Jump to content

2022 Match Review Panel

Demonland
Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

 
 
38 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

At least Greene's was in one motion, Danger re-extended his leg to make contact 

Pretty bad look and will go on to be ignored 

  • Quote
    • Vomit 3

    Danger should have gotten a week for that

    I thought Maynard was a touch stiff.  the bloke knocked himself out on the ground and so Maynard got 2 weeks.  if the bloke didnt fall so awkwardly he would have been cleared.  unlucky

  • Quote
    • Shocked 1

    2 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

    Whately interviewed Dangerfield this morning. 
    this of course was not mentioned 

    Lyon and Watson also interviewed him today.

    Too busy talking about fishing, the price of petrol etc, than tackling the big issues.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    1 hour ago, DubDee said:

    Danger should have gotten a week for that

    I thought Maynard was a touch stiff.  the bloke knocked himself out on the ground and so Maynard got 2 weeks.  if the bloke didnt fall so awkwardly he would have been cleared.  unlucky

    If Maynard had gone with a straight arm to punch instead of a round arm that collected his head with the bicep, the bloke would have a better chance to land.

    From what the tribunal has indicated, Maynard caused the contact, and it doesn't really matter whether the concussion occurs with the direct hit or the subsequent landing of the player in question.

    PS: That Dangerfield action is shocking, but not as bad as the fact that the media are too scared to raise the spectre of their darling doing something bad.  Dangerfield, Selwood and Hawkins have a thuggery element that is almost never exposed by the media.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Angry 2
    5 minutes ago, Ouch! said:

    If Maynard had gone with a straight arm to punch instead of a round arm that collected his head with the bicep, the bloke would have a better chance to land.

    From what the tribunal has indicated, Maynard caused the contact, and it doesn't really matter whether the concussion occurs with the direct hit or the subsequent landing of the player in question.

    PS: That Dangerfield action is shocking, but not as bad as the fact that the media are too scared to raise the spectre of their darling doing something bad.  Dangerfield, Selwood and Hawkins have a thuggery element that is almost never exposed by the media.

    Yep, that's the bit I don't agree with.  Hopefully they are at least consistent with the interpretation this year

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    1 hour ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

    Lyon and Watson also interviewed him today.

    Too busy talking about fishing, the price of petrol etc, than tackling the big issues.

    Patrick can do no wrong 

    he speaks well

    Classic Velvet Sledgehammer 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    2 hours ago, Ouch! said:

    From what the tribunal has indicated, Maynard caused the contact.

     

    Well it wasn't the guy on the ground.

    I was surprised that he only got 2 weeks. Doesn't matter where it hits above the shoulder or with what part of the arm. It was a late, reckless, head high, swinging arm contact. If they are going to protect the head, then 4 weeks minimum.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Toby must be [censored] off.  He gets into trouble (correctly) for using his leg to sort of 'protect the ball drop' and Dangerfield, puts his leg down and in a seperate action raises it again high up.  The AFL wants us to respect umpires - perhaps the AFL should work on earning our respect.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
    • Love 1
    5 hours ago, MrFreeze said:

    At least Greene's was in one motion, Danger re-extended his leg to make contact 

    Pretty bad look and will go on to be ignored 

    I disagree. Greene kicked his opponent in the head. Dangerfield basically pushed his opponent in the chest with his foot. IMV not comparable. I'm no Dangerfield apologist and I thought it was ridiculous he appealed his suspension early last year on the grounds of protecting himsaeld from the collision. Surely though, the fact he was suspended last year shows he's not getting special treatment.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    32 minutes ago, tiers said:

    Well it wasn't the guy on the ground.

    I was surprised that he only got 2 weeks. Doesn't matter where it hits above the shoulder or with what part of the arm. It was a late, reckless, head high, swinging arm contact. If they are going to protect the head, then 4 weeks minimum.

    I'm with you tiers. I accept the fact that the contact was accidental, but it was definitely careless. Lloyd could have just as easily been concussed from the contact as from hitting his head on the ground. And why did he his head on the ground? Because he was unbalanced from being hit in the head. I was amazed that Collingwood appealed this and my faith in the process was restored somewhat by the MRO chucking the appeal out. Lucky to geet onlt 2 weeks IMV.

    Having said that, I really don't understand why the level of injury should have any effect one way or the other. Why should the rule be that if you're lucky your opponent isn't injured the penalty iis less (and vice versa). It should be the action, not the consequences, that count 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    14 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

    I disagree. Greene kicked his opponent in the head. Dangerfield basically pushed his opponent in the chest with his foot. IMV not comparable. I'm no Dangerfield apologist and I thought it was ridiculous he appealed his suspension early last year on the grounds of protecting himsaeld from the collision. Surely though, the fact he was suspended last year shows he's not getting special treatment

    Disagree.  There was no justification for the 2 actions. His foot came very close to his head.  Given the attention Greene's tactics were getting, he may well have been rubbed out if his foot hit the 'chest' rather than the head.

    I won't get into an argument about Dangerfield getting special treatment except to say you can have special treatment but still occasionally not get off.  Do you suggest there are no players who get special treatment?  Some still get rubbed out - cats only have 9 lives.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
    36 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

    I Dangerfield basically pushed his opponent in the chest with his foot.

    His foot should not have been raised at all nor extended after taking the ball. Feet should not make contact in any way.

    Minimum 2 weeks for raised foot making contact.

  • Quote
    • Like 5

    2 hours ago, Sydney_Demon said:

    I disagree. Greene kicked his opponent in the head. Dangerfield basically pushed his opponent in the chest with his foot. IMV not comparable. I'm no Dangerfield apologist and I thought it was ridiculous he appealed his suspension early last year on the grounds of protecting himsaeld from the collision. Surely though, the fact he was suspended last year shows he's not getting special treatment.

    Greene's action was legal at the time. The rule has since been changed, and both actions are now illegal, but I think worthy only of free kicks.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    2 hours ago, sue said:

    Disagree.  There was no justification for the 2 actions. His foot cabutme very close to his head.  Given the attention Greene's tactics were getting, he may well have been rubbed out if his foot hit the 'chest' rather than the head.

    I won't get into an argument about Dangerfield getting special treatment except to say you can have special treatment but still occasionally not get off.  Do you suggest there are no players who get special treatment?  Some still get rubbed out - cats only have 9 lives.

    Sorry. You are right. Of course certain players can be rubbed out on occasion and still in general be treated leniently. Maybe Dangerfield falls into this category. The general tenor of the posts on this seemed to be that Dangerfeld always gets away with these sorts of actions because he he is an AFL darling, which I think is an overstatement (because  he clearly doesn't always gert away with it!).

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    5 hours ago, Ouch! said:

    Dangerfield, Selwood and Hawkins have a thuggery element that is almost never exposed by the media.

    I'm no Geelong apologist but really? Thuggery? I don't like the way Selwood always whinges to umpires and plays for free kicks but I don't think he has a thuggery element to his game. And Tom Hawkins?

  • Quote
    On 3/9/2022 at 2:47 PM, DubDee said:

    Yep, that's the bit I don't agree with.  Hopefully they are at least consistent with the interpretation this year

    I don't have a problem if that is the call. How can you say if he was concussed by the hit or by hitting the ground? It's impossible, but you can say that the end result was caused by an action that the player making the spoil was responsible for. But I agree that the consistency of applying the rules is key!

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • 2 weeks later...

    Going to try and keep a running update (with a bit of editorial as is my habit, and absolute bias in anything involving JV). Not going to waste time on the jumper punches etc. Feel free to remind me if I miss an incident and any constructive suggestions please share. Any ideas on other Tribunal matters I/ we should be watching. At the end of the year we can assess if the bump is truly dead, on current evidence no.

    This weeks MRO report.

    https://www.afl.com.au/news/724584/match-review-eagle-learns-fate-crow-banned-for-eye-contact

    Brisbane - Mitch Robinson bump on Xavier Duursma - was graded as careless conduct, high contact and medium impact. I say BS, Robbo is a (~^+, but conduct not careless, he stopped and propped and Duursma got pushed lower. Duty of Care exercised.

    WCE - Willie Rioli bump on Matt Rowell -  graded as careless conduct, medium impact and high contact, resulting in a one-match ban that brings Rioli's comeback to a halt. I say BS, left his feet, no eye for the ball, impact should have been judged high. Intent also was clearly to bump.

    Scoring for Head High:

    Correct call = 1 pt (think Toby Greene 6 weeks)

    Insufficient Call =.5 pt (half right i.e. Rioli)

    Bad Call = 0 (flat out wrong)

    Bogus Call = -1 (Star player like Paddy getting off or MFC Tax being exercised - where we get slammed extra)

    Out of however many possible HH Incidents there are during a round.

    Head High Running score for MRO r1, 2022 = 0.5/2

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Shocked 1

    Good luck with this thread mate, could be a long one!

    agree with your assessments in round 1. 
    Rioli was graded as medium impact!?! Maybe the MRO should cop this hit and see how they recover? And careless? He clearly made no attempt to mark. In the MROs eyes Robinson and Rioli showed the same intent. What a joke

    lets hope Robinson gets off at the tribunal 

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    The MRO is truly bizarre in it's reasoning, is it still just Christensen deliberating with darts and a spinning dart board with random outcomes on it?

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Haha 2
    1 hour ago, Cards13 said:

    The MRO is truly bizarre in it's reasoning, is it still just Christensen deliberating with darts and a spinning dart board with random outcomes on it?

    No and Yes

    No - its is Michael Christian and Yes it is darts and a board....

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
     

    Gee whiz, Rioli could have killed Matt Rowell. Seriously dangerous to life and limb with  deliberate intent to take him out. Rioli is incredibly lucky not to have seriously injured or maimed Rowell. One week your joking. 

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    • Vomit 1

    Rioli's action was disgraceful, and he should have copped multiple weeks. AFL should appeal.

    HS today has an article by Robbo comparing Draper's deliberate strike (fine only) with the Robinson case (suspension). I agree that Draper should have copped a week, and have no idea what Robinson was expected to do in that situation.

  • 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

    • PREVIEW: Essendon

      As the focus of the AFL moves exclusively to South Australia for Gather Round, the question is raised as to what are we going to get from the  Melbourne Football Club this weekend? Will it be a repeat of the slop fest of the last three weeks that have seen the team score a measly 174 points and concede 310 or will a return to the City of Churches and the scene where they performed at their best in 2024 act as a wakeup call and bring them out of their early season reverie?  Or will the sleepy Dees treat their fans to a reenactment of their lazy effort from the first Gather Round of two years ago when they allowed the Bombers to trample all over them on a soggy and wet Adelaide Oval? The two examples from above tell us how fickle form can be in football. Last year, a committed group of players turned up in Adelaide with a businesslike mindset. They had a plan, went in confidently and hard for the football and kicked winning scores against both home teams in a difficult environment for visitors. And they repeated that sort of effort later in the season when they played Essendon at the MCG.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Essendon

      Facing the very real and daunting prospect of starting the season with five straight losses, the Demons head to South Australia for the annual Gather Round, where they’ll take on the Bombers in search of their first win of the year. Who comes in, and who comes out?

        • Thumb Down
        • Like
      • 411 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 05

      Gather Round is here, kicking off with a Thursday night blockbuster as Adelaide faces Geelong. The Crows will be out for redemption after a controversial loss last week. Saturday starts with the Magpies taking on the Swans. Collingwood will be eager to cement their spot in the top eight, while Sydney is hot on their heels. In the Barossa Valley, two rising sides go head-to-head in a fascinating battle to prove they're the real deal. Later, Carlton and West Coast face off at Adelaide Oval, both desperate to notch their first win of the season. The action then shifts to Norwood, where the undefeated Lions will aim to keep their streak alive against the Bulldogs. Sunday’s games begin in the Barossa with Richmond up against Fremantle. In Norwood, the Saints will be looking to take a scalp when they come up against the Giants. The round concludes with a fiery rematch of last year's semi-final, as the Hawks seek revenge for their narrow loss to Port Adelaide. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

        • Angry
      • 96 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Geelong

      There was a time in the second quarter of the game at the Cattery on Friday afternoon when the Casey Demons threatened to take the game apart against the Cats. The Demons had been well on top early but were struggling to convert their ascendancy over the ground until Tom Fullarton’s burst of three goals in the space of eight minutes on the way to a five goal haul and his best game for the club since arriving from Brisbane at the end of 2023. He was leading, marking and otherwise giving his opponents a merry dance as Casey grabbed a three goal lead in the blink of an eye. Fullarton has now kicked ten goals in Casey’s three matches and, with Melbourne’s forward conversion woes, he is definitely in with a chance to get his first game with the club in next week’s Gather Round in Adelaide. Despite the tall forward’s efforts - he finished with 19 disposals and eight marks and had four hit outs as back up to Will Verrall in the second half - it wasn’t enough as Geelong reigned in the lead through persistent attacks and eventually clawed their way to the lead early in the last and held it till they achieved the end aim of victory.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Geelong

      I was disappointed to hear Goody say at his post match presser after the team’s 39 point defeat against Geelong that "we're getting high quality entry, just poor execution" because Melbourne’s problems extend far beyond that after its 0 - 4 start to the 2025 football season. There are clearly problems with poor execution, some of which were evident well before the current season and were in play when the Demons met the Cats in early May last year and beat them in a near top-of-the-table clash that saw both sides sitting comfortably in the top four after round eight. Since that game, the Demons’ performances have been positively Third World with only five wins in 19 games with a no longer majestic midfield and a dysfunctional forward line that has become too easy for opposing coaches to counter. This is an area of their game that is currently being played out as if they were all completely panic-stricken.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 04

      Round 4 kicks off with a blockbuster on Thursday night as traditional rivals Collingwood and Carlton clash at the MCG, with the Magpies looking to assert themselves as early-season contenders and the Blues seeking their first win of the season. Saturday opens with Gold Coast hosting Adelaide, a key test for the Suns as they aim to back up their big win last week, while the Crows will be looking to keep their perfect record intact. Reigning wooden spooners Richmond have the daunting task of facing reigning premiers Brisbane at the ‘G and the Lions will be eager to reaffirm their premiership credentials after a patchy start. Saturday night sees North Melbourne take on Sydney at Marvel Stadium, with the Swans looking to build on their first win of the season last week against a rebuilding Roos outfit. Sunday’s action begins with GWS hosting West Coast at ENGIE Stadium, a game that could get ugly very early for the visitors. Port Adelaide vs St Kilda at Adelaide Oval looms as a interesting clash, with both clubs form being very hard to read. The round wraps up with Fremantle taking on the Western Bulldogs at Optus Stadium in what could be a fierce contest between two sides with top-eight ambitions. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • 273 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All