The inconsistencies in how to process and grade reports and charges have highlighted the gaps. They'll have to fix it.
Printable View
I guess it's no wonder the afl is facing legal action.
It boggles the mind they haven't got this right. Even the players are bewildered the outcome and not the action is punished.
Considering we are also facing legal action for concussion (I mean even aside from that surely we should've anyway) did anyone else find it peculiar/bewildering that there was no concussion test done on Bailey?
I mean he appeared fine but Pickett cannonballed poorly through his head, surely at the very least we had a duty of care to assess it. It wasn't long before half time too so it isn't as if Bailey would've missed much gametime.
If he happens to have delayed symptoms or something this is gonna look real bad for us as a responsible employer.
Another side to the Pickett bump is that Bailey was in his kicking action. Probably the most vulnerable you can be. There's no way to brace yourself. 2 weeks is negligent.
McAdam 3 weeks
Compare the red card given to England's Steward in the 6 Nations game v Ireland for a high tackle.
Sent off, team plays a man down. I appreciate we don't have a send off rule, but maybe for high tackles we should.
Or it becomes like for like if a players goes off injured in the case of a head high reportable offence the offending player cannot come back onto the field until the injured player does including their rehab.
This will be a very stiff penalty if the injured player is forced into retirement because of the head high hit.
I think we are trying to make the solution too complicated and we just need to come up with some rules and penalties that has the clubs modifying the way players tackle and bump more than finding clever ways to punish the offending player on match day.
Minimising the number of incidents from occurring is more important than defining the punishment.
If a player is found guilty perhaps an automatic 3 week suspension as a minimum is sufficient.
Clubs wont be happy losing players for multiple weeks and will work on technique and attitudes towards bumps etc to ensure it won't happen.
For some reason I cant warm to red cards but perhaps I haven't got the point of it.
It was suggested on Reddit and initially I had the normal reflex "don't change what has worked for years" thoughts but could banning the bump or reducing it's use be a valid pathway to go down?
I don't think I'd be in favour of a blanket ban but I think if we banned any bumps that were either front on or where the bumper left the ground in the action regardless of whether or not they were high I think that could rule out a lot of dangerous movements that aren't really football actions anymore, while still allowing for shepherds and contesting of the ball.
Broad deserved 4 weeks. No need to slam someone into the ground like he did
https://static.ffx.io/images/$zoom_0...78bf28f7530d65
Broads was at least a footy tackle. Sure it's dangerous and should be stamped out. But it was a tackle motion. Pickett's wasn't. Pickett was just trying to kill a guy. Broad got 4 because the victim was concussed. It's just a joke of a system.
I do wonder if it will be used against them in the lawsuit. Like has the afl done enough to discourage certain movements. I don't think they have.
Not sure if anyone saw the incident where De Koning kneed Stanley pretty hard in the ribs at the Centre Bounce.
The AFL has now acted:Quote:
Tom De Koning has his fine for kneeing Rhys Stanley wiped off by the tribunal. Cats earlier sought clarity from the league on what they believe is a ruck "trend", with Chris Scott telling AFL360 the AFL told them:"You can't do that". Blues argued "football action"
Quote:
THE AFL will today send a memo to all clubs stating that Tom De Koning's action should have been a free kick and isn't permitted under the banner of unnecessary contact. Doesn't explain the tribunal decision, but the league wants to stamp out the no-jump, knee-up technique.
How many weeks for Lynch's hit on Keath?
Yeh I think they'll excuse it as a football action despite the fact he didn't contest the ball and dropped his shoulder, directly causing a concussion.
It's what forwards should do to defenders.
Nothing to see, don't get in their way.
It's a Bulldog player hurt so if history serves me correctly you take off 1 to 2 weeks for that. Won't even be looked at or a fine.
Lynch could have raised his arms to take the mark like players do in the same circumstances all day during games. He chose not to, and took the player out instead.
Yes he was looking at the ball, but his intent was to impact the man. We have to stop making excuses for people if we want to limit the risk, which is what we should be doing.
I hate to say This but Lynch will get off as the afl trubunal hates us
This incident should be used as a concussiom case, and Lynch should get 2 weeks minimum. Keath is going to be out for at least 2 , and hoping no lingering side effects... but i fear the worst to allow for player welfare.
Won't really matter in the end as Lynch has a broken foot and will miss more than whatever the suspension would be.