MRO Thread

Poor decision. Does the player not have a duty of care to his opponent? Maynard put himself in a path of collision with Brayshaw, he has a duty of care to ensure that any contact does not do Brayshaw harm? Whether it s football act or not is relevant only in context of mitigation.

I don't believe Maynard set out to harm Brayshaw, but his actions were at a minimum careless. If you are going to take head injuries seriously then you have to start from a premise that the party initiating contact has the obligation to ensure that there is no harm done. This is a decision that opens up a loophole ina n area your don't want loopholes.

I'm sorry but who puts their hands out if they're falling into someone else? You would absolutely turn your body to protect yourself. Your face, sternum etc.

He attempted a smother on the run playing at full intensity/velocity. If that's suspendable then the game has changed dramatically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bulldogsthru&thru

I'm sorry but who puts their hands out if they're falling into someone else? You would absolutely turn your body to protect yourself. Your face, sternum etc.

He attempted a smother on the run playing at full intensity/velocity. If that's suspendable then the game has changed dramatically.

---

I mean, I had heaps of collisions with dudes playing basketball/footy. And I never knocked one of them out with my shoulder "protecting myself".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EasternWest

I mean, I had heaps of collisions with dudes playing basketball/footy. And I never knocked one of them out with my shoulder "protecting myself".

---

Were you in the air at the time of collision?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bulldogsthru&thru

Were you in the air at the time of collision?

---

Playing basketball? Never.

Actually that's probably true I couldn't jump.

Two things I'd do.

If you concuss someone, no matter how otherwise legal your (possibly "football") action is, then you get suspended (I guess still some grey area if the offending player wasn't the instigator). By definition if you hurt someone badly enough in an incident that they get concussed, then it was an unsafe action, and you haven't shown the appropriate duty of care.

In this example Maynard was justified in smothering, and maybe even justified in protecting himself, but as soon as Brayshaw gets concussed then Maynard is done. Also 400 milliseconds or not if Brayshaw was Maynard's girlfriend or grandma then there is no way he "protects himself" like that, so he absolutely had other options.

Secondly, all finals suspensions are served in season. So if Maynard did get suspended he'd play the rest of the finals but get a delayed start to next season. But to make the penalty hurt properly all finals suspensions are worth double. So if he did get 2 weeks then he wouldn't get to play till round 5. Greene would've copped 12 weeks for his umpire bullshit. Takes the conflict of interest that ensures the league finds loopholes for stars (think Cotchin on Shiel) out of it, and is a pretty harsh penalty that adds up real quickly if you get carried away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soupman

Two things I'd do.

If you concuss someone, no matter how otherwise legal your (possibly "football") action is, then you get suspended (I guess still some grey area if the offending player wasn't the instigator). By definition if you hurt someone badly enough in an incident that they get concussed, then it was an unsafe action, and you haven't shown the appropriate duty of care..

---

Are all these all up for suspension under your scenario

https://twitter.com/kanecornes/statu...16793283739889

Should Cordys famous knee to Ward have resulted in a suspension?

And didn't Brayshaw get concussed by a football?

I get the league needs to take concussions seriously but it reaches a point where players will second guess football acts , which will then be ruled out which will slowly lead to the sport becoming near non-contact. Perhaps there's some middle ground here but it's gonna get really really hazy.

Lynch was not suspended when he hit Keath. I thought that was worse than the Maynard one as he was nowhere in the contest.

https://twitter.com/kanecornes/statu...92107686240662

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bulldogsthru&thru

I'm sorry but who puts their hands out if they're falling into someone else? You would absolutely turn your body to protect yourself. Your face, sternum etc.

He attempted a smother on the run playing at full intensity/velocity. If that's suspendable then the game has changed dramatically.

---

The running jump and smother happens all the time in the game and often results in no smother and no collision that causes maiming of an opponent. Putting your hands out to avoid hurting an opponent is natural in most cases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bornadog

Lynch was not suspended when he hit Keath. I thought that was worse than the Maynard one as he was nowhere in the contest.

https://twitter.com/kanecornes/statu...92107686240662

---

One bad decision doesn't justify another bad decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocket Science

I might need the idea that Maynard pretends to be 'tough' because he's actually only fake 'tough' explained to me.

---

Not sure what you are exactly trying to say?
Fake toughness?
One part of being tough is that you?re able to take without complaint what you dish out.

All you need to do is check out 2018 gf. The Ryan bump on him shows he can?t take what he gives out. The whining after the Sheed mark is another tell tale. Never given away a deserved free kick in his career.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bulldogsthru&thru

I'm sorry but who puts their hands out if they're falling into someone else? You would absolutely turn your body to protect yourself. Your face, sternum etc.

He attempted a smother on the run playing at full intensity/velocity. If that's suspendable then the game has changed dramatically.

---

Falling? He was jumping.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soupman

Secondly, all finals suspensions are served in season. So if Maynard did get suspended he'd play the rest of the finals but get a delayed start to next season. But to make the penalty hurt properly all finals suspensions are worth double. So if he did get 2 weeks then he wouldn't get to play till round 5. Greene would've copped 12 weeks for his umpire bullshit. Takes the conflict of interest that ensures the league finds loopholes for stars (think Cotchin on Shiel) out of it, and is a pretty harsh penalty that adds up real quickly if you get carried away.

---

Sorry but that’s just silly. Who cares about missing early games next year if you’ve won your team a final with a thuggish act.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soupman

Two things I'd do.

If you concuss someone, no matter how otherwise legal your (possibly "football") action is, then you get suspended (I guess still some grey area if the offending player wasn't the instigator). By definition if you hurt someone badly enough in an incident that they get concussed, then it was an unsafe action, and you haven't shown the appropriate duty of care.

In this example Maynard was justified in smothering, and maybe even justified in protecting himself, but as soon as Brayshaw gets concussed then Maynard is done. Also 400 milliseconds or not if Brayshaw was Maynard's girlfriend or grandma then there is no way he "protects himself" like that, so he absolutely had other options.

Secondly, all finals suspensions are served in season. So if Maynard did get suspended he'd play the rest of the finals but get a delayed start to next season. But to make the penalty hurt properly all finals suspensions are worth double. So if he did get 2 weeks then he wouldn't get to play till round 5. Greene would've copped 12 weeks for his umpire bullshit. Takes the conflict of interest that ensures the league finds loopholes for stars (think Cotchin on Shiel) out of it, and is a pretty harsh penalty that adds up real quickly if you get carried away.

---

Maybe he hates his Grandma?