If Clisby gets more weeks than C. Brown then...

[rjay 24,883]

Brown lucky with 3 weeks with his poor record and the fact that impact with a boot, which broke a player's nose, was found to be medium. I wonder what high is, death.

Found that a bit strange 'Redleg'. Medium???

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Should have been classified high impact, not medium. The man had his nose broken!

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Brown:

2011 - spent a total of 6 round suspended for two incidents (off ball elbow hit to Callan Ward's face, high contact bump on Barry Hall who's head was over the ball)

2012 - suspended for 6 rounds in his last game for the season, dragged over to 2013 (high front bump on Aidan Riley)

2013 - suspension from 2012 aside now faces 3 round ban (off ball foot contact to James Strauss' face breaking his nose)

3 years, 4 incidents involving opposition's faces and a total of 15 rounds suspended (if he takes this recent offer).

If they thought he deliberately hit Strauss' face then he should have got more than 3, particularly considering his history and the fact that it broke Strauss' nose.

Almost as much a joke as the commentators who's only reaction was "ouch" then silence and then commended Brown's bump into Trengrove... how about commending Trengrove for holding the tackle despite getting elbowed in the face.

Edited August 12, 2013 by PJ_12345

[mauriesy 7,261]

Brown lucky with 3 weeks with his poor record and the fact that impact with a boot, which broke a player's nose, was found to be medium. I wonder what high is, death.

Yep, trying very hard to work out how kicking someone in the head and breaking their nose is only 'medium' impact.

[mrtwister 652]

Kicking him like a football would be high impact. Poking at him while rolling on the ground is not the same impact. The fact it was the bottom of his boots that contacted his face is what broke his nose, not the amount of force in the kick.

[Redleg 40,837]

Kicking him like a football would be high impact. Poking at him while rolling on the ground is not the same impact. The fact it was the bottom of his boots that contacted his face is what broke his nose, not the amount of force in the kick.

Glad it wasn't his eye that was hit. What would we be saying then? Remember there are stops on the bottom of the boot. That makes it more dangerous.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Kicking him like a football would be high impact. Poking at him while rolling on the ground is not the same impact. The fact it was the bottom of his boots that contacted his face is what broke his nose, not the amount of force in the kick.

Just got hit by a parked car but didn't break a bone, not even a bruise! Using your theory I dont know why...

[sue 9,096]

Kicking him like a football would be high impact. Poking at him while rolling on the ground is not the same impact. The fact it was the bottom of his boots that contacted his face is what broke his nose, not the amount of force in the kick.

You ought to have a closer look at the video. He was kicked in the face with the most force that someone can muster in that position. (Someone with muscles, not most of us keyboard warriors). Lucky he didn't take an eye out.

Anyway, well done to the AFL for giving him at least 3. On past performances, I wouldn't have been too surprised if they failed to do anything. I wonder where the borderline between reckless and deliberate is though. Perhaps it was recklessly deliberate :>)

Those TV commentators hardly noticed. I wonder how many replays and comments would have been made if one of our guys kicked Ablett in the face like that? (rhetorical question)

Edited August 12, 2013 by sue

[Arrow 1,257]

Kicking him like a football would be high impact. Poking at him while rolling on the ground is not the same impact. The fact it was the bottom of his boots that contacted his face is what broke his nose, not the amount of force in the kick.

Kicking him like a football would be dead set close to murder. Ridiculous. Even with brass knuckles if I lean them against you, they don't do damage.. You use them properly it's not just assault, it's assault with a deadly weapon. The same applies here.

[Sideshow Bob 2,343]

Top of the things that sh!t me to tears - incidents like this that don't get picked up on match day by umpires, yet warrant a suspension. The goal that happened as a direct result of this to Gold Coast stands, then other incidents ( not that any happened this week ) get a report, a 50m penalty (and generally result in a goal) and then get thrown out as the umpires over reacted to nothing incidents.

Possibly could have cost us the win on Saturday - certainly would have stopped gold coasts momentum,by adjudicating the brown incident at the time of the game. I don't get why umpires just get that so wrong

[Jaded No More 68,867]

Not severe enough of a punishment, but at least it got reviewed and punished. Players like Brown have no place in our game. If he wants to be a gutless [censored] he can go somewhere else.

Talk about small man syndrome.

[Fitzy36 29]

AFL just tweeted saying Clisby gets 3 weeks..... WTF!?!?!

[sue 9,096]

AFL just tweeted saying Clisby gets 3 weeks..... WTF!?!?!

Typical of the AFL. A bit of push and shove with unfortunate consequences has a similar penalty to deliberately kicking someone in the face.

[Jaded No More 68,867]

Man the AFL MRP can get stuffed.

I bet Brown challenges and gets off. Typical garbage from an inconsistent and poorly managed system.

[titan_uranus 24,974]

You can't 'recklessly' kick someone in the head. Either it is 'negligent' (i.e. you clearly weren't watching and had no intent whatsover, but extended your leg and hit them) or you knew what you were doing.

Brown's actions weren't 'reckless'. They were intentional.

Moreover, how could a kick to the head which breaks the victim's nose not be 'severe'? That is insanely ridiculous.

Finally, his charge was 'misconduct in that he made unreasonable and unnecessary contact to the face'. Sorry MRP, do you mean 'kicking'?

Campbell Brown is the lowest AFL player I've seen in years, if not ever.

The MRP has a collective IQ no greater than a brick.

Edited August 12, 2013 by titan_uranus

[Redleg 40,837]

I wonder where the borderline between reckless and deliberate is though. Perhaps it was recklessly deliberate :>)

Or deliberately reckless.

[Nasher 33,607]

It's pretty funny reading the Gold Coast subforum on BigFooty. According to them, Brown's was purely accidental and Clisby's was worse than Judd's chicken wing on Leigh Adams.

[Jaded No More 68,867]

It's pretty funny reading the Gold Coast subforum on BigFooty. According to them, Brown's was purely accidental and Clisby's was worse than Judd's chicken wing on Leigh Adams.

They are GC supporters. They've been watching football for two years. They know nothing.

[Redleg 40,837]

It's pretty funny reading the Gold Coast subforum on BigFooty. According to them, Brown's was purely accidental and Clisby's was worse than Judd's chicken wing on Leigh Adams.

What did Clisby actually do? He has copped severe impact ( 4 points ) while Brown got medium impact ( 2 points ) for a kick to the face that breaks a guys nose.

[Nasher 33,607]

What did Clisby actually do? He has copped severe impact ( 4 points ) while Brown got medium impact ( 2 points ) for a kick to the face that breaks a guys nose.

Dislocated the guy's shoulder apparently. On TV it looked innocuous.

Not saying whose version of events is right, I was just amused by how the entire range of possible interpretations have been touched upon by the supporters of both clubs.

[Return to Glory 8,411]

Well McVeigh just showed how bright he is. Declared C.Brown innocent. Twerp.

You mean 'I know nothing about injections' Mc Veigh.

[Return to Glory 8,411]

You can't 'recklessly' kick someone in the head. Either it is 'negligent' (i.e. you clearly weren't watching and had no intent whatsover, but extended your leg and hit them) or you knew what you were doing.

Brown's actions weren't 'reckless'. They were intentional.

Moreover, how could a kick to the head which breaks the victim's nose not be 'severe'? That is insanely ridiculous.

Finally, his charge was 'misconduct in that he made unreasonable and unnecessary contact to the face'. Sorry MRP, do you mean 'kicking'?

Campbell Brown is the lowest AFL player I've seen in years, if not ever.

The MRP has a collective IQ no greater than a brick.

Why do you insult bricks?

Laughable result.

[CHAMP 347]

IIRC he buried his opponent in a tackle and a shoulder (already heavily strapped) popped out.

The MRP works largely upon consequence rather than the event itself.

[Return to Glory 8,411]

IIRC he buried his opponent in a tackle and a shoulder (already heavily strapped) popped out.

The MRP works largely upon consequence rather than the event itself.

CHAMP, I don't see how that adds up based on today. Edited August 12, 2013 by Return to Glory

[Redleg 40,837]

Dislocated the guy's shoulder apparently. On TV it looked innocuous.

Not saying whose version of events is right, I was just amused by how the entire range of possible interpretations have been touched upon by the supporters of both clubs.

Just watched it again on AFL site.

Terlich gets up and Sexton is on the ground. He rolls over to all fours and extends his arms and arches his back. Looks OK at that point and the incident which was not shown is over.

He then goes to get up and the camera pans away.

Later is seen leaving the ground with two trainers and shoulder injured.

It appears he has hurt his shoulder when he got up and no one is near him. If that is the case, Clisby must get off as he hasn't caused the severe impact, whatever it is.

On the other hand if my summary is innacurate, so is my conclusion.

Interesting that a kick to the face which breaks a nose is less than body contact, as described by the MRP, which allegedly injures a shoulder.

Unless there is other video evidence that is damning, I would be fighting it.