3 hours ago, DV8 said:

What is your definition of the rule,  'high contact' ?

high contact is anything above the shoulders. so it's not just the head. I,for one, think he also got him in the chin but for the sake of not changing the point of the discussion let's say he just got his throat. that's still high contact.

 

3 hours ago, DV8 said:

I studied the replay in slo-mo, over and over.   Even frame by frame from just before the point of contact, until after when the player starts to fall away from May.

May did move toward the player... maybe a half step to a step.  With no speed in his momentum...  but did twist his upper body aligning his shoulder to be the contact point. Of which his point of shoulder got the Lions player below the chin,  to the Adams-Apple area. 

Has the rule changed... does it not have to be contact to the head ?   to be outside the rules ?

.

agree with everything you said here. May knew that he was making a hard hit. He didnt need to run up as he was just using Berry's momentum to create the force. He moved back into his path, powered his centre of gravity and leant into Berry with his shoulder. 

I can't believe we are even discussing this. Sure discuss whether it was light or medium impact but I'm getting tired of all these tough guys that think May had no choice but to do what he did.

Berry doesnt need to have awareness by the letter of the law. If you get hit high or in the head through a bump that player is going to get time. 

27 minutes ago, Dr.D said:

high contact is anything above the shoulders. so it's not just the head. I,for one, think he also got him in the chin but for the sake of not changing the point of the discussion let's say he just got his throat. that's still high contact.

 

If the throat counts as head high, then fair enough.   Re the rules and guilty verdict.

To me hitting the throat doesn't cause concussion,  which is what all the hullabaloo is about recently...  so to cause a concussion from contact with the throat, it would be a massive hit with huge weight behind it.   Having to cause a viscous whiplash..  or head contact with a 2nd object, from the initial impact.

9 hours ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

May would eat Watts

Thank Christ he's not playing then, how many weeks for eating an opposition player????

I suppose it comes down to whether or not he chews with his mouth open or shut, considering 'the look' and all that jazz.

I hope May gets suspended again during the the season for running through someone fairly.

In my lifetime the best teams have always been slightly over the top aggressive. I’m talking Brisbane, Geelong & Hawthorn.

It is also my understanding that our premiership teams coached by Norm Smith and lead by Ron Dale were pretty rough and tumble but fair much like May.

42 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

I hope May gets suspended again during the the season for running through someone fairly.

In my lifetime the best teams have always been slightly over the top aggressive. I’m talking Brisbane, Geelong & Hawthorn.

It is also my understanding that our premiership teams coached by Norm Smith and lead by Ron Dale were pretty rough and tumble but fair much like May.

Happy if he's not suspended actually lol

Understand the sentiments

Judging by the comments from Jones & Lewis, the club is pretty dark about his suspension, as am I.

There was very little malice and the claim he contacted him high is questionable at best.

I think the main issue is May is a lot bigger than Berry and also Berry wasn't prepared so it caught him off guard. At worst this should have been a fine, but personally I think it should be nothing but a free kick.

The other factor talking about concussion for the player (also contentious), is that you don't just get concussion from hits to the head. It can also be from whiplash style hits as well. So in this instance, he could have got him square in the chest area, but the resulting had whipping back causes concussion. 

Really disappointed if this is what the AFL are planning to do with the game.

24 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

Really disappointed if this is what the AFL are planning to do with the game.

Happy if they're consistent but you can guarantee this will be relaxed as the season goes along, especially if it involves a Brownlow favourite.

13 hours ago, daisycutter said:

May did not have momentum, dv8. Watch the video (carefully) on the mfc site. It is taken from behind berry as he approaches may. Berry moves very slightly to his right to deliver his hand ball, May, at that point takes a half step in same direction and props, so from the time of handball till collision he is motionless (ie no momentum). at the last nano second he does lean forward into the collision but his feet don't move forward. The only other movement he makes after the handball is to turn his body sidewards (from being front on) but that is not momentum

berry has all the advantage of momentum but fails to turn his body (presumably through lack of awareness)

Berry f'd up. May suspended.

And the AFL wonders whats turning ppl off footy !!

29 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

Judging by the comments from Jones & Lewis, the club is pretty dark about his suspension, as am I.

There was very little malice and the claim he contacted him high is questionable at best.

I think the main issue is May is a lot bigger than Berry and also Berry wasn't prepared so it caught him off guard. At worst this should have been a fine, but personally I think it should be nothing but a free kick.

The other factor talking about concussion for the player (also contentious), is that you don't just get concussion from hits to the head. It can also be from whiplash style hits as well. So in this instance, he could have got him square in the chest area, but the resulting had whipping back causes concussion. 

Really disappointed if this is what the AFL are planning to do with the game.

Exactly if Brayshaw who has a history of concussion gets hit in the hips and that consequently causes concussion should the player get suspeneded?

Of course not.

The “look” and the medical report should be irrelevant.

The act should be the major contributing factor in every case.

1 hour ago, Wrecker45 said:

I hope May gets suspended again during the the season for running through someone fairly.

In my lifetime the best teams have always been slightly over the top aggressive. I’m talking Brisbane, Geelong & Hawthorn.

It is also my understanding that our premiership teams coached by Norm Smith and lead by Ron Dale were pretty rough and tumble but fair much like May.

Yeah me too. That would be great. I hope it is the prelim. 

I continue to be concerned that much of the discussion here is about whether May's bump hit him in the head or not. Concussion can also be caused by whiplash. That's why I don't think the rule should just be about making head high contact or even whether the impact was low or medium. I believe the rule should be but whether the player (in this instance May) needed to bump at all. If I was designing the rule I would say that if the player had no choice, then all clear; but if he had a choice, one week, irrespective of whether there was an injury or not and more weeks if there was an avoidable injury. 

12 hours ago, monoccular said:

Christian and Catholic conspirators? ?

Straight out of the Inquisitorial Bible, always maintain CONTROL....otherwise my summer residence in Imperia is in jeopardy.

I don't know if anyone else has said this already. In a funny way May getting reported now for one match might be the best thing that could happen to him as he starts his career at the Demons. The one worry for me with getting him was his track record of getting reported. He must be spewing about it and feeling he's let his new team down straight away. I'm sure that will burn in him more than if it happened after he'd been playing here for a while. If the result is that this makes him fix the problem and it never happens again then I'll take the week.

33 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I continue to be concerned that much of the discussion here is about whether May's bump hit him in the head or not. Concussion can also be caused by whiplash. That's why I don't think the rule should just be about making head high contact or even whether the impact was low or medium. I believe the rule should be but whether the player (in this instance May) needed to bump at all. If I was designing the rule I would say that if the player had no choice, then all clear; but if he had a choice, one week, irrespective of whether there was an injury or not and more weeks if there was an avoidable injury. 

It's a contact sport and these things are going to happen.

If you want to completely eradicate concussion, each player should wear a flag in the back of their shorts that needs to be pulled out instead of tackling.

4 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

It's a contact sport and these things are going to happen.

If you want to completely eradicate concussion, each player should wear a flag in the back of their shorts that needs to be pulled out instead of tackling.

I see a big difference between tackling or bumping a player with the ball (both which I consider to be unavoidable, as long as the tackle or bump is fair) and tackling or bumping a player who does not have the ball (generally, but not always, avoidable). It's the latter that concerns me. We should be doing everything we can to reduce the risk of concussion, particularly when players do not have the ball.

I know there is an argument that the primary purpose of that bump is to stop the player who is bumped from immediately returning to that passage of play. I'm saying reducing the risk of concussion from that tactic (the bump) should be more important than stopping that player from continuing to participate in that passage of play.  

Completely agree with Lewis' comments regarding the suspension, May is a victim of his own size & unfortunately had a skinny kid run into him. I really like the way May goes about it, for years we had been screaming out to not be a soft team and he will truly scare the daylights out of opposition forwards. No doubt he will get reported again throughout the year, but lets be honest when it truly matters in September these types of suspensions will be thrown out the window. 

3 hours ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

It's a contact sport and these things are going to happen.

If you want to completely eradicate concussion, each player should wear a flag in the back of their shorts that needs to be pulled out instead of tackling.

Here, this ones about to take a  'hanger'.

Here's Gazza-jnr  2020  model.   brains over brawn.

Tbh I thought he was lucky to get one given his recidivist history 

22 hours ago, dieter said:

It still begs the f.....g question: wtf was May supposed to do?????Look at it again in real time.

Correct, '...supposed to do?' What he did not do saved Berry - and he chose not to do anything other than absorb the impact between two forces (thus reducing the likelihood of injury) and to protect his soft tissues in that process. Guilty of something? My RRRRRRs/

3 hours ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

Tbh I thought he was lucky to get one given his recidivist history 

Don't give 'em ideas for next time......

19 hours ago, Dr.D said:

high contact is anything above the shoulders. so it's not just the head. I,for one, think he also got him in the chin but for the sake of not changing the point of the discussion let's say he just got his throat. that's still high contact.

 

You know Doc.   I didn't think players get reported for over the shoulder,  unless its for hitting the head... otherwise it's just a free kick.   Unless it's a striking offence causing some level of injury.

Edited March 14, 20196 yr by DV8

Like Jones summary of the incident. 

"Its contentious if you call it a block or a bump. I think it was a block but I sort of understand the AFL's stance around head knocks and the look of things.You see those instances; particularly the action Steve did -- and we are actually taught this as a defensive skill.You are going to have bigger guys run into smaller guys and the blows going to look more significant than other times.

I think he was stiff.

14 hours ago, rjay said:

Happy if they're consistent but you can guarantee this will be relaxed as the season goes along, especially if it involves a Brownlow favourite.

That's my only issue with the suspension. IMo I thought when it happened he was in trouble and probably deserved a week for stupidity, but My years of watching footy tell me something similar or even slightly worse later in the year gets reviewed over and over to find how a fine is justified.