Jump to content

Liam Jones only gets a fine. How stiff is Steven May?

inanunda
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

 

Really happy that the AFL has decided to crack down on off the ball incidents.

Go you beauties...get this out of the game.

Wait a minute...Oh no! not inconsistencies again.

Hands up...how many of us saw this coming????

Only thing is, I thought they would at least wait until a few weeks into the season, not the first game.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Love 1
     
    3 minutes ago, rjay said:

    Really happy that the AFL has decided to crack down on off the ball incidents.

    Go you beauties...get this out of the game.

    Wait a minute...Oh no! not inconsistencies again.

    Hands up...how many of us saw this coming????

    Only thing is, I thought they would at least wait until a few weeks into the season, not the first game.

    Graded as low impact to the body.  That hit was so much harder than what May did, and the “optics” were so much worse because it was so far off the ball.  But it was exactly what I think Stewart did to Max Gawn at Geelong last year, and the talk about the hit to Max was how he faked it and Stewart didn’t even get cited from memory. Go figure.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    May's shoulder hit Berry flush on the chin. 

    To me it looked like Liam Jones hit Rievoldt's body and winded him badly

    One was head and one was body. That's the difference.

    (But I still think May's should have been a fine only)

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    There was no high contact, you would want to suspend someone for a bump to the body??

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    42 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

    May's shoulder hit Berry flush on the chin. 

    To me it looked like Liam Jones hit Rievoldt's body and winded him badly

    One was head and one was body. That's the difference.

    (But I still think May's should have been a fine only)

    So whose hit was harder?  May was graded as medium impact.  Jones as low impact?  That’s why May got suspended.

    Edited by Watson11

  • Quote
    •  

    He plays for Carlton.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Love 1

    Don't you get it

    MRP...AFL for ( insert choice word of derision )

    It's their way of manipulating the game ;)

     

  • Quote

    I think everyone needs to find their peace with the fact that if you make contact with the head (even a glancing blow to the very tip of the chin) you’re cooked.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    39 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

    I think everyone needs to find their peace with the fact that if you make contact with the head (even a glancing blow to the very tip of the chin) you’re cooked.

    But there are hits and hits !!!

    slight glancing blow with no impact and assessment of no damage or effect.

    AND 

    ridiculous over the top grading ie medium vs low 

    AND 

    " the look " Which is so subjective and if added makes a good case about nothing really 

    So you can manufacture a cadebif you want to and not if you don't !!!

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    We will come down hard on gut punches and off ball incidents.

    Bloody hypocrites. 

  • Quote
    • Like 5

    Eddie McGuire said on Fox Footy he sat on that committee (?) and the discussion for 40 minutes was the determination to stamp this sort of thing out. Going on what was said, in his opinion Jones should be gone for a week. So what happened? Didn't Christian get the memo? Oh well. Knew it was going to happen.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    In some respects this is precisely what we want from the AFL.

    Both May and Jones have been dealt with based on the action, not the consequence.

    May's bump made head-high contact. Jones' didn't.

    It doesn't matter that both had similar levels of impact. May's offence was a worse offence than Jones' and was dealt with accordingly.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    I've seen more head contact in jumper punching than Mays insignificant glance 

    Absolute hypocrisy by afl

  • Quote
    50 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

    In some respects this is precisely what we want from the AFL.

    Both May and Jones have been dealt with based on the action, not the consequence.

    May's bump made head-high contact. Jones' didn't.

    It doesn't matter that both had similar levels of impact. May's offence was a worse offence than Jones' and was dealt with accordingly.

    Bullshite!

     

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    4 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

    May's shoulder hit Berry flush on the chin. 

    To me it looked like Liam Jones hit Rievoldt's body and winded him badly

    One was head and one was body. That's the difference.

    (But I still think May's should have been a fine only)

    "flush on the chin" is a bit of an exaggeration, moonie

    more like grazed the chin. if it was flush on the chin his head would have whiplashed and he would have been out cold. the vast bulk of the impact was taken on his body 

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    8DA30D92-4C77-4BD8-96E1-0E8BBEE3D1B1.jpeg.e2ea65e20909ca3f6a06ea981556e9fa.jpeg

    The rules are the rules and shouldn’t be that hard for Christian to apply consistently.  He just seems incapable of being consistent.

    By the way, you can be suspended for hits to the body.  

  • Quote

    1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

    In some respects this is precisely what we want from the AFL.

    Both May and Jones have been dealt with based on the action, not the consequence.

    May's bump made head-high contact. Jones' didn't.

    It doesn't matter that both had similar levels of impact. May's offence was a worse offence than Jones' and was dealt with accordingly.

    That’s where your wrong.  May graded as medium impact.  Jones graded as low impact.

  • Quote
    27 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

    "flush on the chin" is a bit of an exaggeration, moonie

    more like grazed the chin. if it was flush on the chin his head would have whiplashed and he would have been out cold. the vast bulk of the impact was taken on his body 

    I disagree. Watch the video Daisy, the point of May's shoulder hit Berry on the front of his chin, that would be 'flush'. His head tilted back and he played no further part on the game. Revoldt played on.

    Had Berry been "out cold", May might well have got 3-4 weeks. He has history with the bump. Not sure Jones does.

     

  • Quote
    •  
    2 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

    May's bump made head-high contact. Jones' didn't.

    May did Not make contact to the head !

    Edited by DV8

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    8 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

    I disagree. Watch the video Daisy, the point of May's shoulder hit Berry on the front of his chin, that would be 'flush'. His head tilted back and he played no further part on the game. Revoldt played on.

    Had Berry been "out cold", May might well have got 3-4 weeks. He has history with the bump. Not sure Jones does.

     

    his head didn't tilt back with respect to his body. sure, his whole body tilted back (and hit the ground) but his head stayed in line with his body with no independent movement of the head which you would expect if it was flush. the chin is the lowest part of the head and yes his shoulder made chin contact but it was minor and his body took the majority of the impact. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    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...
    Go to topic listing

    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
      • 25 replies
      Demonland

    • 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
      Demonland

    • 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
      Demonland

    • 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
      Demonland

    • 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
      • 232 replies
      Demonland

    • 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
      Demonland
    View All