Gotta love the AFL community. One player elbows another in the face, after the siren, and all the talk is about how the victim reacted.

Just wondering where the line is here. Should Jed Lamb have stayed upright after Houli's cowardly act? How hard do you have to be hit before it is okay to lose your feet?

Schofield can have two weeks off, Houli can have six, and maybe the AFL will start to get serious about cleaning up the game.

 

I will say I was surprised by how quickly Clarrie fell following this hit. I will also say that I don't think he dived. He was taken off guard by an ELBOW to the jaw which had enough force to slam his mouth shut and wobble his head. That would hurt, not only would you teeth hurt from smashing together (as I don't think he wears a mouthguard and if he does he may have taken it out for half time), but so would cuts from biting your checks/tongue and the joints between the jaw and scull would hurt quite a bit as well. 

The elbow isn't soft, there is no padding, just as there isn't really on your chin, this was basically bone on bone. 

I think Clarrie was stunned and trying to work out what had happened and how hurt he was. In doing so he did what pretty much everyone would do when you aren't expecting it and he fell. A natural reaction to an unnatural dog act perpetrated against him!

7 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Yeah, as I said in an earlier post - this is what is wrong with Australian culture: why are you making a thing of it?

'He only hit her once...'

'He only called you a monkey, he didn't know what it meant...'

'That happened 20 years ago, aren't you over it...'

 

Why are you making a thing of it?

 

I can't stand it. Blaming the victim. Exonerating the perpetrator.

Exactly right.

What a pathetic and disgusting reaction from the public. A player got hit, deliberately and not in play, and people are saying he is soft and staging.

Gees I bet everyone would react exactly the same if it was them, or someone they knew personally getting hit. 

Disgraceful reflection of our society, and why apparently so many 'blokes' think it's ok to hit women, kids, random strangers. Get a grip!

Clarry has form. He went down against North over nothing which sparked a bit of argy bargy for the rest of the game. How Cunnington didn't get a week is an absolute mystery.

26 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Yeah, as I said in an earlier post - this is what is wrong with Australian culture: why are you making a thing of it?

'He only hit her once...'

'He only called you a monkey, he didn't know what it meant...'

'That happened 20 years ago, aren't you over it...'

 

Why are you making a thing of it?

 

I can't stand it. Blaming the victim. Exonerating the perpetrator.

Best post on this site. 

Ya know... there's a reason a boxer might like to whack you on the chin 

Firstly, in most cases, if you draw blood, it's not a tap on the chin. Second, as BB has pointed out we will never be the darlings of the media or general public. In the case of the media, remember that these days the media is only interested in news creation. That means providing a story and an opinion irrespective of the truth.  The more success we have, the greater the resentment and comments that our success is all due to concessions from the AFL. Third, Clarrie should resist the temptation to respond via social media. Let his football do the talking. 

27 minutes ago, Sylvia Saint said:

Clarry has form. He went down against North over nothing which sparked a bit of argy bargy for the rest of the game. How Cunnington didn't get a week is an absolute mystery.

I don't recall him 'diving' against North?

He copped a hit to the throat from Higgins which really should've been a free kick.

Before the MRP knee jerk into anything they should get an expert opinion from someone in the boxing industry. 

Furthermore, IF he is cited (and he maintains that he did not dive) then to clear his name we must fight the case and get our own boxing expert to clarify.  

Of course that would be after they have grasped their opportunity to exonerate the assailant   That is a big problem with the current MRP system - the case is arbitrated by amateurs and rarely tested  

Didn't our club doctor report a gum or lip laceration?  The MRP took cognizance of the Carlscum quack in their excessive penalty on Jesse, and their penalty on Lewis.  But knowing their inconsistency, and their blatant bias, no doubt they won't ask  

I don't follow boxing, but some who do say that this is a very natural response to a jaw tap.

5 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Before the MRP knee jerk into anything they should get an expert opinion from someone in the boxing industry. 

but they'v got an expert on everything........jimmy boy

anyway they have already admitted their job is to get players off

53 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Again: who cares if we'd been saying it was a stage if the roles were reversed. It is not our job to be consistent or measured - but it is our job to support our player when there is significant room for benefit of the doubt. That argument is totally irrelevant. I don't understand why Melbourne supporters would choose the worst position when other ones are credibly on offer.

And +1 for the complaints that this whole conversation is around the actions of the victim and not those of the perpetrator.

Well said.  This is the second time recenlty where Demonland posters have argued that just because we might have some supporters who are too biased to let facts get in the way, that somehow that can be used against the actions of a MFC player.   

As Nasher says it is totally irrlevant what some posters may have said if it was the other way around.  Judge each case on the facts (and where they are unclear, apply your knowledge of human motivations).

My view is there is no good evidence that he dived or had a motivation for diving.  Therefore let's concentrate on the perpertrator not the victim.   This was a case of assault which if performed in the street could have landed someone in jail for life if things went badly wrong (under our new stupid laws which allow no discretion for a judge apparently.)

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-25/clayton-oliver-former-test-cricketer-in-twitter-spat-over-dive

There is a ch 7 twitter image at the bottom of that article.

Is it doctored?

• The image is a few frames before Schofield hit Oliver (which was at half time siren).
• It shows the 'Full Time' Final Score.
• It shows the time clock as 43 seconds to go when in fact we hit the front with 24 seconds left.

If it is doctored it is reprehensible by Ch 7 and they have stooped to a new low.  Adds weight to my earlier point that Darcy and Richo set out to bait him in their interview.

Lets out the real villains in all this - it certainly isn't Oliver!

A 'Please Explain' is warranted!

17 minutes ago, Is Dom Is Good said:

I don't recall him 'diving' against North?

He copped a hit to the throat from Higgins which really should've been a free kick.

Yes i am the same. Is there footage showing Clarrie taking a dive against Nought. 

Big Call

6 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-25/clayton-oliver-former-test-cricketer-in-twitter-spat-over-dive

There is a ch 7 twitter image at the bottom of that article.

Is it doctored?

• The image is a few frames before Schofield hit Oliver (which was at half time siren).
• It shows the 'Full Time' Final Score.
• It shows the time clock as 43 seconds to go when in fact we hit the front with 24 seconds left.

If it is doctored it is reprehensible by Ch 7 and they have stooped to a new low.  Adds wait to my earlier point that Darcy and Richo set out to bait him in their interview.

Lets out the real villains in all this - it certainly isn't Oliver!

A 'Please Explain' is warranted!

Cool your jets. The 43 seconds is the length of the Twitter video.

7 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-25/clayton-oliver-former-test-cricketer-in-twitter-spat-over-dive

There is a ch 7 twitter image at the bottom of that article.

Is it doctored?

• The image is a few frames before Schofield hit Oliver (which was at half time siren).
• It shows the 'Full Time' Final Score.
• It shows the time clock as 43 seconds to go when in fact we hit the front with 24 seconds left.

If it is doctored it is reprehensible by Ch 7 and they have stooped to a new low.  Adds weight to my earlier point that Darcy and Richo set out to bait him in their interview.

Lets out the real villains in all this - it certainly isn't Oliver!

A 'Please Explain' is warranted!

It could be a replay of the incident that they showed after the game was over?

1 minute ago, Dees_In_October said:

It could be a replay of the incident that they showed after the game was over?

Regardless, I wouldn't trust the bastards. 

16 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

but they'v got an expert on everything........jimmy boy

anyway they have already admitted their job is to get players off

Like Hogan????

10 minutes ago, Sylvia Saint said:

Cool your jets. The 43 seconds is the length of the Twitter video.

Hahahaha

22 minutes ago, Sylvia Saint said:

Cool your jets. The 43 seconds is the length of the Twitter video.

That may be so but that still image in an AFL article is what the wider public sees, not the video and easily misinterpreted as I did.

20 minutes ago, Dees_In_October said:

It could be a replay of the incident that they showed after the game was over?

True, but replays usually sow the actual time/quarter.

Overall, I didn't like it.  Ch 7 have form - they edited their post game telecast of the Sydney rooms last Friday night to portray them as being uncooperative and disruptive.  https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/swans-hit-back-at-roaming-bt-spray-following-friday-night-controversy-ng-b88517428z

Ch7 have their agendas and their favourite teams.  We aren't on that list.

4 hours ago, Nasher said:

Watts a given

JKH next in line midfielder 

Kennedy next in line flanker/midfielder 

Kent next in line forward

Wagner next in line defender.

Weid next in line key forward.

No point trying to guess who will come out. Too many permutations with the number of players we had injured or sore.

Hogan

Weid has started to get form and confidence at VFL, now needs to work on that, and develop hunger.  I would hold him back for now. 

On the media I found Richo bloody annoying on Saturday night. Clearly doesn't like the dees (as my wife said, it is probably because we have gone sailing past Richmond) and every chance he got he questioned the frees we were getting paid and talking us down, yet didn't seem to question any of the West Coast frees. He even defended the free against OMac for front on contact (when Omac made contact from behind/the side) saying it would have been too high anyway. No way in hell that could have been for too high!

23 minutes ago, Chris said:

On the media I found Richo bloody annoying on Saturday night. Clearly doesn't like the dees (as my wife said, it is probably because we have gone sailing past Richmond) and every chance he got he questioned the frees we were getting paid and talking us down, yet didn't seem to question any of the West Coast frees. He even defended the free against OMac for front on contact (when Omac made contact from behind/the side) saying it would have been too high anyway. No way in hell that could have been for too high!

richo just waffles on aimlessly all match. he's terrible and adds little. ch7 commentary team has to be the worst going around

4 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

richo just waffles on aimlessly all match. he's terrible and adds little. ch7 commentary team has to be the worst going around

Just commented in more depth on an old thread talking about commentators as to not distract from this thread. Agree entirely though.

2 hours ago, Ted Fidge said:

I'm learning a few things in this thread.

• All our players are virtuous angels and as pure as the driven snow.
• Only players from other teams play it up or bend the rules.

And if one of our guys had done the identical thing to say Pendlebury or Treloar and they went down, what would be said on here? "He was acting / he's soft / it got him on the shoulder / nothing in it / etc"

Here are the facts as I see them.

• He was hit on the jaw
• He was taken by surprise
• He hammed it up a bit to make sure he ump knew about it
• It wasn't Rance-level award winning stuff. But it was there.
• A fine would be outrageous given that he actually was clipped and if Rance wasn't fined, no-one can ever be fined.

He is in danger of getting a reputation. One more lineball staging event and it could be cemented.

The thing about reputations is they don't have to be fairly earned. One they get going they're hard to stop. Especially in the AFL where fans will defend their players to the hilt while putting the hammer down on oppo players.

He needs to go out there like Viney and snuff it out before it gets going.

Loving this, aren't you? Going after a 19-year-old like Sookfield did. Claiming he has a "history of staging", then when you're asked to clarify, "I don't know, I didn't sit him down for an interview".

Perhaps what you mean is the time he got bumped face-on by Rioli in his first year. Or clotheslined by Higgins against Norf in the first 10 minutes of the match this year, which hit set the scene for all the stuff that followed, and which was said to be low impact because it was "just a throat punch". You for some reason feel the need to defend these three old stagers going after a stellar player at the start of his career. I can't recall any other being openly targetted in this way so early in his career. Can you? Hint - you don't have to sit anyone down for an interview to answer this.

You need to take a good hard look. Or just keep fanning the fire. You seem to pushing hard for him to get this reputation.

And if one of our players did the same thing, I'd be equally disgusted, as would most of us. Having said that, if Schofield doesn't go for at least 2 weeks, like Hogan did & like Lewis did (notwithstanding extra week for Lewis's bad record), I'd say he's got off incredibly easy.

2 hours ago, rpfc said:

Yeah, as I said in an earlier post - this is what is wrong with Australian culture: why are you making a thing of it?

'He only hit her once...'

'He only called you a monkey, he didn't know what it meant...'

'That happened 20 years ago, aren't you over it...'

 

Why are you making a thing of it?

 

I can't stand it. Blaming the victim. Exonerating the perpetrator.

We are not blaming the victim we are discussing if he exaggerated contact. Because let's be honest if the siren had not gone, we would be discussing if the victim was in fact a cheat .