Jump to content

Featured Replies

 

The strange thing is with all of this I kind of agree that he shouldnt get suspended if it was judged he was playing the ball and had no intent to make a hit, If that’s the judgement, which you could argue against too. 
 

however, I would love the afl to move toward intent rather than outcome as it seems far less complicated. It does however mean some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished. 

 
14 minutes ago, von said:

The strange thing is with all of this I kind of agree that he shouldnt get suspended if it was judged he was playing the ball and had no intent to make a hit, If that’s the judgement, which you could argue against too. 
 

however, I would love the afl to move toward intent rather than outcome as it seems far less complicated. It does however mean some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished. 

If the AFL is not worried that "some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished" they may find themselves in legal hot water in 15 years.  But by then those currently with the snouts in the troughs will be retired to their beachside havens so worried, but not too worried.

18 minutes ago, sue said:

If the AFL is not worried that "some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished" they may find themselves in legal hot water in 15 years.  But by then those currently with the snouts in the troughs will be retired to their beachside havens so worried, but not too worried.

Agreed. We don’t know what we are in for with concussion in the future. Lawsuits around it could decimate the game.


1 hour ago, DubDee said:

Absolutely.  Saying to players that this elbow to the back of the head is allowed and acceptable is clearly creating an unsafe working environment that will lead to brain damage and other concussion related issues. The AFL will try to distance themselves saying we said it was 2 weeks but then this external tribunal deemed it fair.  Irrelevant I say as the system is created and maintained by the AFL with clear overall accountability.

The external Appeals Board, like the Tribunal, like the MRO, are all on the AFL payroll.

9 minutes ago, von said:

Agreed. We don’t know what we are in for with concussion in the future. Lawsuits around it could decimate the game.

It's a scary thought, but it is coming. 

Overturned because of a legal technicality is that how we really want our game adjudicated 

 
45 minutes ago, loges said:

Overturned because of a legal technicality is that how we really want our game adjudicated 

Hear, hear. It's a sporting tribunal.

Courts of law go over definitions to hair splitting detail because a guilty decision can be very very serious. Career prospects, house home & family, earning capabilities ... big bickie stuff.

Here we're dealing with whether a footballer will miss a game of football or not.

It's farcical that a QC is permitted to speak for an hour and a half, befuddling the tribunal -- including a beak -- as to which way is up. What is a bump? What is football even? What is "is"?

And the tribunal members, bless their little cotton socks, bought into the paradigm and embraced it.

It was a travesty and a farce.

2 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Hear, hear. It's a sporting tribunal.

Courts of law go over definitions to hair splitting detail because a guilty decision can be very very serious. Career prospects, house home & family, earning capabilities ... big bickie stuff.

Here we're dealing with whether a footballer will miss a game of football or not.

It's farcical that a QC is permitted to speak for an hour and a half, befuddling the tribunal -- including a beak -- as to which way is up. What is a bump? What is football even? What is "is"?

And the tribunal members, bless their little cotton socks, bought into the paradigm and embraced it.

It was a travesty and a farce.

you get what you pay for

and they were very well paid


So if this was a match early in the year would they have over turned the suspension, i think not. While it was stated that Cripps was going for the mark, i personally did not see his arms out looking to grab the ball as we often see true marking collisions. Cripps turned and led with his shoulder. So  is the AFL now saying if you turn your shoulder at the last minute and knock the crap out of someone that is ok, no consequences for hurting someone. How many others will use the Cripps defense going forward. He took an opposition player out of the game leaving them one man short and receiving no penalty. At what point in time do we see some mongrel deliberately take out an opposition player and plead that they were only protecting themselves. I would prefer melbourne to play and beat Carlton with Cripps playing as they may get complacent if he was not. But its the AFL's attitude and double standards that pisses me off.

2 hours ago, loges said:

Overturned because of a legal technicality is that how we really want our game adjudicated 

Johnathan Brown performed an all time grub manoeuvre by grabbing someone in a headlock from behind, swinging them to the ground before landing on top of them. Was charged with rough play but go off because the quarter had actually finished so technically play had stopped. It’s been going on for a while now.

Incidental contact to the head where a bump is involved is always going to be impossible to adjudicate properly anyway (with the ball being in the vicinity) 

So unless the tribunal or the appeals tribunal is instructed to find a guilty verdict for incidental contact to the head from a bump, they are likely to arrive at a not guilty verdict as absolute guilt is very difficult to prove.  Again, with the ball being in the vicinity

So the language from the AFL doesn't match the language of the bodies that they have in place to adjudicate on these matters

If they are going to have rules, they need to make sure that everyone associated with those rules are all on the same page

Highly doubt that that will happen though

Edited by Macca

Yeah the AFL sold out their integrity again for the mighty dollar.
Am I surprised ... No.
They spent 4 and a half hrs calculating ticket sales and found the contact was incidental.

 


42 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Johnathan Brown performed an all time grub manoeuvre by grabbing someone in a headlock from behind, swinging them to the ground before landing on top of them. Was charged with rough play but go off because the quarter had actually finished so technically play had stopped. It’s been going on for a while now.

Should have been charged with assault then.

The big issue is that they (the AFL) don't practice what they preach

"If you choose to bump and contact is made to your opponents head, you will be reported and sidelined"

Except that doesn't happen but sometimes it does.  It's pot luck on outcomes

They've got all the time in the world to get these decisions right and also, to end up with consistent outcomes ... but it's still a crapshoot

1 hour ago, Deecisive said:

So if this was a match early in the year would they have over turned the suspension, i think not. While it was stated that Cripps was going for the mark, i personally did not see his arms out looking to grab the ball as we often see true marking collisions. Cripps turned and led with his shoulder. So  is the AFL now saying if you turn your shoulder at the last minute and knock the crap out of someone that is ok, no consequences for hurting someone. How many others will use the Cripps defense going forward. He took an opposition player out of the game leaving them one man short and receiving no penalty. At what point in time do we see some mongrel deliberately take out an opposition player and plead that they were only protecting themselves. I would prefer melbourne to play and beat Carlton with Cripps playing as they may get complacent if he was not. But its the AFL's attitude and double standards that pisses me off.

Problem is, they were trying to gather a spoil, it wasnt a marking contest.   Makes the overturning even worse.

The moral of the story. It pays to have a good Attorney at Law. I hope we hire this Christopher Townsend fella that next time we want to get someone off the hook.

4 hours ago, loges said:

Overturned because of a legal technicality is that how we really want our game adjudicated 

No


Let justice be done though the heavens fall…unless you're Carlton.

intro-1660071035.webp

6 hours ago, von said:

The strange thing is with all of this I kind of agree that he shouldnt get suspended if it was judged he was playing the ball and had no intent to make a hit, If that’s the judgement, which you could argue against too. 
 

however, I would love the afl to move toward intent rather than outcome as it seems far less complicated. It does however mean some concussions, like this one, will go unpunished. 

It’s how Cripps always attacks the footy which is flawed. He attacks it with little care for his opponent. I guess that’s fine. But I’d have thought in an era where the AFL have to be at least seen to be trying - to protect the head - that Cripps would’ve copped the two weeks. This incident won’t make me pity the AFL when the lawsuits come piling in down the track. As soon as players can get CTE accurately diagnosed In living players it’s a wrap, and this case is the perfect precedent for any player. I love MFC, but I’d like to see the AFL completely fold due to not having a safety of care for the players. League can start again under another form, but this organization is corrupt at its core. 

 
6 hours ago, 1964_2 said:

This clip reaffirms what an arrogant [censored] Silvagni is, hope he gets a solid (legal) clip tomorrow night

Glad he got let off as the game & the fans have gone softer than that other round ball football code these days. Always reward a player going for the ball & he jumped to go for the ball. Wish there was more of it & also wish they let a defender wrap a forward around the ears when going for a mark, earn your kicks.

The while concussion thing is garbage, you sign up to play a contact sport & there should be no legal case for compensation down the track.


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: Port Adelaide

    With both sides precariously positioned ahead of the run home to the finals, only one team involved in Sunday’s clash at the Adelaide Oval between the Power and the Demons will remain a contender when it’s over.  On current form, that one team has to be Melbourne which narrowly missed out on defeating the competition’s power house Collingwood on King's Birthday and also recently overpowered both 2024 Grand Finalists. Conversely, Port Adelaide snapped out of a four-game losing streak with a win against the Giants in Canberra. Although they will be rejuvenated following that victory, their performances during that run of losses were sub par and resulted in some embarrassing blow out defeats.

      • Love
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • NON-MFC: Round 14

    Round 14 is upon us and there's plenty at stake across the rest of the competition. As Melbourne heads to Adelaide, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches of the Round. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons’ finals tilt? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

      • Thanks
    • 190 replies
  • REPORT: Collingwood

    The media focus on the fiery interaction between Max Gawn and Steven May at the end of the game was unfortunate because it took away the gloss from Melbourne’s performance in winning almost everywhere but on the scoreboard in its Kings Birthday clash with Collingwood at the MCG. It was a real battle reminiscent of the good old days when the rivalry between the two clubs was at its height and a fitting contest to celebrate the 2025 Australian of the Year, Neale Daniher and his superb work to bring the campaign to raise funds for motor neurone disease awareness to the forefront. Notwithstanding the fact that the Magpies snatched a one point victory from his old club, Daniher would be proud of the fact that his Demons fought tooth and nail to win the keenly contested game in front of 77,761 fans.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • PREGAME: Port Adelaide

    The Demons are set to embark on a four-week road trip that takes them across the country, with two games in Adelaide and a clash on the Gold Coast, broken up by a mid-season bye. Next up is a meeting with the inconsistent Port Adelaide at Adelaide Oval. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 181 replies
  • PODCAST: Collingwood

    I have something on tomorrow night so Podcast will be Wednesday night. The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Wednesday, 11th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees heartbreaking 1 point loss to the Magpies on King's Birthday 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/

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 37 replies
  • POSTGAME: Collingwood

    Despite effectively playing against four extra opponents, the Dees controlled much of the match. However, their inaccuracy in front of goal and inability to convert dominance in clearances and inside 50s ultimately cost them dearly, falling to a heartbreaking one-point loss on King’s Birthday.

      • Sad
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 534 replies