Jump to content

Featured Replies

2 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

They just said on the radio they are looking at it today 

I reckon he will get a week 

Then we should challenge it

 

When does the MRC spin their wheel? 
 

It’s likely he’ll get a 1 or two week suspension. Interestingly, his brother, Darcy kicked 20 goals for Coldstream FC on Saturday 24th April.

 

If he does get a week then we have to challenge.

To compare to recent incident dismissed:

Fritsch - In play accidental forearm to head of opposition player who was a waste height bending down to bump/tackle. Fritsch is bracing for contact with split second time to react and the opposition player played out the game. Fritsch has no MRP record.

Hawkins - In play accidental elbow to the face caved in Mays eye socket and he missed the remainder of the match and subsequent weeks match. Hawkins also has a horrible MRP record.


9 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

If he does get a week then we have to challenge.

To compare to recent incident dismissed:

Fritsch - In play accidental forearm to head of opposition player who was a waste height bending down to bump/tackle. Fritsch is bracing for contact with split second time to react and the opposition player played out the game. Fritsch has no MRP record.

Hawkins - In play accidental elbow to the face caved in Mays eye socket and he missed the remainder of the match and subsequent weeks match. Hawkins also has a horrible MRP record.

forget the may incident, it is considered, rightly or wrongly, a purely accidental incident

no comparison to fritta incident

i'm sure there are many similar fend off incidents where no suspension resulted. these are the ones his defence (if necessary) need to reference

12 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

If he does get a week then we have to challenge.

To compare to recent incident dismissed:

Fritsch - In play accidental forearm to head of opposition player who was a waste height bending down to bump/tackle. Fritsch is bracing for contact with split second time to react and the opposition player played out the game. Fritsch has no MRP record.

Hawkins - In play accidental elbow to the face caved in Mays eye socket and he missed the remainder of the match and subsequent weeks match. Hawkins also has a horrible MRP record.

I’m really not sure you can use the Hawkins incident as a comparison for a favourable decision for Fritsch. Hawkins was facing away from May and therefore makes an easier case for accidental. Fritsch on the other hand was looking straight at his tackler, and tried to fend him off, making it so much harder to claim accidental. 

I think we will need a way better argument to consider an appeal, should the worst happen.

1 hour ago, PaulRB said:

When does the MRC spin their wheel? 
 

The MRO Monday results have been released after 6pm.

I still can't work out why most of you think he'll get off.

He elbowed someone in the head, and that player went off hurt which automatically rules out low impact.

At best:

Careless, high contact, medium impact = 1 week.

If the MFC deem that an injustice, then it's up to them to challenge at the tribunal.

 

 
3 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The MRO Monday results have been released after 6pm.

I still can't work out why most of you think he'll get off.

He elbowed someone in the head, and that player went off hurt which automatically rules out low impact.

At best:

Careless, high contact, medium impact = 1 week.

If the MFC deem that an injustice, then it's up to them to challenge at the tribunal.

 

dislike but agree

7 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I’m really not sure you can use the Hawkins incident as a comparison for a favourable decision for Fritsch. Hawkins was facing away from May and therefore makes an easier case for accidental. Fritsch on the other hand was looking straight at his tackler, and tried to fend him off, making it so much harder to claim accidental. 

I think we will need a way better argument to consider an appeal, should the worst happen.

I agree... however, some on here were calling for Hawkins' head, claiming he has form and that it was intentional because he's somehow incredibly good at concealing his intentions, yet those same people are probably going to get upset if Fritsch goes for what does appear to be a forearm that could possibly have been avoided (it's a very bad look regardless).  I will be very (pleasantly) surprised if he doesn't get a week.


Nothing but a fine. Careless/low contact. No concussion or injury and returned to the field. Such an overreaction, as usual 

30 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

forget the may incident, it is considered, rightly or wrongly, a purely accidental incident

no comparison to fritta incident

i'm sure there are many similar fend off incidents where no suspension resulted. these are the ones his defence (if necessary) need to reference

Kind of like when Doug and Dinsdale Piranha had to nail Vince's  head to the floor. Smashing blokes, those Dinsdales:

 

24 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The MRO Monday results have been released after 6pm.

I still can't work out why most of you think he'll get off.

He elbowed someone in the head, and that player went off hurt which automatically rules out low impact.

At best:

Careless, high contact, medium impact = 1 week.

If the MFC deem that an injustice, then it's up to them to challenge at the tribunal.

 

Not disagreeing, but how did the same criteria not result in Hawkins getting a week? 

18 hours ago, dice said:

Gotta love the media when it comes to elbows:

 

Like all of us here, I want Fritta to play and I don't think he was intending to hurt the guy, but he was certainly intending to make contact, so you couldn't call that an accident.

That said, I have the feeling he'll escape penalty. There are a few precedents that should help.

1 minute ago, bush demon said:

Kind of like when Doug and Dinsdale Piranha had to nail Vince's  head to the floor. Smashing blokes, those Dinsdales:

 

Stig O’Tracey and Vince “Snetterton” Lewis were such shady characters...


1 minute ago, Cheesy D. Pun said:

Like all of us here, I want Fritta to play and I don't think he was intending to hurt the guy, but he was certainly intending to make contact, so you couldn't call that an accident.

That said, I have the feeling he'll escape penalty. There are a few precedents that should help.

Brian "there's nothing in that" Taylor, Channel 7's correct-elbow etiquette correspondent.

1 minute ago, Cheesy D. Pun said:

Like all of us here, I want Fritta to play and I don't think he was intending to hurt the guy, but he was certainly intending to make contact, so you couldn't call that an accident.

That said, I have the feeling he'll escape penalty. There are a few precedents that should help.

He didn’t intend to flatten someone, he braced for contact. He instinctively raised his arm to protect himself having his ribs broken by an opposition player barreling into him low at waist and chest height. He raised his arm instinctively to protect an injured hand in a brace, and did well not to raise his arm or shoulder any higher. He actually prevented serious injury by not following through.

If he’s suspended, then we should challenge.

If he’s suspended, then contact rules of the game need to be altered as a result, as players should be allowed to brace themselves for heavy contact.

4 minutes ago, bush demon said:

Brian "there's nothing in that" Taylor, Channel 7's correct-elbow etiquette correspondent.

You're on fire today Bush D.

Given that Fritta's forearm initially contacted Powell's arm below the shoulder but moved up based on Powell lowering himself, I cannot see how a suspension can result. 

7 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Not disagreeing, but how did the same criteria not result in Hawkins getting a week? 

It seems it all depends on the AFL definitions for accidental vs careless. Is it as simple as if you aren’t looking at the guy you hit, it’s accidental. If you are looking at him it’s careless?


54 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

forget the may incident, it is considered, rightly or wrongly, a purely accidental incident

no comparison to fritta incident

i'm sure there are many similar fend off incidents where no suspension resulted. these are the ones his defence (if necessary) need to reference

Dangerfield Grand Final Vlastuin

21 hours ago, Seetrollgetttroll said:

If Hawkins doesn't get suspended for swinging an elbow and accidentally fracturing Mays eye socket, Fritsch shouldn't get suspended for raising an elbow and having Powell run and stumble straight into it. Having said that, the AFL tribunal is so inconsistent these days it's hard to predict what the verdict might be. 

I would also argue he was avoiding a head clash....

  • Author

I think because we're winning and drawing favorable press the MRO will let him off.

I'm sure some of the mindless the criteria is based on ladder position.

 

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

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • 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
    • 216 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
    • 528 replies