2 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

Not harsh. He's done this three or four times already and he's only been playing as many seasons. Have to stamp this out. 

Just strange they haven't done likewise with Buddy Franklin, even though he lined up someone last year and has done it for years. 

I think it's on the harsh side and I think they take the injury in to account too much. Add 1 extra week for the injury but if not injured I think this would've been 1 or 2 with the guilty plea. 

He's a good player and mainly a ball player. Players across the comp need to get the message that deliberate acts highly likely to cause concussion must be outlawed, but this seems just a bit too much. Sustained strong penalties for everyone will do that better than random targeted decisions that the tribunal/MRP often produce. 

Just watched it again, targeted attack on the head. Sucked in to Cameron, massive blow for the Giants considering they want to play finals this year.

Their draw early reads....

demons

geelong

Sydney

port

saints

hawks

freo 

suns

dogs

Could possibly be 2 and 7. 

Early guilty plea and texting the bloke whose head you've just taken off should count for nothing. 

New panel and a new tone is set.

Stiff to get 4 weeks. 

If he had of hit the bloke in a different area of his head and he played on, He would have only gotten one week id say. Luck has a lot to do with it 

I agree. 4 weeks is pretty harsh.

Glad he received at least 1 week though.

 

Was surprised to hear four weeks. I was thinking 2 weeks.

I've always thought that it is the action that should be penalised, not the outcome. If the action is wrong, it is wrong. Unfortunately, I don't think whether or not someone is injured should be factored into the length of the suspension.

Does this set the precedent that all head-high bumps this season will get four weeks?

Well, I was thinking he'd get 4 weeks, down to 3 with an early plea, until I realised how many times he'd already lined up opposition players. He's an out and out sniper and I'm sure his record went against him.

Edited March 15, 20169 yr by AdamFarr

I thought three down to two.

Four is harsh I think. 

3 hours ago, Gorgoroth said:

I thought three down to two.

Four is harsh I think. 

the guy he hit is out for 6 weeks

Yeah I know, still it's never been you get roughly weeks your opponent misses through injury.

8 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Yeah I know, still it's never been you get roughly weeks your opponent misses through injury.

I reckon that's the way it is heading.

"an eye for an eye" penalty system.

The nonsensical nature of penalty by injury is an innocuous bump can cause maximum damage and a line up from 5 metres and take the head can cause nil damage.

Is anyone in any doubt that if the Oliver tackle had resulted in Young spending a couple of weeks on the sideline that he would have only got a fine ?

In my mind Cameron got 4 weeks purely based on the outcome of the injury  - whilst he needed to be suspended for choosing to bump, jumping off the ground and taking the head he is unlucky due to the severity of the damage - I have seen a lot worst bumps cause a lot less damage. 

32 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Yeah I know, still it's never been you get roughly weeks your opponent misses through injury.

he didn't. he got 1/3 less  

56 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

the guy he hit is out for 6 weeks

and you can hit/bump someone fairly in a marking contest or hip and shoulder and they miss 10 weeks.  so what?  collision injuries happen and its too simplistic to say and eye for an eye.  

if that gets 4 weeks, what would a deliberate elbow/punch off the ball get?

1 minute ago, DubDee said:

and you can hit/bump someone fairly in a marking contest or hip and shoulder and they miss 10 weeks.  so what?  collision injuries happen and its too simplistic to say and eye for an eye.  

 

I didnt say I agree with it  - but I do suggest it is eye for an eye.

You answered your own question  -  if an injury happens due to a fair contest then that's footy - but if you choose to bump, the more severe the injury the greater the penalty - that's the message they are sending. How often is it being reported - "we will see what the injury report is"

The other thing of note is hitting/bumping/tackling someone fairly. The definition of fairly seems to be fluid with MRP. 

2 minutes ago, DubDee said:

and you can hit/bump someone fairly in a marking contest or hip and shoulder and they miss 10 weeks.  so what?  collision injuries happen and its too simplistic to say and eye for an eye.  

if that gets 4 weeks, what would a deliberate elbow/punch off the ball get?

yes i understand, but i don't think cameron's action was accidental and we all know he has form

cameron's bump was intentional and at least reckless and didn't exercise due care, and that is why consequences do and should come into play. fcs he fractured the guy's jaw. 

13 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

yes i understand, but i don't think cameron's action was accidental and we all know he has form

cameron's bump was intentional and at least reckless and didn't exercise due care, and that is why consequences do and should come into play. fcs he fractured the guy's jaw. 

didnt viney fracture Lynch's jaw?  

I think we are roughly agreeing - I just think the system for how many weeks someone gets is BS

15 minutes ago, nutbean said:

I didnt say I agree with it  - but I do suggest it is eye for an eye.

You answered your own question  -  if an injury happens due to a fair contest then that's footy - but if you choose to bump, the more severe the injury the greater the penalty - that's the message they are sending. How often is it being reported - "we will see what the injury report is"

The other thing of note is hitting/bumping/tackling someone fairly. The definition of fairly seems to be fluid with MRP. 

yeah I wasnt having a go at you - just the system

cheers

Just now, DubDee said:

didnt viney fracture Lynch's jaw?  

I think we are roughly agreeing - I just think the system for how many weeks someone gets is BS

viney situation quite different. viney was shorter, was stationary at impact, didn't leave the ground and just turned his body to meet the impact. he also, a split second earlier was in a position to get to the ball first depending on the bounce of the ball. lynch was also sandwiched by the other demon player following him. anyway it was deemed accidental as a result.

and as i pointed out it wasn't quite eye for eye as cameron didn't get 6 weeks. personally i thought it would be 4 down to three for accepting guilt but they didn't offer that.

I did say "roughly"