People don't do things like that in a meaningless game unless they have a reason. 

We all know what it might be...

17 minutes ago, Chook said:

People don't do things like that in a meaningless game unless they have a reason. 

We all know what it might be...

…. which could well be the reason that Colonwood have clearly downplayed the event. 

19 minutes ago, Chook said:

People don't do things like that in a meaningless game unless they have a reason. 

We all know what it might be...

Why did Gaff hit Brayshaw? 

Edited August 17, 20214 yr by Ethan Trembley

7 minutes ago, Ethan Trembley said:

Why did Gaff hit Brayshaw? 

because brayshaw was impeding/holding him? or something else?

at least it looked like brayshaw was holding. in this case there seems no apparent reason, hence the questioning. i'm not suggesting the r word, just thinking it might have been something we didn't see

Edited August 17, 20214 yr by daisycutter

I think it’s really poor form to suggest there was racism involved. If you were Cox, would you be happy with even the suggestion? 

3 minutes ago, Ethan Trembley said:

I think it’s really poor form to suggest there was racism involved. If you were Cox, would you be happy with even the suggestion? 

agree ethan, but something happened and colonwood clearly lied for some reason

i'm not trying to exonerate majak either, just wondering why he did what he did

17 minutes ago, Ethan Trembley said:

Why did Gaff hit Brayshaw? 

Gaff meant to hit him in the chest and missed, was always my take.

I’m not saying what Daw has done is fine but if someone wants be super critical and throw the book at him then where’s the criticism of Selwood what his blatant high bump? 

Is this yet again media personal wanting “optics” to dictate the MRO? Smells like an agenda to me. 

If Mason Cox's lawyers find this thread somebody's going to have to restart Demonology.

36 minutes ago, Chook said:

Gaff meant to hit him in the chest and missed, was always my take.

And? That’s still a hit. 

1 hour ago, Ethan Trembley said:

I think it’s really poor form to suggest there was racism involved. If you were Cox, would you be happy with even the suggestion? 

Yep, you really can't make that assumption 'Ethan'...agreed.

...but it was an unusual incident, maybe payback for something earlier in the game.

One week suspension. Tom Morris is a fickfm tool 

2 hours ago, Demonstone said:

What Grinter did was indefensible.

It was a dirty, unprovoked coat-hanger behind the play that caused serious damage to Wallace.   

Actually the incident was in the play. Grinter got Wallace a fraction of a second after Wallace fumbled the ball in front of his face. I suspect Wallace fumbled because he saw Grinter coming. 

Edited August 17, 20214 yr by John Crow Batty

2 hours ago, monoccular said:

I was just pointing out that that  was another first for the tribunal (as far as I remember)

The tribunal were on to Grinter after several other coat hanger type incidents in preceding games as well as an article in the papers about an unnamed “hit man” around the time.

Edited August 17, 20214 yr by John Crow Batty

1 hour ago, Pates said:

I’m not saying what Daw has done is fine but if someone wants be super critical and throw the book at him then where’s the criticism of Selwood what his blatant high bump? 

Is this yet again media personal wanting “optics” to dictate the MRO? Smells like an agenda to me. 

What I don’t get is that Tom Morris is a Melbourne man too. Or at least he was a former employee. 

14 minutes ago, CYB said:

What I don’t get is that Tom Morris is a Melbourne man too. Or at least he was a former employee. 

He’s a journalist doing his job so don’t expect any favours. However, his analysis simply doesn’t sound right in light of what we’ve seen in recent weeks at AFL level. Hawkins got off with nothing for what he did on Saturday. Dangerfield and Selwood have both been lucky not to be sanctioned in recent weeks either. At worst, this is a one week suspension. 

8 minutes ago, Freddy Fuschia said:

He’s a journalist doing his job so don’t expect any favours. However, his analysis simply doesn’t sound right in light of what we’ve seen in recent weeks at AFL level. Hawkins got off with nothing for what he did on Saturday. Dangerfield and Selwood have both been lucky not to be sanctioned in recent weeks either. At worst, this is a one week suspension. 

He adds mayonnaise to everything, and sets himself up as an expert football commentator. Yes he is a journalist doing his job, you're not wrong, but all the extra sensationalism makes me loathe him. 

3 hours ago, Demonstone said:

What Grinter did was indefensible.

It was a dirty, unprovoked coat-hanger behind the play that caused serious damage to Wallace.   

Bulltish.

Ball was in play/dispute. Grinter was about a second too late connecting with the pill.

As a spectator I was about 30 metres from the incident.

The TV replays do Grinter no favours. 

 

4 hours ago, willmoy said:

Grinter was a lot like Rys Jones and Crosswell,

Without the skill.

7 hours ago, dee-tox said:

Bulltish.

Ball was in play/dispute.

Just had a look at the clip on Youtube and you're correct that it was in play.  Nevertheless, it was still a dirty and violent round-arm swipe to the neck/head region.   

8 hours ago, CYB said:

What I don’t get is that Tom Morris is a Melbourne man too. Or at least he was a former employee. 

Doesn't stop him from being a dipstick

That's baffling from Majak. 

Unless somehow he thought Cox had the ball and it's a tackle gone all wrong - the slips up as Cox dips down - it makes no sense at all.

Not the right week to have damaged someone's larynx

10 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

Actually the incident was in the play. Grinter got Wallace a fraction of a second after Wallace fumbled the ball in front of his face. I suspect Wallace fumbled because he saw Grinter coming. 

That is how I recall the incident - rather like  "clumsy" Hawkins or Mumford wild swing with a bad outcome.

Is anyone able to show the footage.

13 hours ago, monoccular said:

I guess the AFL have copped some criticism for not acting on well publicised acts so why not kicking a MFC player down?

It seems the usual thing setting precedents - ANB, Jakovic (only player suspended for wrestling), Trengove v Dangerfield, Viney v Lynch, even Grinter v Wallace. 

Barassi v Squealer Dean

Very odd indeed.

Cox can be a bit of a mouth if he thinks he can sledge someone who he thinks he can get away with it with. While Majak has been around ten years, both he and Cox aren’t the type of footballers it comes to instinctually, so maybe he thought that he would get lippy.

What the contents of that were if it happened, who knows? It seems out of character for Majak to do something like that. 

Let’s not jump the gun on making allegations, shall we? There is also a possibility that Majak may have simply had a brain snap. It would be odd for a guy from an American basketballing background, one who looked more than uncomfortable when Sam Newman kept trying to get him to wear a MAGA cap on the Footy Show and was Joe Biden’s welcoming committee to not realize the gravity of those types of remarks.

Hopefully, it all comes out.

 

Edited August 18, 20214 yr by Colin B. Flaubert