WELCOME TO THE MELBOURNE FOOTBALL CLUB - STEVEN MAY

[Ethan Tremblay 29,016]

Choosing to throw an elbow backwards is not accidental it’s careless. According to the text below Hawkins should receive at least one week. 

[Damo 3,055]

Here is last years elbow strike that he got off on appeal.  https://www.afl.com.au/news/477208/the-verdict-is-in-tribunal-makes-call-on-tomahawk-strike

 

Edited April 12, 2021 by Damo

[Grapeviney 9,106]

If his eye makes a miraculous recovery, we could be treated to my dream headline:

MAY BE SEE DEE

[titan_uranus 23,344]

16 minutes ago, Nasher said:

My assessment is just from looking up the MRP’s chart for assessing incidents. I am not angry or emotional about it, and I’ve got nothing against Hawkins. I accept it was an accident, but that’s not the question.

I don’t believe there is room in our game for players having bones in their faces broken in regulation contests. If it was a head-on collision we were talking about, I might agree with you. But I can’t see how swinging an elbow backwards like that is any less than “careless” (per the MRP’s chart), and surely the impact is at least “high”, if not extreme, given the injury. Which part do you disagree with?

My view wouldn’t change, irrespective of which players or clubs were involved. 

In this instance, I think it is.

This isn't a sling tackle or a bump, which are actions that we can identify as problematic and to which we can then apply the careless/intentional matrix.

This has to be one of the offences listed in the table. Is it a strike? If it's an accident, then I don't think so. Is it "unreasonable" contact to the face? If the latter, how can an accident also be "unreasonable"?

If a player flies for a mark with outstretched hands, doing nothing other than playing the ball, but in the process his elbow hits another player's head, do we call that "careless" and suspend him?

One of the problems with the MRO process is that we focus on the outcome too much and the action not enough. I think that's happening here again.

[Damo 3,055]

To quote Titus O'Reilly "Hawkins should get the benefit of the doubt. He’s only been cited for striking seven times in the last five seasons."

[Nasher 33,382]

14 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

In this instance, I think it is.

This isn't a sling tackle or a bump, which are actions that we can identify as problematic and to which we can then apply the careless/intentional matrix.

This has to be one of the offences listed in the table. Is it a strike? If it's an accident, then I don't think so. Is it "unreasonable" contact to the face? If the latter, how can an accident also be "unreasonable"?

If a player flies for a mark with outstretched hands, doing nothing other than playing the ball, but in the process his elbow hits another player's head, do we call that "careless" and suspend him?

One of the problems with the MRO process is that we focus on the outcome too much and the action not enough. I think that's happening here again.

Have you seen the photo of May? They have a ranking for “unreasonable contact to the face, careless conduct, high/extreme impact, high contact”. If this situation doesn’t meet that definition, what situation would, in your view? 

A player flying for the mark with arms outstretched is an expected action in the game. I wouldn’t penalise that for the same reason we don’t penalise (other than a free) when defenders accidentally punch players in the head when attempting a spoil. It’s mal-execution of a normal skill in the sport. What normal football skill involves flinging one’s elbow backwards at head height? I didn’t see any other head high reverse elbows fling about in this match, or any of others. Did you? 

Whether the MRP should assess actual outcome or not is irrelevant. The fact is they do, so we can only judge Hawkins on what the rules are, not what they should be in your opinion.

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,713]

To Hawkins's credit he did approach May to see if he was ok.

[Pickett2Jackson 3,904]

Hawkins elbow wasn't an accident.  It never is with that rotund beast.

[Lord Travis 10,336]

I must be one of the few on here who thinks it was accidental and just part of play?

He was being tackled while handballing and May actually pulled him as part of the tackle which contributed to his arm being closer to his head. Hawkins is definitely a dirty player, but not sure he’s talented enough to defy gravity to get a cheap shot in!

Yes it’s sucks one of our most important players got hurt, but Hawkins has no case to answer for IMO. Unlucky hit, move on.

[Grimes Times 1,278]

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/904097/may-sidelined-after-suffering-fracture

 

2-4 weeks

 

[Garbo 1,379]

[dazzledavey36 50,017]

1 minute ago, Grimes Times said:

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/904097/may-sidelined-after-suffering-fracture

 

2-4 weeks

 

Better then the 2-4 months that was mentioned on here yesterday.. 

[In Harmes Way 7,620]

1 minute ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Better then the 2-4 months that was mentioned on here yesterday.. 

I reckon that's what it will feel like though daz

[Jaded No More 60,661]

2-4 weeks is a big big let off for what could have been season ending. Thank god he sustained no permanent damage to his eye. 
 

[Pickett2Jackson 3,904]

5 minutes ago, Grimes Times said:

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/904097/may-sidelined-after-suffering-fracture

 

2-4 weeks

 

 

The timeframe is great news.    A 2nd concussion in the last 5 weeks is not so hopefully the champ is ok.

[Garbo 1,379]

Back for the swans game to play on Franklin, only tough one he will miss is tigers if that works out

Edited April 12, 2021 by Garbo

[Pennant St Dee 12,016]

1 hour ago, bingers said:

If May had caused this injury to Hawkins, would he be cited?  

I think we all know the answer to that.

Yes the answer is no.

FCS stop looking for something that isn’t there. It was an accident and they happen in footy

[AllMyTeamsAreWank 564]

Why are people so desperate for Hawkins to get suspended? It footy, [censored] happens. He didn't king him ffs. 

[Jaded No More 60,661]

1 minute ago, AllMyTeamsAreWank said:

Why are people so desperate for Hawkins to get suspended? It footy, [censored] happens. He didn't king him ffs. 

Because Geelong is a club full of dirty cheating [censored] who have gotten away with doing this stuff for far too long. 
Hawkins has form. He did not need to swing an arm.
I don’t think he meant to cause such damage, but gees he’s one clumsy guy isn’t he? ?

[monoccular 16,796]

7 minutes ago, AllMyTeamsAreWank said:

Why are people so desperate for Hawkins to get suspended? It footy, [censored] happens. He didn't king him ffs. 

Because he has a long history of carelessly / recklessly elbowing opponents in the face, head and guts. 

[hemingway 7,608]

2 minutes ago, AllMyTeamsAreWank said:

Why are people so desperate for Hawkins to get suspended? It footy, [censored] happens. He didn't king him ffs. 

Because Hawkins has a long track record of hits, with lame excuses each time. You don’t need to king hit a player to be suspended. Careless, yes, unduly rough play, yes, high contact, yes, causing serious injury to another player, yes. 

[Click_Bate 182]

Second concussion in 5 weeks is probably more concerning than the fracture. Give him the 4 weeks off - make sure we are taking care of him! ??

[mauriesy 6,942]

1 hour ago, Jaded said:

Because Geelong is a club full of dirty cheating [censored] who have gotten away with doing this stuff for far too long. 
Hawkins has form. He did not need to swing an arm.
I don’t think he meant to cause such damage, but gees he’s one clumsy guy isn’t he? ?

My view is it was accidental. If you look at the replay in slo-mo, May actually pulled Hawkins towards himself by the jumper at the same moment Hawkins handballed. That exacerbated the close contact and brought his swinging arm from the handball closer to May's face.

I don't see how you could possibly charge Hawkins with an offence, let alone think he did it in any way deliberately.

 

[Demonstone 20,237]

I'm sure that if the roles were reversed and it was Hawkins who was injured, Demonlanders would be adamant that it was an accident and that May had no case to answer.

[sue 8,699]

I haven’t reviewed the video so have no opinion on the incident. But with a record like he has it is perfectly reasonable for his actions to be closely scrutinised.