Jump to content

Lachie Hunter Loses Bid To Overturn 1 Week Suspension

Monbon
Monbon
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

it's all in those "eyes"

Hunter initially says he's "fairly sure" his eyes are on the ball for the whole duration of the contest, but on re-examination admits it is "slightly harder to tell" near the point of contact.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

    Love it !!!

    Jeff Gleeson says Hunter is "an intelligent, articulate fellow who's got a clear view about what happened in this matter" and should stay for further questions if he can.

    Hunter: "I've got nowhere to be mate other than Saturday at the G'."

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Haha 6
    • Clap 1
    31 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    Gleeson refused to accept videos of similar incidents as it does not comply with the infamous Rule 5.5

    We may have our Appeal Ground right here if needed.

    IMG_3446.thumb.jpeg.7b60fd983a36ca8ea6bd02a2a9309c69.jpeg

     

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    • Clap 1
     

    I liked this one.

    AFL: One of the things you could've done to avoid this impact was to step either to your left or right prior to impact. Hunter: No, because you're asking me to concede the ball to Port Adelaide.

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    • Love 2
    • Clap 3

    14 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    it's all in those "eyes"

    Hunter initially says he's "fairly sure" his eyes are on the ball for the whole duration of the contest, but on re-examination admits it is "slightly harder to tell" near the point of contact.

    I hope we aren't arguing solely on the basis of "he had eyes for the ball at all times" then.

    If so it would seem to be not all that convincing or alternatively an argument that might be easily picked off by the AFL cronies.

    The argument that Hunter arrived at the contest before Rozee, braced as you are trained to do, and that Rozee could have either pulled up or kept his feet / stayed upright in the contest but instead 'chose' to dive at the ball head first afterwards.... to me is more compelling and somewhat less flimsy for mine.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Clap 1
    3 minutes ago, Mickey said:

    AFL: One of the things you could've done to avoid this impact was to step either to your left or right prior to impact.

    Hunter: No, because you're asking me to concede the ball to Port Adelaide.

    Great answer because if the Tribunal finds him guilty, the game becomes a non contact sport.

  • Quote
    • Like 9
    • Clap 1
    5 minutes ago, YearOfTheDees said:

    I liked this one.

    AFL: One of the things you could've done to avoid this impact was to step either to your left or right prior to impact. Hunter: No, because you're asking me to concede the ball to Port Adelaide.

    AFL: sorry im stupid and have never played the game. I'll see myself out

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 6
    • Clap 1
     

    Interesting comment by Gleeson....

    Gleeson: It's an interesting question. Contesting the ball, if it becomes too remote from the act of trying to gather the ball, then almost everything is contesting the ball, including just bumping your opponent out of the way so you can pick the ball up.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Shocked 1

    1 minute ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    Interesting comment by Gleeson....

    Gleeson: It's an interesting question. Contesting the ball, if it becomes too remote from the act of trying to gather the ball, then almost everything is contesting the ball, including just bumping your opponent out of the way so you can pick the ball up.

    Wow, he's on some serious crack tonight

  • Quote
    • Haha 1
    4 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    Interesting comment by Gleeson....

    Gleeson: It's an interesting question. Contesting the ball, if it becomes too remote from the act of trying to gather the ball, then almost everything is contesting the ball, including just bumping your opponent out of the way so you can pick the ball up.

    well said Gleeson. When you think about it, walking down the street?  contesting the ball

    dropping the kids off at school?  contesting the ball

    WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!??

    How has footy been reduced to this farce!?

  • Quote
    • Shocked 1
    • Angry 1

    Hunter: There comes a point in which my version of contesting the ball is stopping Connor Rozee's tap from going on to the next person ... I think I can gain possession by stopping that tap and winning that secondary contest.

    ...

    Hunter: The intention is always to get the ball, but there's always going to be dangers involved ... Connor Rozee's approach in this example is extremely dangerous. 

    AFL: One of the things you could've done to avoid this impact was to step either to your left or right prior to impact.

    Hunter: No, because you're asking me to concede the ball to Port Adelaide.

    Gleeson (Tribunal chair): It's an interesting question. Contesting the ball, if it becomes too remote from the act of trying to gather the ball, then almost everything is contesting the ball, including just bumping your opponent out of the way so you can pick the ball up.

     

    ------------------------

     

    That is the crux of the argument there. 

    I don't think Hunter is wrong. He decelerated as much as possible. If Rozee picked the ball up Hunter could have tackled. But Rozee chose to try to knock it through Hunters legs, while lunging head first.

    If Hunter isn't contesting the ball, because he isn't trying to take possession, then I think there is a very reasonable argument that Rozee isn't trying to contest the ball either, because he is trying to knock it away, not take possession.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Why was the contact deemed as medium when Rozee got straight up, got 8 coaches votes, and ended up kicking the winning goal?

    He didn’t seem too inconvenienced by the incident.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Angry 1

    I think we need to stop the theatre of the appeal process. There has to be a more transparent, productive and not litigating way to deal with this nonsense.

    I say we put it to an online vote - that’ll make things interesting .. it’ll at least be more consistent.

    Edited by Gawndy the Great

  • Quote

    1 minute ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

    Why was the contact deemed as medium when Rozee got straight up, got 8 coaches votes, and ended up kicking the winning goal?

    He didn’t seem too inconvenienced by the incident.

    What’s the definition of light or low contact?

     

  • Quote

    Dees' eight points:

    1. No reasonable, realistic alternative

    2. Hands down in motion to gather ball until very last split second

    3. Still in goalkeeping pose (left foot, left hand out) to trap the ball. Only at last split second that he begins to move

    4. Doesn't go past ball

    5. Rozee's actions were unusual

    6. Hunter didn't have option to tackle

    7. He couldn't go low and risk contact below knees

    8. It would've been reckless and dangerous to stay front on and go head-first.

     
     
     
     
     
     

    Edited by YearOfTheDees
    tidy

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Thanks 4
    • Clap 2
    6 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

    Why was the contact deemed as medium when Rozee got straight up, got 8 coaches votes, and ended up kicking the winning goal?

    He didn’t seem too inconvenienced by the incident.

    Because they place too much emphasis on potential to cause injury. Which seems overly conservative/misleading. I agree he recovered fine.

  • Quote
    20 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    Interesting comment by Gleeson....

    Gleeson: It's an interesting question. Contesting the ball, if it becomes too remote from the act of trying to gather the ball, then almost everything is contesting the ball, including just bumping your opponent out of the way so you can pick the ball up.

    It's ridiculous because there is always the question of whether it is reasonable. Hunter could have karate kicked Rozee into next week, then won the ball. But that's not a reasonable way of contesting the ball.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    5 minutes ago, YearOfTheDees said:

    Dees' eight points:

    1. No reasonable, realistic alternative

    2. Hands down in motion to gather ball until very last split second

    3. Still in goalkeeping pose (left foot, left hand out) to trap the ball. Only at last split second that he begins to move

    4. Doesn't go past ball

    5. Rozee's actions were unusual

    6. Hunter didn't have option to tackle

    7. He couldn't go low and risk contact below knees

    8. It would've been reckless and dangerous to stay front on and go head-first.

     
     
     
     
     
     

    That's the crazy thing for me, he was stationary - point 3. 
    How can his action be reckless or careless when he's stopped and the AFL are arguing he should have jumped out of the way?
    That's like being charged for being on a pedestrian crossing and doing damage to someone's car who is recklessley speeding into you.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Clap 1

    I really like Hunter. Seems like a character. And knows his way around the AFL spin. 

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    it's all in those "eyes"

    Hunter initially says he's "fairly sure" his eyes are on the ball for the whole duration of the contest, but on re-examination admits it is "slightly harder to tell" near the point of contact.

    giphy.gif.603e07be0ac837c10f2227c04e6b34e9.gif

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

    I assume everyone is free Thursday night for another 4 hour appeals process? 
     

     

  • Quote
    • Haha 3
    • Vomit 1
     

    Based on what I've been reading here anyone unable to preempt an opponents action by turning on the head of a pin in a split second to avoid contact will be in trouble. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    It's the Matador movement

    Stand still.. swing your hips .. wave your red cape and allow the bull to charge past you..

    Except that this Bull goes onto score

    Seriously though ... a two hour hearing on a relatively simple point.. This is beyond the Pale

    Edited by Diamond_Jim

  • Quote
    • Haha 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

    • NON-MFC: Round 11

      Round 11, the second week of The Sir Doug Nicholls Round, kicks off on Thursday night with the Cats hosting the Bulldogs at Kardinia Park. Geelong will be looking to to continue their decade long dominance over the Bulldogs, while the Dogs aim to take another big scalp as they surge up the ladder. On Friday night it's he Dreamtime at the 'G clash between Essendon and Richmond. The Bombers will want to avoid another embarrassing performance against a lowly side whilst the Tigers will be keen to avenge a disappointing loss to the Kangaroos. Saturday footy kicks off as the Blues face the Giants in a pivotal clash for both clubs. Carlton need to turn around their up and down season while GWS will be eager to bounce back and reassert themselves as a September threat. At twilight sees the Hawks taking on the Lions at the G. Hawthorn need to cement themselves in the Top 4 but they’ll need to be at their best to challenge a Brisbane side eager to respond after last week’s crushing loss to the Dees on their home turf. The first of the Saturday night double headers opens with North Melbourne up against the high-flying Magpies. The Roos will need a near-perfect performance to trouble a Collingwood side sitting atop the ladder.

      • 16 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Sydney

      The two teams competing at the MCG on Sunday afternoon have each traversed a long and arduous path since their previous encounter on a sweltering March evening in Sydney a season and a half ago. Both experienced periods of success at various times last year. The Demons ran out of steam in midseason while the Swans went on to narrowly miss the ultimate prize in the sport. Now, they find themselves outside of finals contention as the season approaches the halfway mark. The winner this week will remain in contact with the leading pack, while the loser may well find itself on a precipice, staring into the abyss. The current season has presented numerous challenges for most clubs, particularly those positioned in the middle tier. The Essendon experience in suffering a significant 91-point loss to the Bulldogs, just one week after defeating the Swans, may not be typical, but it illustrates the unpredictability of outcomes under the league’s present set up. 

      • 3 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Brisbane

      “Max Gawn has been the heart and soul of the Dees for years now, but this recent recovery from a terrible start has been driven by him. He was everywhere again, and with the game in the balance, he took several key marks to keep the ball in the Dees forward half.” - The Monday Knee Jerk Reaction: Round Ten Of course, it wasn’t the efforts of one man that caused this monumental upset, but rather the work of the coach and his assistants and the other 22 players who took the ground, notably the likes of Jake Melksham, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kozzie Pickett but Max has been magnificent in taking ownership of his team and its welfare under the fire of a calamitous 0-5 start to the season. On Sunday, he provided the leadership that was needed to face up to the reigning premier and top of the ladder Brisbane Lions on their home turf and to prevail after a slow start, during which the hosts led by as much as 24 points in the second quarter. Titus O’Reily is normally comedic in his descriptions of the football but this time, he was being deadly serious. The Demons have come from a long way back and, although they still sit in the bottom third of the AFL pack, there’s a light at the end of the tunnel as they look to drive home the momentum inspired in the past four or five weeks by Max the Magnificent who was under such great pressure in those dark, early days of the season.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Southport

      The Southport Sharks came to Casey. They saw and they conquered a team with 16 AFL-listed players who, for the most part, wasted their time on the ground and failed to earn their keep. For the first half, the Sharks were kept in the game by the Demons’ poor use of the football, it’s disposal getting worse the closer the team got to its own goal and moreover, it got worse as the game progressed. Make no mistake, Casey was far and away the better team in the first half, it was winning the ruck duels through Tom Campbell’s solid performance but it was the scoreboard that told the story.

      • 3 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Sydney

      Just a game and percentage outside the Top 8, the Demons return to Melbourne to face the Sydney Swans at the MCG, with a golden opportunity to build on the momentum from toppling the reigning premiers on their own turf. Who comes in, and who makes way?

        • Love
        • Like
      • 272 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Brisbane

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we analyse a famous victory by the Demons over the Lions at the Gabba.
      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/

      • 35 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All