Bayley Fritsch cleared of striking

[Fritta and Turner 3,650]

1 week

[The Jackson FIX 2,288]

2 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Was it intentional?

that will be the crux between a fine or Suspension 

He had the ball. That helps his argument. The other guy was low, that helps his argument. His elbow was up above the point of his shoulder: that is the only question in all of this

[Garbo 1,326]

Feeling is at least a week. He chose to raise the elbow got the player high. The only mitigating factor is he had the ball.

[Little Goffy 12,546]

If that earns a suspension Dusty might as well not come back from New Zealand.

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,122]

5 minutes ago, Garbo said:

Feeling is at least a week. He chose to raise the elbow got the player high. The only mitigating factor is he had the ball.

I could be wrong but the fact that it was an “in play” incident automatically gives him immunity from Intentional? 
Therefore saving him 3 weeks or even more.

I have a feeling he’ll get 2 weeks. Careless, to the head and high impact.

If you look at it objectively and not through MFC goggles, you’d concede it was a crude incident.

Really disappointing as we need him out there next week. And I hope I’m wrong.

Edited May 2, 2021 by Bring-Back-Powell

[olisik 4,060]

If unintentional (which it is) then I don’t see how it could be argued to be any worse then Hawkins unintentional eye socket breaking elbow. At least the impacted player continued the game in this instance where as May missed a week.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

6 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

I could be wrong but the fact that it was an “in play” incident automatically gives him immunity from Intentional? 
Therefore saving him 3 weeks or even more.

I have a feeling he’ll get 2 weeks. Careless, to the head and high impact.

If you look at it objectively and not through MFC goggles, you’d concede it was a crude incident.

Really disappointing as we need him out there next week.

High impact? What’s that based on?

Edited May 2, 2021 by Clint Bizkit

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,122]

1 minute ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Night impact? What’s that based on?

The fact the North bloke was forced off the field. Wouldn’t that be the definition of high?

I hope I’m wrong and more than happy to be wrong.

[Superunknown 3,310]

Get a QC in (Brett walker please) and argue the Hawkins incident then demand recompense for wasting our time 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

2 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The fact the North bloke was forced off the field. Wouldn’t that be the definition of high?

I hope I’m wrong and more than happy to be wrong.

I would consider if he had his jaw broken as “high”. As an aside, I hate using outcomes to determine penalties but it’s the system the AFL use.

Even still, most force came from the North player running into Fritsch.

[Jaded No More 57,770]

4 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The fact the North bloke was forced off the field. Wouldn’t that be the definition of high?

I hope I’m wrong and more than happy to be wrong.

He was shaken. Passed concussion test. Came back on. He was rattled for sure but high impact is if you cause injury. 

Edited May 2, 2021 by Jaded

[chookrat 3,776]

1 hour ago, Better days ahead said:

If it is assessed and medium impact  and careless he'll get a week. Can't be worse than medium given phillips played out the game. It's line ball i reckon.

I think Fritsch has a good case for accidental as he played the ball, had zero alternative but to make contact and the high contact was no more careless than Tom Hawkins clumsy elbow against May. Common sense dictates that Fritsch was playing the ball and did not act unreasonably.

I suspect the AFL will avoid the accidental v careless aspect in terms of suspension and grade it as careless, low impact, high contact which is a $1500 fine.

Edited May 2, 2021 by chookrat

[chookrat 3,776]

5 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The fact the North bloke was forced off the field. Wouldn’t that be the definition of high?

I hope I’m wrong and more than happy to be wrong.

He did not do a concussion test and provided there are no adverse findings in the medical report it would likely be low impact.

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,122]

3 minutes ago, Jaded said:

He was shaken. Passed concussion test. Came back on. He was rattled for sure but high impact is if you cause injury. 

Hope you’re correct but can’t see him getting away with anything better than medium. Hence 1 week at best.

[chookrat 3,776]

3 minutes ago, Jaded said:

He was shaken. Passed concussion test. Came back on. He was rattled for sure but high impact is if you cause injury. 

Did he have a concussion test? As if that were the case it is a mandatory 20 minutes off ground and nothing was mentioned by commentators. I thoughts he went to the bench, had a spell and got back onto the ground.

[Jaded No More 57,770]

2 minutes ago, chookrat said:

Did he have a concussion test? As if that were the case it is a mandatory 20 minutes off ground and nothing was mentioned by commentators. I thoughts he went to the bench, had a spell and got back onto the ground.

He would have had an assessment to determine if one was needed. Obviously it was not. 

[dice 566]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-news-2021-north-melbourne-vs-melbourne-tom-powell-bayley-fritsch-high-contact-mro-match-review-michael-christian/news-story/d66bef46a83663c4fcc6de4341585f3a

Gotta love the media when it comes to elbows:

• Fritta - ERRANT
• Hawkins - ACCIDENTAL
• Hipwood - ACCIDENTAL

 

[dazzledavey36 48,704]

13 minutes ago, Jaded said:

He was shaken. Passed concussion test. Came back on. He was rattled for sure but high impact is if you cause injury. 

Read a FOX sports article stating that he didn't undertake a concussion test.

[In Harmes Way 7,491]

Has to be low impact and a fine at worst, but what would I know. Powell played out the game without even the need for a concussion test.

Its a bit of a farce frankly that the AFL have four levels of grading for impact without definition of what these are.

[Sir Why You Little 34,430]

40 minutes ago, The Jackson 6 said:

He had the ball. That helps his argument. The other guy was low, that helps his argument. His elbow was up above the point of his shoulder: that is the only question in all of this

I think it is worth fighting if there is a suspension. 
Fritta may not have even seen the low tackler, he was spinning around 

[John Crow Batty 8,247]

 

30 minutes ago, chookrat said:

I think Fritsch has a good case for accidental as he played the ball, had zero alternative but to make contact and the high contact was no more careless than Tom Hawkins clumsy elbow against May. Common sense dictates that Fritsch was playing the ball and did not act unreasonably.

I suspect the AFL will avoid the accidental v careless aspect in terms of suspension and grade it as careless, low impact, high contact which is a $1500 fine.

Right in front of the umpire who didn’t think it was reportable. Agree should only be fine. 

Edited May 2, 2021 by John Crow Batty

[Willmoy1947 3,769]

I'll tell you what, i don't care that he gets reported and gets a week. He stood up, after getting hit behind the play not for the first time, and took care of himself. We are on top and not reliant on one player in our forward line.

This mob were instructed to rough us up, and that is what is going to happen for the rest of the year.

I would rather have a player out of the side for getting rubbed out than being injured and out for four/six weeks.

We need to get over saying  he didn't mean it and winging about it, and i reckon a lot of coaches think the same albeit quietly

[daisycutter 28,484]

optics certainly don't look good

bit of a raffle how the mro view it, especially as he was in possession

[monoccular 16,042]

1 hour ago, John Crow Batty said:

 

Right in front of the umpire who didn’t think it was reportable. Agree should only be fine. 

... or, like Hawkins smashing Mays face and causing concussion, not even cited. 

[Lord Travis 10,158]

2 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

If that earns a suspension Dusty might as well not come back from New Zealand.

100% this. Dusty fends off high every week, often recklessly to the head or throat. He never even gets cited for head high contact. I still remember he did a high fend off on Jordie McKenzie years ago that hit his throat and Jordie came from the ground with breathing issues. Not cited, not even a free kick. The rules don’t apply for Martin apparently!

What is Fritsch supposed to do in this scenario? Not try to protect himself and just accept broken ribs? He was about to be cleaned up by a guy coming in at waist and chest height. He had less than half a second to react in mid air and just braced himself for strong contact. He honestly did an incredible job not to raise his arm and shoulder higher and completely cave in the guys skull. The North player was dazed for a bit but then played out the game. It was possibly the best result injury wise for both players.

If he gets suspended for that then the game is officially a non contact sport going forward. Not even worth a fine.