay of the incident, 4 weeks IMO if not more.

Then there is the one on Hall. If it was someone like Monfries he'd get another 4 weeks but Hall just took it and kicked the goal. 1 week but wouldn't be surprised he gets off that one.

[Before I Die]

Only by missing Barry's head ( copped him on the shoulder ) means they will probably only dish out a week. I sincerely hope he gets 2

The original contact is to Barry's head then it glances off onto Barry's shoulder. This is also reflected in Barry's reaction where his hand goes to his head. I also believe he should get weeks for the hit on Grant (though he probably won't), he runs past the ball to take out a player not involved in the actual play. He also collects him high, but doesn't cause any serious damage.

Should get at least 5 all up, but will probably end up with 3.

[Doc26]

Brown is one of those neanderthals still running around from a bygone era where they loosely and falsely get labelled courageous. Brown is not courageous, Crossy is courageous, Lenny is courageous, Ball is courageous. This sniper Brown's actions might well change the course of a game but doesn't make his acts any less illegal and fortunately not in the spirit of how the game has progressed to. Damage from these past neanderthals is now limited to the airwaves, unfortunately and to my shagrin, Darcy too often sounds like one of them.

Having sat yesterday in front of his latest act of courage:

Brown V Victim 1 (Ward)

Conduct: Intentional
Impact: Medium
Contact: High

7 Activation points
Level 4 Striking Charge

325 points plus 65 point loading for previous cowardly act
Total 390 points

3 Weeks

Now the interesting one.

Brown V Victim 2 (Hall)

Conduct: Intentional
Impact: Low
Contact: High

6 Activation points
Level 3 "Bumping or making forceful contact to an opponent from front on whilst that player has his head down over ball" charge
400 points plus his 20% loading, 80 points.
Total 480 points

4 Weeks

Total: 7 weeks but dependant on whether he takes an early plea but with a bunch of new carry over points to go with his war chest.

[LostDoggy]

Sorry Doc26 no offence but its more a lucky dip than anything. Could be nothing to 10.

[always right]

Brown is one of those neanderthals still running around from a bygone era where they loosely and falsely get labelled courageous. Brown is not courageous, Crossy is courageous, Lenny is courageous, Ball is courageous. This sniper Brown's actions might well change the course of a game but doesn't make his acts any less illegal and fortunately not in the spirit of how the game has progressed to. Damage from these past neanderthals is now limited to the airwaves, unfortunately and to my shagrin, Darcy too often sounds like one of them.

Having sat yesterday in front of his latest act of courage:

Brown V Victim 1 (Ward)

Conduct: Intentional
Impact: Medium
Contact: High

7 Activation points
Level 4 Striking Charge

325 points plus 65 point loading for previous cowardly act
Total 390 points

3 Weeks

Now the interesting one.

Brown V Victim 2 (Hall)

Conduct: Intentional
Impact: Low
Contact: High

6 Activation points
Level 3 "Bumping or making forceful contact to an opponent from front on whilst that player has his head down over ball" charge
400 points plus his 20% loading, 80 points.
Total 480 points

4 Weeks

Total: 7 weeks but dependant on whether he takes an early plea but with a bunch of new carry over points to go with his war chest.

No way known will they classify the Hall one as intentional...put your money on reckless.

[LostDoggy]

I will put my cash on 4 weeks, the AFL will encourage leniency for the coasters.

[Topdog]

anyone got a link to footage?

[Doc26]

No way known will they classify the Hall one as intentional...put your money on reckless.

I'm a realist and understand that other factors will come into play other than applying the object nature of the AFL's demerit system.

The offence that I believe best fits Brown V Hall's is the charge of "Bumping or making forceful contact to an opponent from front on whilst that player has his head down over ball".

Aside from what the MRP come up with in their version of chook lotto, do you believe Brown 'intended' this act OR as you suggest just 'recklessly' put himself in the position to put it on Hall ? For mine he intentionally bumped and made forceful contact to Hall from front on whilst Hall's head was down over the ball.

[AndrewP6]

anyone got a link to footage?

AFL website has a video in their Latest Videos section "Brown moments of madness"

[Hotdog60]

I just watch the Ward and Hall incident in slow mo and with Ward he clearly has picked Ward off. Brown glanced over the shoulder and lined him up, so with that one I would go with intent.

With Barry he had everything tucked in and was going in with the old fashion hip and shoulder but he had lined him up and I don't think he thought one way or the other were Barry's head was. A free kick and that was all it needed but only if it was 10 years ago, now days he should know better and was very reckless.

[mjp]

Both were low impact. Ward one was intentional, Hall one was reckless.

[AndrewP6]

Both were low impact. Ward one was intentional, Hall one was reckless.

How do they assess impact? I'd have said medium at least.

[comrade]

Both were low impact. Ward one was intentional, Hall one was reckless.

Ward has the hardest head at our club and was knocked flat. That one wasn't low impact.

[KT31]

Ward has the hardest head at our club and was knocked flat. That one wasn't low impact.

Two weeks in a row.
IMO his worth is known and now he is a target each week.
I think the opposing coach has said he copped one last week , give him one this week to go on with.

[Hotdog60]

Does Brown open himself up to be made an example off, he's gone on the media (LINK (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/111323/default.aspx)) that this is how he plays his football and he won't change. Which if not given an appropriate penalty will make a mockery of the message that the AFL is putting across in protecting the players head.

[LostDoggy]

Ward has the hardest head at our club and was knocked flat. That one wasn't low impact.

Is that why now 2 weeks in a row he has been knocked flat, taken off but only to return a short time later with people saying/thinking ....."well, he couldn't have been hit that hard, he's up and around now!". Perhaps he needs to show it a little more that he was hit hard - not asking him to soften up :D but maybe just take a little more time to get back on the park?

[LostDoggy]

I think the odds are shortening that he will get off realitivly lightly.
GC must be protected.

[Bulldog Revolution]

I wonder if there is a code in the media to cut the GC players a bit of slack and not to hang them out to dry.



I think maybe its the Hawthorn mafia

Crawf, Dermie, Quarters etc

The hit on Ward was off the ball and thuggish. Its incidents like this where the mrp should send a message. There is no place in the game for these types of cheap shots

[always right]

I'm a realist and understand that other factors will come into play other than applying the object nature of the AFL's demerit system.

The offence that I believe best fits Brown V Hall's is the charge of "Bumping or making forceful contact to an opponent from front on whilst that player has his head down over ball".

Aside from what the MRP come up with in their version of chook lotto, do you believe Brown 'intended' this act OR as you suggest just 'recklessly' put himself in the position to put it on Hall ? For mine he intentionally bumped and made forceful contact to Hall from front on whilst Hall's head was down over the ball.

I'm not suggesting he was reckless......I'm suggesting that this is how it will be classified. History tells us they are always reluctant to classify an offene as deliberate or intentional. It's relatively easy to have it downgraded to reckless and Brown will simply argue that he came in to apply a hip and shoulder when Barry turned his body so that he was front on. Can almost write the script.

[LostDoggy]

I recorded the game and watched the Callan Ward hit last night. I felt like the commentators were trying to downplay the incident, coming up with all sorts of excuses "If he just threw his elbow back and didn't know Ward was there...." "Well Ward's back on the ground now"

I think he should get 4 weeks (combined). It certainly got the crowd fired up on Saturday, reminded me of the North Melbourne game last year with Scott Thompson/Barry Hall.

[LostDoggy]

He did exactly what he was recruited for, the joke is what what they paid for and Hawthorn got for him.

If he gets only 3-5 then it might be worth it in the team sense by making the kids stand taller. They were definetely a better side after it.

I haven't seen the game, but what I don't understand is why it makes the aggressor's team stand taller -- shouldn't it make the aggrieved team fight harder to gain justice through the scoreboard?

If someone from a rabble team with 15 kids and 5 cashed-up mercenaries flattened my teammate I wouldn't stop until I put 30 goals past them. From the final score it looks like the Dogs went back into their shell and just coasted around -- I know it's probably harsh, but the final score is a disgrace to our supposed desire, and I just saw the contested ball stats, which tells me that we're in trouble if we play Collingwood next week .. oh wait, we do.

It's still the first 5 weeks, so I'm cutting the team some slack, but seriously, you have to question our mental toughness if 70 points is the best we can do against a rabble team that Carlton smashed out of the park. It wasn't wet, was it? Can be this time of the year in Melbourne and it's the only excuse I can think of -- just checked, it was at Etihad, so the roof would have been closed (right?)

[Ozza]

I actually thought it fired our guys up immediately after the incident - and we kicked the next 3 goals in pretty short time.

Disappointing that we didn't win the clearances. But as I said during the week - it was always going to be a game where many Bulldogs supporters would be annoyed that we didn't win by 30 goals. After Carlton beat them like that last week - Gold Coast were always going to get numbers behind the ball and slow the game down.

It was largely a training drill where we didn't execute as well as we should have.

(bye this week - Freo after that and then Collingwood)....realistically 3 weeks until we know how we are going.

[Sedat]

He did exactly what he was recruited for, the joke is what what they paid for and Hawthorn got for him.

If he gets only 3-5 then it might be worth it in the team sense by making the kids stand taller. They were definetely a better side after it.
I actually thought they were rubbish for the next 30 minutes after the incident - we were about 4 goals up at the time and we extended it out to almost 10 goals approaching half time. If that galvanised the GC, I'd hate to see them ungalvanised. GC improved in the 2nd half because they were getting used to each other's game style and we dropped off our workrate, not to mention we missed several set shots that would have taken the margain out to around 100 points.

A kid like Seb Tape needs to have Campbell Brown sitting in the stands for the next few weeks instead of helping him out in defensive 50 like a hole in the head. Brown's actions were selfish in the extreme and showed not a skerrick of regard for his young teammates, who desperately need on-field support from the senior brigade.

[LostDoggy]

Disappointing that we didn't win the clearances.

How can we simply dismiss this fact? Is it just me or does this set off massive alarm bells?

I don't care if they had Gablett in there, they have a ruckman with less experience than Ayce Cordy and don't have an on-ball brigade to speak of, while we are supposed to have one of the best midfield groups around, and we still get smashed in the clearances? Incidentally, we are talking about the same group of players that were massacred by Essendon in round 1, and this despite Libba supposedly having brilliant games in close, which begs the question: what would the stats have been without him?

Relying on a third-gamer to be competitive in and under -- is this a sign of a real problem?

[Maddog37]

Gary Ablett is one of the games greatest players ever. Swallow has been largely accepted as a future great and Zac Smith may be young but the boy really can play and jumped all over Hudson. Brennan had one of his good games and when he is on he is a player of rare talent. Also D Harris is no gun but is pretty handy in and under.

The Dons game was just a debacle and is hard to place in context other than to say when we lack effort we are crap, as are most teams.

I have a hairbrained, halfbaked theory that when the focus is strongly placed on tackles, the players will hunt the man more than the ball and as a result quite often will be second for the pill. Strangely enough with the way they officiate the holding the ball rule now it actually works better to be second for the ball at times.

[LostDoggy]

Gary Ablett is one of the games greatest players ever. Swallow has been largely accepted as a future great and Zac Smith may be young but the boy really can play and jumped all over Hudson. Brennan had one of his good games and when he is on he is a player of rare talent. Also D Harris is no gun but is pretty handy in and under.

.

Cooney is a Browlow medal winner -- sure he's no Gablett but he's in the same bracket. Griffen is a top 3 pick (and was largely accepted as a future great for a long time, and most of us still hold some hope of that happening) a la Swallow with infinitely more experience and conditioning, Zac Smith is two/three years behind Ayce Cordy and Jordan Roughead who are also two gun young ruckmen. Sure Brennan is a talent, but Higgins should easily be his equal, and I haven't even added guys like Boyd (captain), Sherman, Hudson, Cross, Gia etc.

We give players like Cordy and Ward excuses because they are young, we don't expect Roughead to carry the ruck for a couple of years yet, but we are happy that third-gamer Zac Smith beat Huddo?

Look, like I said, it's the first 5 rounds and there are a lot of mitigating factors (we are aiming at September, while after last week's Carlton debacle, GC was always going to play harder this week), but no way, if we are aiming for a premiership, can we be happy or have any excuses about Cooney, Griff, Huddo, Boydy, Higgo et al being beaten in the clearances* by a midfield made up of TAC Cup All-Stars, Gablett or not.

* and from what I've read of Rocket's comments, he's not happy about this fact either.

[Maddog37]

I agree with you but I do not want six players diving on the ball and the opposition leaving a few seagulls outside and just running away like the Pies do every week.

Losing the clearance count is not great but nor is it the end of the world.

Cooney is not even close to Little Gaz either sorry. Wish he was...........

Also I do not really want Cooney, Higgins, Griff and Sherman getting too many clerances. I would prefer they stayed outside and let Ward, Libba , Crossy, Hudosn and Boyd do their thing.

Zac Smith is a different body type to Ayce and Ruff too but I take your point.

[LostDoggy]

ILosing the clearance count is not great but nor is it the end of the world.

Zac Smith is a different body type to Ayce and Ruff too but I take your point.

Blimey, I don't know if we're at cross-purposes here, but clearance counts are everything in the modern game where first use of the ball is paramount. Forget the game against the GC (where any AFL team would beat them on sheer experience and larger tanks in general) -- I would defy anyone to show me a premiership contender that gets regularly beaten in the contested possession stats.

I think you may be confusing 'clearances' with diving on the ball and handballing blindly; the stat only registers a clearance if you actually get it out of congestion into open play (generally to advantage either by getting the pill to a teammate or moving the ball significantly forward).

Skill-levels inside are so good these days with the likes of Mitchell, Pendlebury, Hayes, Selwood, Ball etc. that you can't just expect to seagull-pick off the errant disposal; if these guys are getting their hands on the ball first, the next in the chain of handballs will be a clean take to a flying Hodge, Didak or Montagna, and that's another forward 50 entry. If you think the Pies last year were only 'seagull picking' off other teams' clearance work, you need to watch Jolly, Swan, Pendles and Ball a little bit more.

Considering the fact that we aren't exactly the cleanest team by hand or foot out of congestion anyway (Libba notwithstanding, it seems), winning the contested possession count becomes even more important.

I'm not worried about losing the clearance stats to GC per se, I'm worried about what this means when we play against the other real contenders who WILL make you pay for being second to the ball.

ps. I don't know Zac Smith, but Roughead was supposed to be a 'more mature body' when we picked him up too. Our midfield group don't need excuses, they need a good kick up the bum to get them going -- no one is doubting their talent, it's their application that is the worry, albeit better in April than in September. (Still, you don't necessarily want a team that is turning things on and off as suits them, we have a habit of not being able to wake up in the first week of September too).

[Rocco Jones]

Zac Smith is older than Jordan Roughead. GC picked him all the way back in 2008 and he has been warehoused in the years between now and then. Despite only playing 3 games in the AFL, he spent a full season playing in the VFL last season as a 20 yo.

On Smith, I have not rated a young ruckman higher for a long time. He is going to be a superstar.

[LostDoggy]

I haven't seen the game, but what I don't understand is why it makes the aggressor's team stand taller -- shouldn't it make the aggrieved team fight harder to gain justice through the scoreboard?

I would have thought Brown's action made a statement to his teammates that he wasn't gonna take another 120 loss and maybe they took note? Know you'd understood the psychology more.
Also their mercenaries were not going to play that badly again. We were poor but still won by 70+

[LostDoggy]

I can't believe Polkinghorne got away with his hit on Ward last week.
Therefore, nothing would surprise me here.

[LostDoggy]

I would have thought Brown's action made a statement to his teammates that he wasn't gonna take another 120 loss and maybe they took note? Know you'd understood the psychology more.
Also their mercenaries were not going to play that badly again. We were poor but still won by 70+

Fair enough, I understood the point made in your original post, just wondered why it's always assumed the aggressor's team that will stand up (Lloydy vs. the Hawks etc.).

It's funny -- I was happy to reserve judgment after the Essendon game because it was only one game, but this huge win sees me more worried than that loss, because it seems that some of the issues from the Essendon game (mainly contested ball and clearances) are trending the same win or lose, and may become bigger issues in the four or five crunch games we are going to get this year, which our season will really come down to.

You know as well as I do that our season will not be deemed a success based on beating GC, Brisbane, Melbourne, Richmond etc: if a GF is our pass mark (and I think it is), it's a very fine margin between failure and success for us this year, so we all have our standards set pretty high.

The reality is that our season hasn't really started yet -- with one poor hitout, two uncompetitive games and a bye, it's seemed like an extended pre-season, but Freo and Geelong on the other side of the bye will be pretty serious wake-up calls which will see if we're on track or if some drastic mid-course corrections may be needed -- the formline is very unimpressive thus far, regardless of what the W/L ratio says.

[Sedat]

On Smith, I have not rated a young ruckman higher for a long time. He is going to be a superstar.
Scary prospect. He is going to monster opposition ruckmen in 2-3 years. Gorringe is no slouch either, albeit coming from a younger base and will need more time to develop.

[bornadog]

I can't believe Polkinghorne got away with his hit on Ward last week.
Therefore, nothing would surprise me here.

He didn't get away with it he was guilty but the penalty after discounts ended up a reprimand, which was a disgrace

[Doc26]

Blimey, I don't know if we're at cross-purposes here, but clearance counts are everything in the modern game where first use of the ball is paramount. Forget the game against the GC (where any AFL team would beat them on sheer experience and larger tanks in general) -- I would defy anyone to show me a premiership contender that gets regularly beaten in the contested possession stats.

I think you may be confusing 'clearances' with diving on the ball and handballing blindly; the stat only registers a clearance if you actually get it out of congestion into open play (generally to advantage either by getting the pill to a teammate or moving the ball significantly forward).

Skill-levels inside are so good these days with the likes of Mitchell, Pendlebury, Hayes, Selwood, Ball etc. that you can't just expect to seagull-pick off the errant disposal; if these guys are getting their hands on the ball first, the next in the chain of handballs will be a clean take to a flying Hodge, Didak or Montagna, and that's another forward 50 entry. If you think the Pies last year were only 'seagull picking' off other teams' clearance work, you need to watch Jolly, Swan, Pendles and Ball a little bit more.

Considering the fact that we aren't exactly the cleanest team by hand or foot out of congestion anyway (Libba notwithstanding, it seems), winning the contested possession count becomes even more important.

I'm not worried about losing the clearance stats to GC per se, I'm worried about what this means when we play against the other real contenders who WILL make you pay for being second to the ball.

Although this is now off thread, I was baffled hearing Rodney post match state that our "indicators" were apparently acceptable. Not sure what this means but at face value I'd suggest a reassessment of our 'indicators' may need to be looked at.

I don't see that we have addressed the issue of clean and effective use of the ball from stoppages even when we do win a clearance. Too often we just seem to lack the composure and class in hitting up a target from a stoppage that a Pendlebury or Swan are so good at. Huddo's form is also concerning as it appears we're not getting advantage at hit outs. I'm hoping that the form issue with Ben is short term although I'm fearing he could be one of those players where the end comes fast.

[immortalmike]

Blimey, I don't know if we're at cross-purposes here, but clearance counts are everything in the modern game where first use of the ball is paramount. Forget the game against the GC (where any AFL team would beat them on sheer experience and larger tanks in general) -- I would defy anyone to show me a premiership contender that gets regularly beaten in the contested possession stats.

I think you may be confusing 'clearances' with diving on the ball and handballing blindly; the stat only registers a clearance if you actually get it out of congestion into open play (generally to advantage either by getting the pill to a teammate or moving the ball significantly forward).



There is very little actual correlation between clearances and winning...check it out for yourself if you wish.

Also Carlton only just broke even with GC in the clearances last week. In a 120 point win...

[Ozza]

There is very little actual correlation between clearances and winning...check it out for yourself if you wish.

Also Carlton only just broke even with GC in the clearances last week. In a 120 point win...

The stats can definitely be misleading. I was surprised we lost the clearance stats when I heard....mainly because It felt like we had the ball for most of the game.

[Remi Moses]

Is this the same Campbell Brown who claimed Lloyd was a sniper a few years back!
Reeked havoc with my throat screaming abuse at him.
Three weeks he'll get.

[LostDoggy]

On twitter it is reported as saying he got 5 weeks

[LostDoggy]

He didn't get away with it he was guilty but the penalty after discounts ended up a reprimand, which was a disgrace


Yeah, I'd still count that as getting away with it.

[ledge]

I haven't seen the game, but what I don't understand is why it makes the aggressor's team stand taller -- shouldn't it make the aggrieved team fight harder to gain justice through the scoreboard?

If someone from a rabble team with 15 kids and 5 cashed-up mercenaries flattened my teammate I wouldn't stop until I put 30 goals past them. From the final score it looks like the Dogs went back into their shell and just coasted around -- I know it's probably harsh, but the final score is a disgrace to our supposed desire, and I just saw the contested ball stats, which tells me that we're in trouble if we play Collingwood next week .. oh wait, we do.

It's still the first 5 weeks, so I'm cutting the team some slack, but seriously, you have to question our mental toughness if 70 points is the best we can do against a rabble team that Carlton smashed out of the park. It wasn't wet, was it? Can be this time of the year in Melbourne and it's the only excuse I can think of -- just checked, it was at Etihad, so the roof would have been closed (right?)

The last quarter it rained and the roof was open.

[bornadog]

4 weeks all up. Not enough, bloody gutless sniper.

[aker39]

He got 204 points for Ward and 225 points for Hall, then a 20% loading for prior reports.

Upshot, with a guilty plea, he gets 4 weeks.

[Flamethrower]

2 weeks for an intentional elbow to the head of Callan Ward - AFL/MRP is a joke.

[jazzadogs]

He got 204 points for Ward and 225 points for Hall, then a 20% loading for prior reports.

Upshot, with a guilty plea, he gets 4 weeks.
More points for the hit on Hall? As far as I'm concerned, they were both hits to the head, one of which was intentional, completely out of play (I don't think 'behind play' adequately describes it, as Higgins was lining up for a shot at goal) and enough to knock a player down and force them from the ground.

Not sure how they figured that tbh.

[aker39]

If Brown had no priors and pleaded guity, he would have been suspended for 1 week for his hit on Ward.

Absolute disgrace.

[Doc26]

What a disgraceful decision.

How Brown versus his first victim, Ward, can be assessed as a level 3 is simply going soft on crime. Reckless over intentional is farcical, it was reckless intent which is where these MRP nuffies too often get it wrong as with Brown circa 2010 on Daniel Jackson. Ward was picked off and was a level 4 striking offence if I've ever seen one. He also got off cheap with a level 2 hit on Hall although at least some argument could be mounted from the defense on the degree of cowardice in Brown's action.

I hereby pronounce Saturday 09 April sniper amnesty day from this day forward.

Only good thing to come out of it will be Josh Toy's return.

[LostDoggy]

Over his career Campbell Brown has been known as a tough player. Yesterday certainly wasn't his finest game with two nasty and cheap shots. What has amazed me is the media really hasn't gone as hard at him as I thought they would.

If it was Hall that had delivered the same contact the same media would be curtailing his career and recommending a 12 week holiday for him. I know Hall has done worse but I do believe Brown has gotten off lightly so far. I wonder if there is a code in the media to cut the GC players a bit of slack and not to hang them out to dry.

Anyway, how many weeks should Brown get? I'll go with 5.

This thread only needed 1 post. 12 for Barry, should have been 8 but got only 4. He got a discount for hitting Hall and being a GC player.
He was lucky it was Hall he hit cause most others would have been out cold.

[LostDoggy]

Browns elbow on Ward not deemed INTENTIONAL but RECKLESS?

Tweets from Media;

Mark Stevens: If Brown was reckless on Ward, then what's intentional?
Mark Robinson: Reckless and not intentional!!!???? What is intentional? Using an axe....

Good points. How is what he did not Intentional? Was he intending on stretching his elbow and Ward got in the way?

[Mofra]

I used to think off the ball incidents were treated more harshly than those in play.

I stand corrected.

[Maddog37]

I hope our players let him know next time he plays that he is owed one........

[The Pie Man]

Browns elbow on Ward not deemed INTENTIONAL but RECKLESS?

Tweets from Media;

Mark Stevens: If Brown was reckless on Ward, then what's intentional?
Mark Robinson: Reckless and not intentional!!!???? What is intentional? Using an axe....

Good points. How is what he did not Intentional? Was he intending on stretching his elbow and Ward got in the way?

Not sure why Intentional & Reckless are judged separate...Brown's actions were clearly both to me

[SlimPickens]

This is a bloody disgrace, I can't believe that sniper gets to play in a month.

[bornadog]

I hope our players let him know next time he plays that he is owed one........

At least the players were flying the flag by remonstrating, unlikely previous few years poor efforts. Great to see for the second week in a row, GIA right in there with Gabletts jumper twisted inside his fist and telling the umpire why they are angry.

[Ghost Dog]

I hope our players let him know next time he plays that he is owed one........

Meh, I hope they do what Barry did and ignore the twit. Tear his team into pieces on the scoreboard and sing the gold coast club song into his ugly face. The worst punishment I can think of!

[Doc26]

At least the players were flying the flag by remonstrating, unlikely previous few years poor efforts. Great to see for the second week in a row, GIA right in there with Gabletts jumper twisted inside his fist and telling the umpire why they are angry.

Yes this was good to see as this has been a criticism of this bunch, that said, probably made a lot easier against a bunch of kiddlywinks.

[LostDoggy]

I will put my cash on 4 weeks, the AFL will encourage leniency for the coasters.

Cash please. I thought it would be three for the Ward hit and 1 for Halls though.

[bornadog]

Yes this was good to see as this has been a criticism of this bunch, that said, probably made a lot easier against a bunch of kiddlywinks.

Well Brown was walking backwards and hiding behind the kiddlywinks.

[Doc26]

Well Brown was walking backwards and hiding behind the kiddlywinks.

Says more about Brown as he no longer had unsuspecting targets to take out.

[LostDoggy]

Browns elbow on Ward not deemed INTENTIONAL but RECKLESS?

Tweets from Media;

Mark Stevens: If Brown was reckless on Ward, then what's intentional?
Mark Robinson: Reckless and not intentional!!!???? What is intentional? Using an axe....

Good points. How is what he did not Intentional? Was he intending on stretching his elbow and Ward got in the way?

Gotta love Robbo's line - ......"intentional is using an axe?". 4 weeks is a disgrace but typical!

[Maddog37]

Meh, I hope they do what Barry did and ignore the twit. Tear his team into pieces on the scoreboard and sing the gold coast club song into his ugly face. The worst punishment I can think of!

I really think our team needs to develop a nasty streak. All the great teams have a bit of intimidation and agro about them. we have alot of hardnosed professional types and even Barry is a different beast now.

[Doc26]

I really think our team needs to develop a nasty streak. All the great teams have a bit of intimidation and agro about them. we have alot of hardnosed professional types and even Barry is a different beast now.

So long as this aggression is directed at winning the hard ball ala Crossy, Picken, Cal and even what little Libba is showing. If we can breed this type of hardness and tenacity across the group then we will have made substantial gains.

[Ghost Dog]

So long as this aggression is directed at winning the hard ball ala Crossy, Picken, Cal and even what little Libba is showing. If we can breed this type of hardness and tenacity across the group then we will have made substantial gains.

Or acrue injuries or reports. I wouldn't like to see Bob Murphy waste his energy doing this sort of stuff, whereas our midfielders could def have a bit more pep at times.
Schofield / Picken types who like to fly the flag a bit - no problem with it. There is a time and a place, agreed.

[soupman]

I really think our team needs to develop a nasty streak. All the great teams have a bit of intimidation and agro about them. we have alot of hardnosed professional types and even Barry is a different beast now.

I think we have this already.

Picken, Addison, Hall, Hudson, Lake and Ward are all happy to have a wrestle and try and intimidate opponents, and we have numerous players who don't hesistate to put themselves at risk to win the ball. The only thing we lack in terms of intimidating is a Campbell Brown type of unprovoked hitter, and really Hall should fall in this category.

[Ghost Dog]

So long as this aggression is directed at winning the hard ball ala Crossy, Picken, Cal and even what little Libba is showing. If we can breed this type of hardness and tenacity across the group then we will have made substantial gains.

Fair enough. Maybe at times, depending on opposition. I wouldn't waste energy on Brown IMO
It's funny, I'm from Hamilton and I asked my mum about Liam Picken last night. " A well known hoon" is how he was described in his youth. :D

[soupman]

As for Campbell Brown's elbow being regarded as "reckless", how was it not intentional? It wasn't like he came flying in and it was something he did as a part of the game, he glanced back and whacked him on purpose. If Ward wasn't there would Brown have moved his elbow as such? Not a chance. I will never understand the MRP.

[AndrewP6]

I think we have this already.

Picken, Addison, Hall, Hudson, Lake and Ward are all happy to have a wrestle and try and intimidate opponents, and we have numerous players who don't hesistate to put themselves at risk to win the ball. The only thing we lack in terms of intimidating is a Campbell Brown type of unprovoked hitter, and really Hall should fall in this category.

It doesn't translate on the scoreboard though. We just coast through when we should really pump teams (the flogging we gave Port last year being an exception), and we don't always take advantage of opportunities. To me, that's the nasty streak we need to develop.

[Mantis]

It doesn't translate on the scoreboard though. We just coast through when we should really pump teams (the flogging we gave Port last year being an exception), and we don't always take advantage of opportunities. To me, that's the nasty streak we need to develop.

How much do you want to win these games by?

[LostDoggy]

How much do you want to win these games by?

Absolutely. If I have to sit through another 70+ win just to see the entire forum go to crap over how “poor” we are, “I'll spew up!” :)

On the topic, it's thought that the fact Ward came back on pretty quickly afterwards and Barry was OK and kicked a goal both helped to lighten the penalty on Brown. He's damn lucky, really. If we had of subbed Ward off for concussion, I'm sure he would have gotten much more of a penalty.

The media have opened up on Brown the last few days — and rightly so.

For mine, I'll always remember Brown's antics against Essendon in Round 22, 2009, when Lloyd took out Sewell and Brown carried on like an absolute monkey, then when it came time to exact retribution, he SLAPPED Lloydy across the shoulder like a girl (sorry girls!).

Tough man? In the thug sense: Yes. In the sense of real courage: No.

[bornadog]

Absolutely. If I have to sit through another 70+ win just to see the entire forum go to crap over how “poor” we are, “I'll spew up!” :)

On the topic, it's thought that the fact Ward came back on pretty quickly afterwards and Barry was OK and kicked a goal both helped to lighten the penalty on Brown. He's damn lucky, really. If we had of subbed Ward off for concussion, I'm sure he would have gotten much more of a penalty.

The media have opened up on Brown the last few days — and rightly so.

For mine, I'll always remember Brown's antics against Essendon in Round 22, 2009, when Lloyd took out Sewell and Brown carried on like an absolute monkey, then when it came time to exact retribution, he SLAPPED Lloydy across the shoulder like a girl (sorry girls!).

Tough man? In the thug sense: Yes. In the sense of real courage: No.

Ward is a hard nut just like his old man was when he played for Yarraville. Anyone else they would not have got up for awhile. Same with Bazza. The hit on Bazza could have been so bad if he had of hit him on the top of the head and cracked his neck.

[AndrewP6]

How much do you want to win these games by?

I'm not only talking about the GC game. It's also the manner in which we win, and giving up leads. No one could say our first two wins have been incredible performances on our part, more the inexperience/ineptitude of the opposition.

[Ghost Dog]

Back to Campbell Brown, see he is unapologetic about his playing style.
The powers that be at GC may not concur. Having a senior player out for a month is a loss. Bad PR for the suns, and just karma for picking such a goon.

[immortalmike]

I'm not only talking about the GC game. It's also the manner in which we win, and giving up leads. No one could say our first two wins have been incredible performances on our part, more the inexperience/ineptitude of the opposition.

Really? Not sure about Gold Coast but Brisbane weren't demolished against either Freo (should have won) or Melbourne (could have won).

[bornadog]

I'm not only talking about the GC game. It's also the manner in which we win, and giving up leads. No one could say our first two wins have been incredible performances on our part, more the inexperience/ineptitude of the opposition.

Andrew, two 70 plus thrashings, I will take that anytime. The only unacceptable game was the Essendon match.

[LostDoggy]

Just saw footage of the incident(s). Thought that maybe everyone was over-reacting, but I can't believe that the Ward incident was only 2 weeks.

Campbell Brown: Spineless, talentless bogan hack of a f***wit. Will be forgotten quicker than he was born, inconsequential waste of oxygen, joke of a vice-captain of a joke team.
MRP: Gutless. Meaningless, incompetent panel that regularly gets these things so wrong. It's role isn't justice, it's just an extension of the AFL marketing arm, just like the umpires are, whose role is more to protect Judd, Gablett, GC etc. than to run a sport.

And why should how quickly a player get up determine the severity of the sentence? That's ludicrous -- the sentence should be based solely on what the perpetrator was doing, not how tough the 'victim' is.

It's rubbish like this that the AFL pull that lets itself down and shows itself to be a provincial sport run by big fish in a small pond. Demitrou, Anderson, KB et al, what dumb f**ks you've proven yourselves to be -- if it's not fair, it's not sport. The competition is so compromised by all the shit that the AFL pull that it's really closer to professional wrestling than it is to a respectable sporting competition. People will get sick of this crap eventually -- I know I am.

Bloody pathetic.

[Ghost Dog]

Andrew, two 70 plus thrashings, I will take that anytime. The only unacceptable game was the Essendon match.

did you watch the post match press conference? Many aspects of the game were unacceptable as far as the coach was concerned.

[azabob]

did you watch the post match press conference? Many aspects of the game were unacceptable as far as the coach was concerned.

Eade says every second week things are unacceptable but he and the MC don't make any changes to the team.
The loss after round one is the perfect example.
Im not saying changes are needed but what Eade says after the match needs to be taken with quite a few grains of salt.

[AndrewP6]

Andrew, two 70 plus thrashings, I will take that anytime. The only unacceptable game was the Essendon match.

I'll take them too. Just making an observation that I believe we lack the "killer instinct" that is a hallmark of the top sides.

[AndrewP6]

Just saw footage of the incident(s). Thought that maybe everyone was over-reacting, but I can't believe that the Ward incident was only 2 weeks.

Campbell Brown: Spineless, talentless bogan hack of a f***wit. Will be forgotten quicker than he was born, inconsequential waste of oxygen, joke of a vice-captain of a joke team.
MRP: Gutless. Meaningless, incompetent panel that regularly gets these things so wrong. It's role isn't justice, it's just an extension of the AFL marketing arm, just like the umpires are, whose role is more to protect Judd, Gablett, GC etc. than to run a sport.

And why should how quickly a player get up determine the severity of the sentence? That's ludicrous -- the sentence should be based solely on what the perpetrator was doing, not how tough the 'victim' is.

It's rubbish like this that the AFL pull that lets itself down and shows itself to be a provincial sport run by big fish in a small pond. Demitrou, Anderson, KB et al, what dumb f**ks you've proven yourselves to be -- if it's not fair, it's not sport. The competition is so compromised by all the shit that the AFL pull that it's really closer to professional wrestling than it is to a respectable sporting competition. People will get sick of this crap eventually -- I know I am.

Bloody pathetic.

Ouch! Say what you really mean!;)
Not disagreeing with you, by the way.

[AndrewP6]

Really? Not sure about Gold Coast but Brisbane weren't demolished against either Freo (should have won) or Melbourne (could have won).

True, but they were inept for large parts of our match.

[Hotdog60]

I'll take them too. Just making an observation that I believe we lack the "killer instinct" that is a hallmark of the top sides.

We been like that for a long long time, I know what your saying when a team is on the ropes we don't deliver the killer blow. A interesting stat might be which teams have the most 100+ points wins over the last 50 years.

[Ghost Dog]

Eade says every second week things are unacceptable but he and the MC don't make any changes to the team.
The loss after round one is the perfect example.
Im not saying changes are needed but what Eade says after the match needs to be taken with quite a few grains of salt.

There have been plenty of changes to the team this season.
Jones, Libba, Sherman.

I thought it was a classic Rocket press conference. Does he have reflux or something? He always seems to be slurping or hiccuping; on the verge of breaking wind. And chewing on something. Always

He didn't paper over the cracks. Seriously, The clearances early on were like " Hey, they are doing it again! That's OUR ball...."

I was trying to think what the Suns logo and gurnsey makes me think of....
Cornetto Icecream....
This is what you do to pass time on a cold and wet West footscray platform.

[LostDoggy]

Campbell Brown: Spineless, talentless bogan hack of a f***wit. Will be forgotten quicker than he was born, inconsequential waste of oxygen, joke of a vice-captain of a joke team.
MRP: Gutless. Meaningless, incompetent panel that regularly gets these things so wrong. It's role isn't justice, it's just an extension of the AFL marketing arm, just like the umpires are, whose role is more to protect Judd, Gablett, GC etc. than to run a sport.

.

Love it!


.

[Mantis]

There have been plenty of changes to the team this season.
Jones, Libba, Sherman.



The 'core' of the team is still exactly the same.

[Ghost Dog]

The midfield is clearly about to go through transition of the generations.
What changes especially would you like to see?

[Mantis]

The midfield is clearly about to go through transition of the generations.
What changes especially would you like to see?

I would think that several of our more senior players would have until about the mid point of the season to prove they can have an impact against quality opposition... If they can't it's time to look to the future.

[ledge]

I think we have gone off track here.

[immortalmike]

True, but they were inept for large parts of our match.

Chicken and the egg. Was it us that made them look inept or were they simply inept?

One thing's for sure, our defence was very good and we had a fairly high tackle count.

[AndrewP6]

Chicken and the egg. Was it us that made them look inept or were they simply inept?

One thing's for sure, our defence was very good and we had a fairly high tackle count.

Lock in B, Eddie :)

[LostDoggy]

I thought this was a Campbell Brown thread???? :confused:

[immortalmike]

Lock in B, Eddie :)

Hmmm... I'm not so sure.

One thing we can agree on is that Campbell Brown is a complete wanker and should consider himself very lucky to be playing in a month. I think there should be a rule that if a player hits one of our blokes behind play then Barry gets a free hit on them with no repercussions.

[AndrewP6]

Hmmm... I'm not so sure.

One thing we can agree on is that Campbell Brown is a complete wanker and should consider himself very lucky to be playing in a month. I think there should be a rule that if a player hits one of our blokes behind play then Barry gets a free hit on them with no repercussions.

Hahaha... and a free kick from the top of the square. :)