Jump to content

2022 Match Review Panel

Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Explain a free kick for a front on infringement to me because I reckon Willie Rioli should have got one.

Rowell did not have eyes on the ball unless he has eyes in the back of his head 

Nick Reiwolds famous running with flight mark could have been a free kick against him 

If two players are contesting a mark from different direction then why does one have more rights to mark the ball 

 

 

 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     

    I think there is a potential Concussion issue in the Rioli/Rowell one and other similar ones this year. To me it seems that what looks to be a head contact of some intensity is just being ignored or nothing to see here type incident. Should the player just be allowed to get up and play on. Who is doing the checking here as it seems more likely than not that the picture just pans away to something else asap.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     
    5 hours ago, Cyclops said:

    Explain a free kick for a front on infringement to me because I reckon Willie Rioli should have got one.

    Rowell did not have eyes on the ball unless he has eyes in the back of his head 

    Nick Reiwolds famous running with flight mark could have been a free kick against him 

    If two players are contesting a mark from different direction then why does one have more rights to mark the ball 

     

     

     

    As I called it Rioli free to play

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Vomit 1

    Rioli free to play

    cleaning up players going for the ball seems to be fine

    play on

  • Quote

    His hip flushed him in the head. He did not have eyes for the ball. He crunched a bloke with eyes for the ball and then his team got a goal 15 seconds later. 
     

    message for players - leave the ground, smash blokes and you’ll be right

  • Quote
    • Like 6
    • Vomit 1
     

    Having reviewed the Dangerfield vision, I'd have to say it's inconclusive.

    I.e. it must have been from about 2014 which was about the last time Patty was young enough to jump off the ground with both feet.

  • Quote

    Rioli getting off is a completely unfathomable decision. The Tribunal have just confirmed they are completely out of touch with the average fan. Bizarre 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    33 minutes ago, DubDee said:

    His hip flushed him in the head. He did not have eyes for the ball. He crunched a bloke with eyes for the ball and then his team got a goal 15 seconds later. 
     

    message for players - leave the ground, smash blokes and you’ll be right

    At times, you've got to wonder what goes on behind the scenes. So the head isn't sacrosanct. Good for the lawyers to know re duty of care..

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    AFL Tribunal saying that holding ground and bracing is much worse than running full pace jumping and meeting a player with eyes for the footy in the head with their hip.

    Animated GIF
     

    AFL needs to appeal and then the need another review of the set up if this is what we are getting.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    It's a complete joke. what is Robinson meant to do. Get out of the way and be branded a squib or brace for the bump. He could have kept moving and made it worse. This game is going from bad to worse. Soon Basketball will be a tougher game. Absolute stupidity from the AFL. Oh for the good old days!.

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

    Explain a free kick for a front on infringement to me because I reckon Willie Rioli should have got one.

    Rowell did not have eyes on the ball unless he has eyes in the back of his head 

    Nick Reiwolds famous running with flight mark could have been a free kick against him 

    If two players are contesting a mark from different direction then why does one have more rights to mark the ball 

     

     

     

    I’ll explain it as it is not really very difficult.  If they both have eyes on the ball then it’s a fair contest.  As soon as one takes their eye off the ball it’s a free (and maybe suspension if they jump in the air and make high contact).  How simple is that concept.  Feel free to forward this to Jeff Gleeson as he obviously has never played the game.

    The pictures also show you don’t need eyes in the back of your head to mark running with the flight.  Just a lot of courage. 

    06E45C91-3EEF-4C03-99F3-FEC454BD7269.thumb.png.85fdc5a62c4f1e4ed66f30df1b1342f1.png229263EE-8502-4E84-9B26-ADD0215192B5.thumb.png.e0732a55e63b3af5e335895992aebfe5.png007308D1-A7AE-420B-B263-186FDE4708F0.thumb.png.04ba32eafc90ee81d4072731562bf1d3.png

  • Quote

    Thanks for merging threads and sorry for missing this thread to start with. Revised for round 1 - AFL off to a bad start, I have tried every angle to see how it looked like a serious attempt to get the ball, never put his arms in the air. To be fair to the AFL it was the tribunal and not the MRO that gave Willie an out. Robinson actually got lower, first time I have ever had sympathy for this guy.

    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 = -2/2

  • Quote

    If I was this bloke's family I would seriously turn up at some blockheads front door and say we want this fixed or else.

  • Quote
    3 hours ago, Watson11 said:

    I’ll explain it as it is not really very difficult.  If they both have eyes on the ball then it’s a fair contest.  As soon as one takes their eye off the ball it’s a free (and maybe suspension if they jump in the air and make high contact).  How simple is that concept.  Feel free to forward this to Jeff Gleeson as he obviously has never played the game.

    The pictures also show you don’t need eyes in the back of your head to mark running with the flight.  Just a lot of courage. 

    06E45C91-3EEF-4C03-99F3-FEC454BD7269.thumb.png.85fdc5a62c4f1e4ed66f30df1b1342f1.png229263EE-8502-4E84-9B26-ADD0215192B5.thumb.png.e0732a55e63b3af5e335895992aebfe5.png007308D1-A7AE-420B-B263-186FDE4708F0.thumb.png.04ba32eafc90ee81d4072731562bf1d3.png

    Thank you for that explanation Watson11 however what you offer is a circumstance. What if both have eyes for the ball and both jump but are going at different speeds? Rioli going out intercept the ball had every right to do that. If in case both had kept their feet then the outcome may have been tragic.

    To me every circumstance seems to have a different interpretation.

    FWIW his name is Jeff Gieschen but the fellow you need is Michael Jennings.

    Edited by Cyclops
    Spelling

  • Quote
    4 hours ago, Cyclops said:

    Thank you for that explanation Watson11 however what you offer is a circumstance. What if both have eyes for the ball and both jump but are going at different speeds? Rioli going out intercept the ball had every right to do that. If in case both had kept their feet then the outcome may have been tragic.

    To me every circumstance seems to have a different interpretation.

    FWIW his name is Jeff Gieschen but the fellow you need is Michael Jennings.

    If Rioli kept his feet he may have been able to make a last minute decision to turn out of the way as he was second to the ball. He left the ground, and he turned his hip into a weapon. We are trying to stop that behaviour.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     

    The Rioli decision is the latest disgrace in what is an ongoing disgrace: the state of the AFL's MRO/Tribunal system.

    I can't use the word broken enough.

  • Quote
    • Like 8
    • Thanks 1
    5 hours ago, Cyclops said:

    Thank you for that explanation Watson11 however what you offer is a circumstance. What if both have eyes for the ball and both jump but are going at different speeds? Rioli going out intercept the ball had every right to do that. If in case both had kept their feet then the outcome may have been tragic.

    To me every circumstance seems to have a different interpretation.

    FWIW his name is Jeff Gieschen but the fellow you need is Michael Jennings.

    If Rioli chose to contest the mark, he would have had his arms in a position where he could have taken a chest mark. He chose to turn sideways, which could be construed as bracing himself against contact or deliberate head high contact to Rowell with a hip and shoulder. As with the Mitch Robison case, bracing yourself is no defence.

    FWIW, the tribunal panel member's name is Jeff Gleeson.

  • Quote

    • 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: Gold Coast

      The Gold Coast Suns find themselves outside of the top eight for the first time since Round 1 with pressure is mounting on the entire organisation. Their coach Damien Hardwick expressed his frustration at his team’s condition last week by making a middle-finger gesture on television that earned him a fine for his troubles. He showed his desperation by claiming that Fox should pick up the tab.  There’s little doubt the Suns have shown improvement in 2025, and their position on the ladder is influenced to some extent by having played fewer games than their rivals for a playoff role at the end of the season, courtesy of the disruption caused by Cyclone Alfred in March.  However, they are following the same trajectory that hindered the club in past years whenever they appeared to be nearing their potential. As a consequence, that Hardwick gesture should be considered as more than a mere behavioral lapse. It’s a distress signal that does not bode well for the Queenslanders. While the Suns are eager to remain in contention with the top eight, Melbourne faces its own crisis, which is similarly deep-seated but in a much different way. After recovering from a disappointing start to the season and nearing a return to respectability among its peer clubs, the Demons have experienced a decline in status, driven by the fact that while their form has been reasonable (see their performance against the ladder leader in the Kings Birthday match), their conversion in front of goal is poor enough to rank last in the competition. Furthermore, their opponents find them exceptionally easy to score against. As a result, they have effectively eliminated themselves from the finals race and are again positioned to finish in the bottom half of the ladder.

        • Haha
      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 15

      As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

        • Clap
      • 287 replies
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Port Adelaide

      Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

        • Like
      • 3 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Essendon

      Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Gold Coast

      The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

        • Haha
      • 371 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Port Adelaide

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 16th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Power.
      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/

        • Sad
        • Thanks
      • 33 replies
      Demonland
    View All