4 hours ago, Neil Crompton said:

No Jaded, it’s the haircut. He’s been Sampsoned. 

Langdon and BBB both. 

2 hours ago, loges said:

Appeal, does this moron actually look at what really happened.

I very much doubt it.

1 hour ago, fr_ap said:

I must be in the minority on this one but I think it is a clear 1 match suspension. 

Lachie had plenty of time to bend down and try to win that footy with his hands and head down...he didn't and elected to lead with his hip. Yes, Rozee ran into him but Hunter elected not to contest the footy whilst Rozee chased it the right way 

Take the week and move on, I'm pretty far from in love with what Hunter is bringing anyway. Valuable width and positional stuff but he continually asks too much of his teammates by handballing to their feet or kicking scrubbers not to their advantage. Further, he has a gawn-esque hook from a set shot and very hit and miss distance wise. 

Regardless of one’s opinion on Hunters current form or contributions, “take the week and move on” is not what this is all about. 
Are you suggesting that someone carving up the competition, maybe known to be about to win a 2022 Downlow, is worth challenging, but someone maybe working their way up like 2022 Chandler, or someone down on form is totally expendable?  🙄😱😮

The game is cooked

Hunter was running at the ball and turned his body, Rozee ran into him - what else do they expect him to do, not contest the ball?

Meanwhile Jonas cops a suspension for something that earnt him a free kick when we were pushing forward with momentum - so either the suspension is wrong or the free kick was. Which is it?

AFL has jumped the shark, if Melbourne weren't competing for flags I don't think I'd bother watching anymore and when our window closes that is probably me done as anything more than a casual supporter.

1 hour ago, chookrat said:

The club statement on the suspension has left the door open for us to challenge. I suspect the club will look at Hunter's action, whether he elected to bump, and weigh up an appeal based on their odds of a successful challenge.

My take is it's pretty line ball whether Hunter bumped, braced or turned sideways to protect himself and gather the ball in the same motion. Players are allowed to brace or protect themselves when gathering the ball but if they elect to bump then they are in trouble.

If he elected to bump he would've followed through - he stopped and turned, he wasn't moving at the moment of impact. What duty of care does Rozee have? He expects to just be able to collect the ball unchallenged? It's a contact sport FCS.

48 minutes ago, Redleg said:

This sums up the Shockers and their 24 - 27th players that were running around for a fair chunk of the night.... the PortPires

Now another assist from our MRO mate Christian 

What a shiiiete fest last night was.

Topped off by this complete arrsee wipe of a collision.  Rozzie can pull out but instead prefers to dive into Hunter's arrssee head first

Talk about brown nosing!

I will repeat again. The AFL/MRO are out to [censored] us up. No doubt about it.

3 minutes ago, dl4e said:

I will repeat again. The AFL/MRO are out to [censored] us up. No doubt about it.

Well, dl4e, that is the one thing that they seem to be doing successfully.

Had Christian bothered to have a decent freeze frame / ultraslowmo look at it he would have seen that Hunter had stopped and couldn't get out of Kamikaze Rozee's way.

Edited May 20, 20232 yr by monoccular

The Hunter one sucks but was the likely outcome. The AFL hate head high contact no matter how unreasonable Rozee’a decision to lead with the head was. 

It’s an absolute farce though that Jonas has just been suspended for something for which he was awarded a free kick. 

Broken. Absolutely broken. 

8 hours ago, Pipefitter said:

#fabricofthegame

It's called a fabric softener suspension

https://youtu.be/UvHl31q7naM

1 hour ago, Gawndy the Great said:

https://twitter.com/CharlieDons/status/1649599413982220290?s=20

So this was ok.. Christiansen must be smoking crack  

Hang on, who are we playing next week? No way was that a dangerous bump.

Light that pipe baby

That Andy Brayshaw one resulted in a concussion to Libba as well. There was a similar incident in WBD vs Crows with Rankin...

This weekend has been crud 

What’s Christian’s rationale for grading it medium considering Rozee got up a second later and ended up kicking the winning goal for Port??

If we have a solid foundation in arguing this down from medium to low impact, and hence allowing Hunter to play next week, then we should take it to the tribunal.

Edited May 20, 20232 yr by Bring-Back-Powell

13 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

He’ll get cited no doubt under the current climate.

The only key question is if it’s medium (1 week) or low (fine).

The fact that Rozee played on and indeed kicked the winning goal would provide an argument for low contact.

Agree thats the thing Fr- ap does not look at. Every bit of evidence is that it was LOW impact and should be challenged vigorously at the Tribunal. 
Different scenario if he was taken off the ground and also Players are taught NOT to lead head first into a contest but to turn their body. Rozee made no effort at all and Hunter was IMO first at the ball. 

For Fr-ap to say it's so cut and dried he does not understand the game and current psychology of the game.

Where MRO leaves a clear opportunity to challenge the ruling we MUST take him to task. in fact some of Fr-ap 's post is fundamentally wrong some may even call it Cr-ap and we should show our strength and support our players when wrongly charged. 

In other words the medium impact is patently wrong on all counts and should  be downgraded to a fine. 
 

 

8 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

It’s an absolute farce though that Jonas has just been suspended for something for which he was awarded a free kick. 

 Given that Jonas was rewarded for his dangerous tackle can we please give the umpire at least a week off as well. 

9 hours ago, dl4e said:

I will repeat again. The AFL/MRO are out to [censored] us up. No doubt about it.

And thats why we needto push back and call them out.

The AFL ...honestly what a bunch of ( insert fav derogatory)

They're there to oversee the running of the comp....not the ruining.

They are actually the tail..  Certainly the [censored]-end.  Time to wag them. 

16 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

 Given that Jonas was rewarded for his dangerous tackle can we please give the umpire at least a week off as well. 

It doesn't appear the umpires are accountable for their performance these days.

I totally appreciate how difficult the game is to umpire and that the AFL needed to stamp out umpire abuse at all levels of the game. This is reflected by commentators glossing over or ignoring umpiring mistakes. Having said that, it seems it's gone too far the other way with the same umpires showing up week after week making bad calls, getting sucked in by the theatre of the game to make crowd-pleasing calls and/or failing to learn from or improve on their mistakes. Further, to me anyway, they seem to have at times, increasing influence on the momentum of games. The North v Carlton game, earlier in the year was a classic example of this. Do these guys get dropped like players for poor performances?

1 hour ago, 58er said:

Agree thats the thing Fr- ap does not look at. Every bit of evidence is that it was LOW impact and should be challenged vigorously at the Tribunal. 
Different scenario if he was taken off the ground and also Players are taught NOT to lead head first into a contest but to turn their body. Rozee made no effort at all and Hunter was IMO first at the ball. 

For Fr-ap to say it's so cut and dried he does not understand the game and current psychology of the game.

Where MRO leaves a clear opportunity to challenge the ruling we MUST take him to task. in fact some of Fr-ap 's post is fundamentally wrong some may even call it Cr-ap and we should show our strength and support our players when wrongly charged. 

In other words the medium impact is patently wrong on all counts and should  be downgraded to a fine. 
 

 

Taught this in under 10s.

Isn't the current interpretation that if you contribute to high contact it's play on?

 

Edited May 20, 20232 yr by GM11

10 hours ago, monoccular said:

Langdon and BBB both. 

I very much doubt it.

Regardless of one’s opinion on Hunters current form or contributions, “take the week and move on” is not what this is all about. 
Are you suggesting that someone carving up the competition, maybe known to be about to win a 2022 Downlow, is worth challenging, but someone maybe working their way up like 2022 Chandler, or someone down on form is totally expendable?  🙄😱😮

What? Where did I suggest that?

Take the week and move on was an acknowledgement of it being relatively clear cut (in my opinion). Hunter not adding significantly to the current side anyway is a separate issue and only goes to the impact next week of his absence, which is something that is worth discussing.

Let me be clear - it wouldn't be worth challenging regardless of who it was.

1 hour ago, 58er said:

Agree thats the thing Fr- ap does not look at. Every bit of evidence is that it was LOW impact and should be challenged vigorously at the Tribunal. 
Different scenario if he was taken off the ground and also Players are taught NOT to lead head first into a contest but to turn their body. Rozee made no effort at all and Hunter was IMO first at the ball. 

For Fr-ap to say it's so cut and dried he does not understand the game and current psychology of the game.

Where MRO leaves a clear opportunity to challenge the ruling we MUST take him to task. in fact some of Fr-ap 's post is fundamentally wrong some may even call it Cr-ap and we should show our strength and support our players when wrongly charged. 

In other words the medium impact is patently wrong on all counts and should  be downgraded to a fine. 
 

 

Sure, the impact grading could be debated. I could see the rationale for that. Not sure our case is strong, but it's debatable. 

As for me apparently not understanding the game - this year they have moved from penalizing the outcome to at least attempting to penalise the behaviour (as it should always have been). They've done a poor job, but the shift has been evident. Were you aware of that? Do you pay any attention to things outside the MFC?

I agree Rozee not being concussed helps a potential case to make the impact grading low, but people need to get past this "No concussion = no suspension" thing. It doesn't work that way anymore. 

It is beyond laughable you think Rozee "made no effort at all". If you're capable (I doubt it), put yourself in his shoes for a moment. He was literally bending over to pick up the ball. That's his effort, he is playing the ball as he should. Its wet and he fumbled it along the ground for a metre or so. As he pursues it, his head is greeted with the point of Hunter's hip. Yes Hunter was relatively stationary, but it doesn't matter - Rozee has a right to be able to pursue the ball on the deck without risking his head and neck meeting the point of a hip. There are several other things Hunter could have done and he had plenty of time to do so. Petracca or Clarry would have bent down to try and pick up/paddle the ball on their own, and this is what the current rules encourage. They would not have turned to lead with the hip. 

If the club wants to challenge the impact grading then great. I hope we win.  

It honestly makes for ridiculous reading though in here week after week when you claim that there is some secret agenda against the MFC or that every report or suspension 'challenges the fabric of the game' or something similarly dramatic. 

We can all be parochial in our support of the club, but at least try and insert a modicum of objectivity. If Clarry was pursuing the ball along the ground and met an oppo player's hip, you'd all be shouting from the rooftops. It is no different to yelling for every free kick for MFC at the footy and thinking the equivalent ones paid the other way weren't there. I'm not suggesting all umpiring or MRO decisions are beyond reproach - far from it - only that if you've been paying attention and can take off your Dees jumper for a moment, it's not a surprising suspension. 

It's as clear as Sparrows was. Neither player got concussed. There was a similiar outcry when his suspension was first announced. 

Whatever though - I don't need to waste any more time when all I get in response  are jokes about my forum name (who cares?)

You can see the spin at work.

Tim Michell reports in todays Herald Sun, that Langdon got him in the head, with a hip and shoulder.

Go back and see the twitter in this thread and my photo a few posts back and you can see contact is with bum to chest. No shoulder and no head.

Hunter actually gets to the ball about same time , stops and turns as Rozee comes in down low. As the ex players have said, he did it perfectly, to protect Rozee who comes in low and second and what else could he do after he stopped moving.

The whole problem is MRO is picking and choosing who to penalise and worse incidents are being ignored.

Maybe we challenge, just to get Tribunal to tell us what he did wrong in the above scenario.

If you are going for the ball and stop and player coming in contacts you, what should you have done. Also importantly it is not the head and no injury.

 

Edited May 20, 20232 yr by Redleg

5 minutes ago, Redleg said:

You can see the spin at work.

Tim Michell reports in todays Herald Sun, that Langdon got him in the head, with a hip and shoulder.

Go back and see the twitter in this thread and my photo a few posts back and you can see contact is with bum to chest. No shoulder and no head.

Hunter actually gets to the ball about same time , stops and turns as Rozee comes in down low. As the ex players have said, he did it perfectly, to protect Rozee who comes in low and second and what else could he do after he stopped moving.

The whole problem is MRO is picking and choosing who to penalise and worse incidents are being ignored.

Maybe we challenge, just to get Tribunal to tell us what he did wrong in the above scenario.

If you are going for the ball and stop and player coming in contacts you, what should you have done. Also importantly it is not the head and no injury.

 

Almost like they've an agenda .. 🤔🤔🤔

6 minutes ago, Redleg said:

You can see the spin at work.

Tim Michell reports in todays Herald Sun, that Langdon got him in the head, with a hip and shoulder.

Go back and see the twitter in this thread and my photo a few posts back and you can see contact is with bum to chest. No shoulder and no head.

Hunter actually gets to the ball first, stops and turns as Rozee comes in down low. As the ex players have said, he did it perfectly, to protect Rozee who comes in low and second and what else could he do after he stopped moving.

The whole problem is MRO is picking and choosing who to penalise and worse incidents are being ignored.

Maybe we challenge, just to get Tribunal to tell us what he did wrong in the above scenario.

If you get to the ball first and stop and player coming in contacts you, what should you have done. Also importantly it is not the head and no injury.

 

100% Hunter gets there first, Rozee is late and reckless of his own safety!

What is Hunter meant to do step back and say take the ball!

Edited May 20, 20232 yr by D4Life
Additional info

Just now, D4Life said:

100% Hunter gets there first, Rozee is late and reckless of his own safety!

I amended my post as on further examination, Rozee actually touches ball just before Hunter, but Hunter seeing that stops and turns, to make any contact lighter, with his bum rather than hip, a more fleshy cushion. Rozee follows through and actually raises his arms and grabs at Hunter and contact is to the chest.

10 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The game is cooked

...

AFL has jumped the shark, if Melbourne weren't competing for flags I don't think I'd bother watching anymore and when our window closes that is probably me done as anything more than a casual supporter.

Hear, hear. What an ugly unattractive game it was to watch. If MFC hasn't been in it I would have turned off at half time.

53 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

It doesn't appear the umpires are accountable for their performance these days.

I totally appreciate how difficult the game is to umpire etc etc

The AFL have devised a game that cannot be umpired.

It was pathetic watching skilled athletes scrambling around for the ball like seagulls after a chip, throwing it, dropping it (incorrect disposal), barely any of which was penalised, because it all happens so quickly in such confined space that the umps can't be sure of any of it until a player dives to the deck pretending the ball is pinned to him.

The game has evolved to where it cannot be umpired.

Yes, it was wet and the pill was slippery. But the same things happen in perfect conditions too.

(This is quote apart from lamentable skill deficiencies from supposed top level athletes, who can not kick with their "wrong" foot and who can not kick the ball while running in a straight line.)

It didn't really strike me until this match. Holy moly. The AFL have let the game degenerate to the point where it cannot be umpired.

Is there any other sport in the world that can make this claim?

2 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Hear, hear. What an ugly unattractive game it was to watch. If MFC hasn't been in it I would have turned off at half time.

The AFL have devised a game that cannot be umpired.

It was pathetic watching skilled athletes scrambling around for the ball like seagulls after a chip, throwing it, dropping it (incorrect disposal), barely any of which was penalised, because it all happens so quickly in such confined space that the umps can't be sure of any of it until a player dives to the deck pretending the ball is pinned to him.

The game has evolved to where it cannot be umpired.

Yes, it was wet and the pill was slippery. But the same things happen in perfect conditions too.

(This is quote apart from lamentable skill deficiencies from supposed top level athletes, who can not kick with their "wrong" foot and who can not kick the ball while running in a straight line.)

It didn't really strike me until this match. Holy moly. The AFL have let the game degenerate to the point where it cannot be umpired.

Is there any other sport in the world that can make this claim?

Amazing isnt it..

Take a game that in the main had quite defined rules.  ( so much so ONE umpire managed )

Now dispense with some and morph others to the point no one is actually sure what is right or wrong.

Introduce others that are purely SUBJECTIVE.. 

Introduce more umpires. 

Modify the ambiguous rules to beyond interpretation.  

Introduce more umpires.

Ensure there's no consistency and frustrate everyone....esp players.

Introduce draconian measures to deal wil the frustrations.

Introduce more umpires.

Attempt a Professional game with Amateur refereeing.

Introduce and overlay of contradictory and non accountable but partisan assessment. 

🤔What could possibly go wrong 🤷🤷🙄

 

23 minutes ago, D4Life said:

100% Hunter gets there first, Rozee is late and reckless of his own safety!

What is Hunter meant to do step back and say take the ball!

Agree