Jump to content

Featured Replies

3 hours ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Must contest this.

There was no concussion and the player left the field unassisted.  He lay on the ground for so long because he ran into a 100kg man and had the wind completely knocked out of him.

The fact that Christian considers 'the look' of the incident when making his judgement is laughable.

I wonder what ‘look’ Christian considered when Mitchell elbowed Goldstein in the back of the head 100 metres away from  the ball last year?

 

May is going to drive us all insane if he gets reported every 6 weeks, I think it’s a soft suspension but he appears to be a slow learner....sure we want his aggression but already getting done for a week before even playing a proper game!? 

Now as any footballer knows you are allowed to and taught to (particularly when defending) stand your ground, hold your line, block an opponents run ect, now if a opponent runs into your already occupied space, you can protect that space and protect yourself, you will then tuck your elbow in and brace for impact exactly what may did, he did not deviate his line, he did not jump off the ground, and he did not lift his elbow he held his line and held his ground it was  the opponent  who moved into his space. Not only did berry move into mays space he also failed to see may, through a lack of awareness, even though may was directly in front of him, it was almost like he was admiring his handball , hence why he didn't notice may and ran straight into him, now may had every right to stand his ground and to meet the contact, just because berry doesn't notice him through a lack of awareness, berry then doesn't brace himself for contact making it look more forceful contact than it actually was, I also think he carried on a bit because he was surprised may was there, and probably thought may came from a angle just to clean him up, when really he was right in front of him. So IMO berry ran straight into may, may then well within his right protected himself and protected his space and met berry in a protected legal stance. Berry then played up the event making it look worse than it was 

Ffs a bloke is allowed to stand his ground

 
1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

Agree. May has a history of intentionally  bumping. Wasn't a smart thing to do in a preseason game at a new club arguably on big coin.

He got him flush on the chin with the point of his shoulder

Unfortunately, I think that's right.

A few pages ago a poster posted a slow-mo video.  I paused it at around 5.7 seconds and it appeared to me that the first contact was to his chin.

3 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Unfortunately, I think that's right.

A few pages ago a poster posted a slow-mo video.  I paused it at around 5.7 seconds and it appeared to me that the first contact was to his chin.

You mean the first point of contact was to May's shoulder 


36 minutes ago, Paulo said:

You mean the first point of contact was to May's shoulder 

This is the way it looks to me.

Berry does not see he is about to run into May.

It was a stupid decision by May that was made worse by Berry's complete lack of awareness.

Deserves to be fined

The AFL were looking for someone to make an example of.....cue May DH hoped he's docked and better play bloody well to make up for it.

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It's a ridiculous suspension but all those saying May was stationary are blind. He clear moved towards Berry to initiate contact with him. Shouldn't get suspended due to the minimal impact but he definitely initiated contact

Berry takes a mark and then takes on CP who is standing the mark , breaks his tackle and continues to run forward, may comes across to apply pressure he stops (flat footed, stationary, not moving) with his arms stretched apart anticipating Berry's next move, berry is now about 5 or 10 meters directly in front of may and has noticed a free teammate to his right and I believe has not noticed may , he then handballs to his teammate and continues running flat out to be a option to his teammate, (his eyes are still on his teammate)berry  is now running straight at, a stationary may who has then turned his body into a  posistion to protect himself from berry running straight into him, berrys eyes have now turned from his teammate and seen Steven may right in front of him, but its too late he has no time to protect himself but May has, and he does protect himself and had every right to, Berry's chin then meets mays shoulder that is pointed at a incoming collision May is allowed to hold his ground its not his fault berry ran into him

BTW if may was running towards berry and meet him with his shoulder, berry would not be walking off that field

 
3 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It's a ridiculous suspension but all those saying May was stationary are blind. He clear moved towards Berry to initiate contact with him. Shouldn't get suspended due to the minimal impact but he definitely initiated contact

Simon Goodwin said after the incident I'm very confident may will be cleared he was just STANDING there ready to block I guess that makes him blind too I suppose.

I reckon the tribunal threads are possibly the most demented on here outside of the no-go game-day efforts - including most of the one-off reactionary post-loss flare-ups, is 'Goodwin the right guy?' withstanding. Good job team.


If May does not brace, it ends up as a head clash, and Christian's 'visual' is far worse. Berry also could have been looking where he was going and put his arms up in front of his chest.

Edited by Clintosaurus

7 hours ago, Paulo said:

Now as any footballer knows you are allowed to and taught to (particularly when defending) stand your ground, hold your line, block an opponents run ect, now if a opponent runs into your already occupied space, you can protect that space and protect yourself, you will then tuck your elbow in and brace for impact exactly what may did, he did not deviate his line, he did not jump off the ground, and he did not lift his elbow he held his line and held his ground it was  the opponent  who moved into his space. Not only did berry move into mays space he also failed to see may, through a lack of awareness, even though may was directly in front of him, it was almost like he was admiring his handball , hence why he didn't notice may and ran straight into him, now may had every right to stand his ground and to meet the contact, just because berry doesn't notice him through a lack of awareness, berry then doesn't brace himself for contact making it look more forceful contact than it actually was, I also think he carried on a bit because he was surprised may was there, and probably thought may came from a angle just to clean him up, when really he was right in front of him. So IMO berry ran straight into may, may then well within his right protected himself and protected his space and met berry in a protected legal stance. Berry then played up the event making it look worse than it was 

Ffs a bloke is allowed to stand his ground

I think you're spot on Paulo and this is a prime candidate for the rules committee to look at for next year.

Something along the lines of "players must be gazing into each other's eyes before contact is made" some sort of mutual consent......pfft

I vaguely recall an incident involving May last year when he played for the Shanghai Suns and risked being suspended before the China Cup v Port. Can anyone remember the incident and the outcome? 

14 minutes ago, chookrat said:

I vaguely recall an incident involving May last year when he played for the Shanghai Suns and risked being suspended before the China Cup v Port. Can anyone remember the incident and the outcome? 

Umpire contact from memory. He was demonstrating to the ump after he gave away a free kick against us. Put his head or arms into the ump to show him how it played out. Offered a week, Suns challenged successfully and he was off to China.


10 hours ago, rjay said:

Come on 'bub'...the Brisbane player wasn't negligent, he just didn't expect May to be so stupid.

It was a dumb act, a bit of a brain fade.

...but as 'Gonzo' said, minimal impact. A fine and move on.

Come on Rjay..the lion Fwit wasn't even looking where he was going !!

 

10 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I'd be shocked if Melbourne challenge this.

Surely, without the fear of an extra week, we can cough up 10k to challenge it?  I think there is merit in it this time around.

16 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I'd be shocked if Melbourne challenge this.

I would be shocked and disappointed if they don’t challenge 

8 hours ago, Paulo said:

Berry takes a mark and then takes on CP who is standing the mark , breaks his tackle and continues to run forward, may comes across to apply pressure he stops (flat footed, stationary, not moving) with his arms stretched apart anticipating Berry's next move, berry is now about 5 or 10 meters directly in front of may and has noticed a free teammate to his right and I believe has not noticed may , he then handballs to his teammate and continues running flat out to be a option to his teammate, (his eyes are still on his teammate)berry  is now running straight at, a stationary may who has then turned his body into a  posistion to protect himself from berry running straight into him, berrys eyes have now turned from his teammate and seen Steven may right in front of him, but its too late he has no time to protect himself but May has, and he does protect himself and had every right to, Berry's chin then meets mays shoulder that is pointed at a incoming collision May is allowed to hold his ground its not his fault berry ran into him

BTW if may was running towards berry and meet him with his shoulder, berry would not be walking off that field

I'm sorry but we're just going to have to disagree. No-one is saying the hit was big but it doesn't have to be if the person isn't expecting contact. There may be a small element of May protecting himself but he did so by leaning forward and bumping. The only thing wrong with it is he got him high.

You're not serious if you think that a player is going to get hit the way Berry did with May standing stationary? Lol.

Berry is a tough nut footballer who definitely didn't act up. He gathered himself, pushed away the trainers and wanted to keep going so whoever insinuated that Berry couldn't take a hit is just deluded. 


2 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

If May does not brace, it ends up as a head clash, and Christian's 'visual' is far worse. Berry also could have been looking where he was going and put his arms up in front of his chest.

you say brace, I say it's a bump. he got him high. We're talking about Steven May here. He knew he was going to bump him as soon as the handball had left Berry's hand.

Extremely unlucky and unfortunate incident but he won't get off.

Already having nightmares of Frost and O-Mac lining up for us round 1.

 

Edited by stevethemanjordan

 

Mumford got off after being charged with intentional contact. 

May was careless. 

It’s seemingly okay to round arm a bloke in the head but not apply a bump. 

If Hewett was ko’d From that Mumford round arm he’d have got a month. 

As usual, the outcome is of greater significance in comparison to the viciousness of the intent. 

 

That Berry didn't play out the game will not work in May's favour.

His lack of awareness has zilch to do with May getting off. The bump was intended, got him flush on the jaw. His body moved towards Berry. Could've stepped away or got him lower. Duty of care is on May.

FFS, it's a practice game, there was no need for it.

Edited by Moonshadow


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 39 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 250 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    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.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
    • 47 replies