Jump to content

MARK Le CRAS

Bobby McKenzie
Bobby McKenzie
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Posted

Do Eagles players ever get suspended? Can't remember the last one.

Le Cras gets off with a fine because of 'low Impact'.  Because the player he collected to the head got up and played out the game it was classed as 'low impact'. Now, didn't the Hogan and Lewis 'victims' get up and play out the game? Problem was they were not wearing a blue and yellow jumper. Talk about inconsistent penalties.

  • Quote
    •  
    10 minutes ago, Bobby McKenzie said:

    Do Eagles players ever get suspended? Can't remember the last one.

    Le Cras gets off with a fine because of 'low Impact'.  Because the player he collected to the head got up and played out the game it was classed as 'low impact'. Now, didn't the Hogan and Lewis 'victims' get up and play out the game? Problem was they were not wearing a blue and yellow jumper. Talk about inconsistent penalties.

    Nah, the problem was they weren't playing Carlton, so the opposition doctor didn't put in a report of delayed onset concussion.

    They are using the consequence as a factor of determining impact.  I can see the logic in it, but it can lead to inconsistent, obviously bulldust outcomes, because it comes down to the word of the club doctors, who are going to exhibit varying degrees of conservatism (to give them the benefit of the doubt).

  • Quote
    10 minutes ago, Bobby McKenzie said:

    Do Eagles players ever get suspended? Can't remember the last one.

    Le Cras gets off with a fine because of 'low Impact'.  Because the player he collected to the head got up and played out the game it was classed as 'low impact'. Now, didn't the Hogan and Lewis 'victims' get up and play out the game? Problem was they were not wearing a blue and yellow jumper. Talk about inconsistent penalties.

    Wet Toast are protected by AFL and their umpires

  • Quote
    •  

    The use of 'consequences' in grading penalties is ridiculous.

    I can see it now, police pull an erratic driver over, do the breath test.. "oh, you should probably be in hospital with that blood alcohol level, but everything is fine, you didn't hit anyone today".

    Meanwhile, at the MRP - "Oh, you threw you weight into someone's head while they were looking the other way? No problem, they got up. We'll check again next time to see if you've killed anyone."

    And up on the peninsular - "You launched a spread of nuclear missiles at Seoul and Tokyo? Oh, they all failed to detonate, so it's fine, just promise not to improve your fuses."

  • Quote

    The system is an absolute farce! 

    It has zero credibility and must be changed before next season.

  • Quote

    2 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

    The use of 'consequences' in grading penalties is ridiculous.

    I can see it now, police pull an erratic driver over, do the breath test.. "oh, you should probably be in hospital with that blood alcohol level, but everything is fine, you didn't hit anyone today".

    Meanwhile, at the MRP - "Oh, you threw you weight into someone's head while they were looking the other way? No problem, they got up. We'll check again next time to see if you've killed anyone."

    And up on the peninsular - "You launched a spread of nuclear missiles at Seoul and Tokyo? Oh, they all failed to detonate, so it's fine, just promise not to improve your fuses."

    You would expect to see differing penalties for:

    • A drunk driver who doesn't crash or kill anyone
    • A sober driver who crashes and kills someone
    • A drunk driver who crashes and kills someone

    Would you not?

  • Quote
    1 hour ago, Nasher said:

    You would expect to see differing penalties for:

    • A drunk driver who doesn't crash or kill anyone
    • A sober driver who crashes and kills someone
    • A drunk driver who crashes and kills someone

    Would you not?

    If the MRP had any involvement, we'd eventually see someone penalised for being sober and not crashing/killing someone.

  • Quote
    •  

    These medical report suspensions are clearly open to abuse. I can see this easily happening.

    Club X plays Club Z in final round. Both have secured a finals spot. Superstar from club X whacks tagger from club Z who continues playing with no ill effects. Club X doctor says tagger has suffered from delayed concussion. Superstar misses finals games and impacts club Z'd chances. 

     

  • Quote
    7 hours ago, Nasher said:

    Nah, the problem was they weren't playing Carlton, so the opposition doctor didn't put in a report of delayed onset concussion.

    They are using the consequence as a factor of determining impact.  I can see the logic in it, but it can lead to inconsistent, obviously bulldust outcomes, because it comes down to the word of the club doctors, who are going to exhibit varying degrees of conservatism (to give them the benefit of the doubt).

    Not to mention the same impact to different players can have differing outcomes

  • Quote

    Interesting to see what the Cats player who jumped up and elbowed Hodge in the head gets. If it's anything less than 4 weeks it's a joke in comparison to Lewis' penalty

  • Quote

    The real problem with the system is the inability to hold it too account without being exposed to more pain.

    In 2 weeks when a different player from another club does what LeCras did and gets a week his club will still take it on the chin instead of challenging it due to the possibility of an extra week suspension.

    I simply can't see that being legal long term. At some point a desperate club is not only going to challenge a suspension but challenge the assertion that asking to represent your opinion opens you up to more sanctions. It'll happen in a Final and be dragged out for a month so said player can play in the Finals Series, and then force the AFL to review.

    Its a miracle it hasn't happened yet.

  • Quote

    The AFL are always going to favour the interstate clubs and the top 4 in Vic. Have for decades. Wont change unless you change those at the top at AFL level who can change their agenda.

    Unless we become a top 4 Vic club!! :)

  • Quote
    6 hours ago, Nasher said:

    You would expect to see differing penalties for:

    • A drunk driver who doesn't crash or kill anyone
    • A sober driver who crashes and kills someone
    • A drunk driver who crashes and kills someone

    Would you not?

    But you wouldn't want to see penalties for

    - a sober driver, within the speed limit, driving safely, who crashes into someone after a bird flies into their open window.

    While you would want to see penalties for

    - a drunk, speeding driver doing their own imaginary slalom course during pick-up time at a primary school, who manages to miss everyone.

     

    And yes, I do think penalties for drunk or dangerous driving need to be seriously boosted.

  • Quote
    10 hours ago, Bobby McKenzie said:

    Do Eagles players ever get suspended? Can't remember the last one.

    Le Cras gets off with a fine because of 'low Impact'.  Because the player he collected to the head got up and played out the game it was classed as 'low impact'. Now, didn't the Hogan and Lewis 'victims' get up and play out the game? Problem was they were not wearing a blue and yellow jumper. Talk about inconsistent penalties.

    I cannot find much to disagree with in that BM.

    Spot on.

  • Quote

    • Author
    3 hours ago, america de cali said:

    These medical report suspensions are clearly open to abuse. I can see this easily happening.

    Club X plays Club Z in final round. Both have secured a finals spot. Superstar from club X whacks tagger from club Z who continues playing with no ill effects. Club X doctor says tagger has suffered from delayed concussion. Superstar misses finals games and impacts club Z'd chances. 

     

     
     

     Good point america but think the doctor who claimed delayed concussion should have been the club Y one not Club X. Am I right here?

  • Quote

    My god, if we are going to rely on doctors so much, it needs some sort of objective system - an independent, AFL  doctor. 

     

    Imagine if we played the Bombers in the last round, were facing them in the finals a week later and one of our players gave Daniher a well-deserved punch in the moustache - how "objective" would dear old Doc Reid be?    

  • Quote

    Trusting the docs is a bit like self-reporting banks !!

    Theory v Practice

  • Quote
    50 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

    But you wouldn't want to see penalties for

    - a sober driver, within the speed limit, driving safely, who crashes into someone after a bird flies into their open window.

    While you would want to see penalties for

    - a drunk, speeding driver doing their own imaginary slalom course during pick-up time at a primary school, who manages to miss everyone.

     

    And yes, I do think penalties for drunk or dangerous driving need to be seriously boosted.

    I don't think that's an argument against using consequences as an input in to the penalty, which is the position you took (or at least, how I interpreted it). I think my examples show that the consequence is relevant and you appear to agree. I think both our arguments lend support to the idea that the weighting of the consequence should be significantly scaled down, but I'm yet to be convinced they should be discarded altogether. A cherry on top rather than the determining factor if you will.

    By the way I completely agree with you that the outcomes at present are BS and are in need of reform. Just trying to flesh out the logic in where the process fails.

  • Quote

    • Archived

    This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREVIEW: Fremantle

      A month is a long time in AFL football. The proof of this is in the current state of the two teams contesting against each other early this Saturday afternoon at the MCG. It’s hard to fathom that when Melbourne and Fremantle kicked off the 2025 season, the former looked like being a major player in this year’s competition after it came close to beating one of the favourites in the GWS Giants while the latter was smashed by Geelong to the tune of 78 points and looked like rubbish. Fast forward to today and the Demons are low on confidence and appear panic stricken as their winless streak heads towards an even half dozen and pressure mounts on the coach and team leadership.  Meanwhile, the Dockers have recovered their composure and now sit in the top eight. They are definitely on the up and up and look most likely winners this weekend against a team which they have recently dominated and which struggles to find enough passages to the goals to trouble the scorers. And with that, Fremantle will head to the MCG, feeling very good about itself after demolishing Richmond in the Barossa Valley with Josh Treacy coming off a six goal haul and facing up to a Melbourne defence already without Jake Lever and a shaky Steven May needing to pass a fitness test just to make it onto the field of play. 

        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 06

      The Easter Round kicks off in style with a Thursday night showdown between Brisbane and Collingwood, as both sides look to solidify their spots inside the Top 4 early in the season. Good Friday brings a double-header, with Carlton out to claim consecutive wins when they face the struggling Kangaroos, while later that night the Eagles host the Bombers in Perth, still chasing their first victory of the year. Saturday features another marquee clash as the resurgent Crows look to rebound from back-to-back losses against a formidable GWS outfit. That evening, all eyes will be on Marvel Stadium where Damien Hardwick returns to face his old side—the Tigers—coaching the Suns at a ground he's never hidden his disdain for. Sunday offers two crucial contests where the prize is keeping touch with the Top 8. First, Sydney and Port Adelaide go head-to-head, followed by a fierce battle between the Bulldogs and the Saints. Then, Easter Monday delivers the traditional clash between two bitter rivals, both desperate for a win to stay in touch with the top end of the ladder. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons?

        • Thanks
      • 9 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Essendon

      What were they thinking? I mean by “they” the coaching panel and team selectors who chose the team to play against an opponent who, like Melbourne, had made a poor start to the season and who they appeared perfectly capable of beating in what was possibly the last chance to turn the season around.It’s no secret that the Demons’ forward line is totally dysfunctional, having opened the season barely able to average sixty points per game which means there has been no semblance of any system from the team going forward into attack. Nevertheless, on Saturday night at the Adelaide Oval in one of the Gather Round showcase games, Melbourne, with Max Gawn dominating the hit outs against a depleted Essendon ruck resulting from Nick Bryan’s early exit, finished just ahead in clearances won and found itself inside the 50 metre arc 51 times to 43. The end result was a final score that had the Bombers winning 15.6 (96) to 8.9 (57). On balance, one could expect this to result in a two or three goal win, but in this case, it translated into a six and a half goal defeat because they only managed to convert eight times or 11.68% of their entries. The Bombers more than doubled that. On Thursday night at the same ground, the losing team Adelaide managed to score 100 points from almost the same number of times inside 50.

        • Sad
        • Clap
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Essendon

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 14th April @ the all new time of 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect another Demons loss at Kardinia Park to the Cats in the Round 04. Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.

        • Thanks
      • 59 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Fremantle

      The Demons return home to the MCG in search of their first win for the 2025 Premiership season when they take on the Fremantle Dockers on Saturday afternoon. Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 208 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • VOTES: Essendon

      Max Gawn leads the Demonland Player of the Year ahead of Clayton Oliver, Christian Petracca, Kade Chandler and Jake Bowey. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

        • Thanks
      • 24 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All