7 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

why the [censored] would you keep your eye on the ball when you are going to bump someone. crazy statement

There is truth in that. Knowing how severe the penalty is for hitting the head, if you decide to bump the first thing you should do is look at where the player is whom you want to bump so you can aim to miss his head.

1 minute ago, sue said:

There is truth in that. Knowing how severe the penalty is for hitting the head, if you decide to bump the first thing you should do is look at where the player is whom you want to bump so you can aim to miss his head.

But if you do hit him high then it appears as if your intent was to whack rather than get the ball.

Bumping the shoulder is allowed.

Just now, Bitter but optimistic said:

But if you do hit him high then it appears as if your intent was to whack rather than get the ball.

exactamundo, bitters. he was trying to bump, not get the pill. perfectly legitimate (as long as you don't hit the head).  

1 minute ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

But if you do hit him high then it appears as if your intent was to whack rather than get the ball.

Yes, that follows.   But it doesn't mean that merely looking at the bumpee and then hitting him anywhere is grounds for getting rubbed out. We seem to be heading down that path.

11 hours ago, chook fowler said:

You watch Pedo will be rubbed out and Cameron will get off

Don't worry!!!! the afl integrity unit are on the case as we speak , it will all get sorted out 

Not as cynical as some. Pederson will get a week, Cameron two.

 

Definitely will go. Looked worse than it was, but he hit him borderline high and had plenty of chance to back out. It's exactly what they are trying to stop.

when does the mrp do its stuff?

If he misses a week does this mean his chances of winning the Brownlow are cactus?

3 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Bumping the shoulder is allowed.

I can't tell from the vision I saw where contact was. I hope you are right and it was the shoulder. It didn't look great from the head on vision, but at least the player got up and continued on..

If not I have something he can use in his defence. Show the film of Merrett's attack on his face witha forearm, as he marked the ball. That left him with a broken nose and a no charge to answer for Merrett. Don't think the Saint went off bleeding profusely from the face.

34 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I can't tell from the vision I saw where contact was. I hope you are right and it was the shoulder. It didn't look great from the head on vision, but at least the player got up and continued on..

If not I have something he can use in his defence. Show the film of Merrett's attack on his face witha forearm, as he marked the ball. That left him with a broken nose and a no charge to answer for Merrett. Don't think the Saint went off bleeding profusely from the face.

I don't think you are allowed to bring up other cases ( or non cases) as a defence for your own charge. In my opinion that is something you should be allowed to do. It would lead to more consistency. (Noted that it is hard to allow "precedence" when interpretation changes from one season (week?) to the next - Oliver's tackle and fine being a prime example)

9 minutes ago, nutbean said:

I don't think you are allowed to bring up other cases ( or non cases) as a defence for your own charge. In my opinion that is something you should be allowed to do. It would lead to more consistency. (Noted that it is hard to allow "precedence" when interpretation changes from one season (week?) to the next - Oliver's tackle and fine being a prime example)

I agree. But obviously only during the same year.  At least then the AFL would have to explicitly change the interpretation every couple of weeks.

I reckon him making contact with the Saints player's head is just another in a growing list of #PedoMyths

Pedersen has only been fined.

I still dispute that he made contact to the head, but it's a good result for us.

2 hours ago, Mr. White said:

If he misses a week does this mean his chances of winning the Brownlow are cactus?

I sure hope not as I got him at the overly generous odds of $5001-1

3 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Pedersen has only been fined.

I still dispute that he made contact to the head, but it's a good result for us.

Fair outcome and good for us.

Great news.

He's a lucky boy!

Anything close to the head nowadays and you get a holiday.

Cameron Pedersen, Melbourne, has been charged with engaging in rough conduct against Nathan Wright, St Kilda, during the fourth quarter of the Round Four NAB Challenge match between Melbourne and St Kilda, played at Etihad Stadium on Sunday March 13, 2016. 

In summary, his $1500 sanction can be reduced to a $1000 sanction with an early guilty plea. 

Great news! I see Pederson as the only real 'swingman' we've got atm. We need him to give Max a spell. He is a genuinely good mark and a good kick. He could go back and forward. I hope Frost will surpass him but at the moment Pedo is better.

6 hours ago, Delusional demon 82 said:

Don't worry!!!! the afl integrity unit are on the case as we speak , it will all get sorted out 

Never in doubt!  

You Beauty Full side Round one

haha Daisy Thomas not only useless but he cops 2 weeks

Onya Mick

Great news,

couple of seasons ago I think he woulda got weeks when they were really cracking down on the bump.  Good to see the MRP might finally be seeing sense.

Cameron sent directly to the tribunal.  Two weeks minimum, I guess.