Jump to content

Featured Replies

14 minutes ago, Deesprate said:

I can live with Chandlers being pinned and driven into ground is about as dangerous as it get. The feeling as your pile driven and helpless is sickening. Whether it deliberate is beside the point he need to learn to tackle differently. BUT that one week for Ryan is stupefying. His actions were premeditated and deliberate. If you compare the two it is much worse. In our courts manslaughter ie death without intent is less than murder with intent. This decision is simply astonishing and appalling. It is pure dumb luck Bowery was not seriously injured. The MRO said it was careless it wasn’t it was premeditated hit. Get downgraded to careless why other than he a well known player and Chandlers a no body. The AFLis a freakin joke

This is my take too. Chandler verdict regretfully correct. Ryan verdict a ridiculous under-reaction.

 
1 minute ago, Nasher said:

This is my take too. Chandler verdict regretfully correct. Ryan verdict a ridiculous under-reaction.

Agree. If you choose to pin both a players arms and drive him into the ground then the dirt of care is on you to role him or do something else to protect his head as you’ve taken away his ability to protect himself. If you don’t do that then mostly you will be lucky if he is only concussed and. Or far more seriously injured. 

Message received - you are better off lining someone up off the ball and collecting them in the head rather than risk tackling them 

 
8 minutes ago, Nasher said:

This is my take too. Chandler verdict regretfully correct. Ryan verdict a ridiculous under-reaction.

No Chandler incident part of footy PERFECT tackle no penalty. FFS That Liam Ryan gets one week only for a deliberate hit is AFL HYPOCRACY at its absolute best GFY AFL have huge image problem with a myriad of .mish mash make it up as u go rules eg stand rule and even more bulltish absurd dissention garbage. They are in danger of losing the common man. I FURIOUS about this

Edited by picket fence


I like watching Liam Ryan play. His efforts in an undermanned WCE team this year have been full of merit. So I wish him no ill.

However his bump on Bowey is a textbook example of what we are trying to remove from the game. That sort of action can put someone in a wheelchair for the rest of their days.

This was a perfect opportunity for the MRO to confirm that this action won't be tolerated. Sorry Liam, you were bang out of order, have 3 weeks off.

Instead they slap him with a wet lettuce.

The MRO system is clearly broken. Either the prescriptive formula for assessing incidents needs a complete overhaul or Michael Christian is just not up to the job.

Just now, picket fence said:

No Chandler incident part of footy PERFECT tackle no penalty. That Liam Ryan gets one week only for a deliberate hit is AFL HYPOCRACY at its absolute best GFY AFL have huge image problem with a myriad of .mish mash make it up as u go rules eg Stand Rule and absurd dissention garbage. They are in danger of losing the common man. I FURIOUS about this

and don't forget the uncommon man too, picket. we are just as important even if we are a minority

2 minutes ago, Go the Biff said:

I like watching Liam Ryan play. His efforts in an undermanned WCE team this year have been full of merit. So I wish him no ill.

However his bump on Bowey is a textbook example of what we are trying to remove from the game. That sort of action can put someone in a wheelchair for the rest of their days.

This was a perfect opportunity for the MRO to confirm that this action won't be tolerated. Sorry Liam, you were bang out of order, have 3 weeks off.

Instead they slap him with a wet lettuce.

The MRO system is clearly broken. Either the prescriptive formula for assessing incidents needs a complete overhaul or Michael Christian is just not up to the job.

we have known for a long time christian is not up for it

 
  • Author
2 minutes ago, Go the Biff said:

The MRO system is clearly broken. Either the prescriptive formula for assessing incidents needs a complete overhaul or Michael Christian is just not up to the job.

Both.

Liam Ryan is a [censored], absolute rort system. 


Just now, daisycutter said:

and don't forget the uncommon man too, picket. we are just as important even if we are a minority

Commonly uncommon Daisy but we both know fair play and politics at its worse and the AFL is gun shy and gutless

FFS . . . can we just bring back Neil Busse and Monday nights at Harrison House. You: 4 weeks. You, you and you: 3 weeks. And as for you Mr. Rhys-Jones, 6 weeks. Bang.

Ah Byron how are you, 6 weeks

1 minute ago, picket fence said:

No Chandler incident part of footy PERFECT tackle no penalty. That Liam Ryan gets one week only for a deliberate hit is AFL HYPOCRACY at its absolute best GFY AFL have huge image problem with a myriad of .mish mash make it up as u go rules eg Stand Rule and absurd dissention garbage. They are in danger of losing the common man. I FURIOUS about this

Nuh

The last part of Chandler tackle where he drove forward was the bad bit, early in the tackle he was partly turning sideways and had that motion continued less or no damage would have occurred. Pinned arms and driven fwd was dangerous. Granted it was one motion, but the more times I watch the worse it looks.

Two weeks is harsh, would've preferred 2 down to 1

I can't understand the Ryan one??? 🤷‍♂️

Ryan went past the ball and chose to bump and only graded careless. Also the impact was flush and knocked bowey off his feet, but only medium impact

This is a clear case of penalising the result and not the action, and it was a sickening deliberate action

What absolute BS. 

Chandler gets 2 wks for a hard tackle and Ryan gets 1 week for deliberately getting Bowey high. 

AFL playing favourites again and we are on the wrong end of it AGAIN.

PATHETIC 


29 minutes ago, bing181 said:

I'll have a crack: it comes down to intent. Careless is just that, but reckless implies that you knew the action could cause damage but you went ahead anyway.

So then what is intentional?

I get what you're saying and there may be a logic to it but it is wide open to manipulation without any accountability.

Just now, DemonOX said:

What absolute BS. 

Chandler gets 2 wks for a hard tackle and Ryan gets 1 week for deliberately getting Bowey high. 

AFL playing favourites again and we are on the wrong end of it AGAIN.

PATHETIC 

Absolute BS BS AND FRIGGEN BS IM FURIOUS

I suppose Bowey got up and played on whereas Foley didn't.  Hence 1 game vs 2 games.

Feel sorry for kade as there was no malice in it.....

12 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

we have known for a long time christian is not up for it

And he wasn't on the bloody field either


3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

So then what is intentional?

I get what you're saying and there may be a logic to it but it is wide open to manipulation without any accountability.

Typically split second decisions in play aren't determined intentional

If you snot someone behind play (Gaff/Bugg/McCartin) is where intention is applied

Careless is a massive let off for Ryan, Reckless should've been the decision, medium impact based on result but looked like high impact in play

2 hours ago, mo64 said:

When you tackle a player from behind, you have 2 options. First option is to go to your knees so the tackled player is held upright with his armed pinned. Second option is to turn the player in the tackle without letting go, so it's not deemed a sling.

Unfortunately for Chandler, he chose neither, so his actions were reckless/dangerous. 

He'll cop a week with an early plea.

Not sure about reckless but agree with the rest.

Young Chandler mixed enthusiasm with poor technique. Even had Foley not hit his head, it was a free kick for in the back. Poor tackle and those who think it was "perfect" need to put away the Footy Flashbacks DVDs. 

I'd have thought a free kick was fair until it became obvious Foley was concussed. At that point Outcome over Action steps in and I knew a suspension was coming. Two weeks is a bit harsh for a single action tackle though.

Hopefully Foley is ok and Chandler improves his tackling technique - and a few of his team mates take notice. We have a couple that give away in the back frees when tackling from behind

 

The word reckless doesn't appear in the tribunal guidelines. It's either intentional or careless. 


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

  • PREVIEW: Carlton

    Good evening, Demon fans and welcome back to the Demonland Podcast ... it’s time to discuss this week’s game against the Blues. Will the Demons celebrate Clayton Oliver’s 200th game with a victory? We have a number of callers waiting on line … Leopold Bloom: Carlton and Melbourne are both out of finals contention with six wins and eleven losses, and are undoubtedly the two most underwhelming and disappointing teams of 2025. Both had high expectations at the start of participating and advancing deep into the finals, but instead, they have consistently underperformed and disappointed themselves and their supporters throughout the year. However, I am inclined to give the Demons the benefit of the doubt, as they have made some progress in addressing their issues after a disastrous start. In contrast, the Blues are struggling across the board and do not appear to be making any notable improvements. They are regressing, and a significant loss is looming on Saturday night. Max Gawn in the ruck will be huge and the Demon midfield have a point to prove after lowering their colours in so many close calls.

    • 0 replies
  • REPORT: North Melbourne

    I suppose that I should apologise for the title of this piece, but the temptation to go with it was far too great. The memory of how North Melbourne tore Melbourne apart at the seams earlier in the season and the way in which it set the scene for the club’s demise so early in the piece has been weighing heavily upon all of us. This game was a must-win from the club’s perspective, and the team’s response was overwhelming. The 36 point win over Alastair Clarkson’s Kangaroos at the MCG on Sunday was indeed — roovenge of the highest order!

    • 4 replies
  • CASEY: Werribee

    The Casey Demons remain in contention for a VFL finals berth following a comprehensive 76-point victory over the Werribee Tigers at Whitten Oval last night. The caveat to the performance is that the once mighty Tigers have been raided of many key players and are now a shadow of the premiership-winning team from last season. The team suffered a blow before the game when veteran Tom McDonald was withdrawn for senior duty to cover for Steven May who is ill.  However, after conceding the first goal of the game, Casey was dominant from ten minutes in until the very end and despite some early errors and inaccuracy, they managed to warm to the task of dismantling the Tigers with precision, particularly after half time when the nominally home side provided them with minimal resistance.

    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Carlton

    The Demons return to the MCG as the the visiting team on Saturday night to take on the Blues who are under siege after 4 straight losses. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Clap
      • Love
      • Like
    • 222 replies
  • PODCAST: North Melbourne

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 14th July @ 8:00pm. Join Binman & I as we dissect the Dees glorious win over the Kangaroos at the MCG.
    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/

    • 29 replies
  • POSTGAME: North Melbourne

    The Demons are finally back at the MCG and finally back on the winners list as they continually chipped away at a spirited Kangaroos side eventually breaking their backs and opening the floodgates to run out winners by 6 goals.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 253 replies