2 minutes ago, IRW said:

Where did this " football act " come from?

Was it just last week or have I not been paying attention?

Both possibilities are likely( smile)

its the term you use when you can't find the words to justify the action.

14 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

He can’t get off. 

Head high.

High impact.

Thats 2 weeks.

Intentional or accidental is all that’s up for debate, so he gets 2-4 weeks. 2 weeks is the minimum possible outcome.

Fantastic he will miss a flag!

Was it avoidable? Absolutely yes

He didn't bring his arms straight down. he turned and launched the point of his shoulder into Gus' head.

 

Life Ban for mine.

Lachie Hunter from Round 10 says hi

So according to this thread tackling, smothering, marking contests and any sort of collisions should be outlawed. 

Honestly this game has 20 years left as we know it and I mean that sincerely. There's no way you are going to stop concussions completely and until there is some kind of technology that can pad the brain better then we'll obviously need to keep doing these kinds of measures. 

"Go hard, put pressure on the ball carrier but don't leave the ground or stop mid air or make the split second decision to turn the shoulder the right way"

"Don't go for a smother, let him kick the ball inside 50"

"Tackle hard but not too hard"

"Pull out of marking contests"

I care about protecting the head as much as the next person but this is getting out of hand if you want to follow the sport.

Maynard had not even left the ground when Brayshaw kicked it.

14 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

He can’t get off. 

Head high.

High impact.

Thats 2 weeks.

Intentional or accidental is all that’s up for debate, so he gets 2-4 weeks. 2 weeks is the minimum possible outcome.

Fantastic he will miss a flag!

Watch the MRO grade it as accidental, not high and medium impact and he gets a fine. 

Never mind that Gus has a black eye according to Goodwin and was knocked out.

 

Edited September 8, 20231 yr by Jaded No More

Just now, layzie said:

So according to this thread tackling, smothering, marking contests and any sort of collisions should be outlawed. 

Honestly this game has 20 years left as we know it and I mean that sincerely. There's no way you are going to stop concussions completely and until there is some kind of technology that can pad the brain better then we'll obviously need to keep doing these kinds of measures. 

"Go hard, put pressure on the ball carrier but don't leave the ground or stop mid air or make the split second decision to turn the shoulder the right way"

"Don't go for a smother, let him kick the ball inside 50"

"Tackle hard but not too hard"

"Pull out of marking contests"

I care about protecting the head as much as the next person but this is getting out of hand if you want to follow the sport.

No you have it wrong. Its not the smother. Its the turn, tucking the arm in and hitting Brayshaws head with the point of his shoulder 

9 minutes ago, layzie said:

You're doing the right thing but plenty of others are just taking their anger out on this and it's not going to make them feel any better.

Yeah people here are going to vent and they're angry because Gus being taken out changed the course of the game

We were effectively a top player down and we were rattled.  Now, we should have been able to deal with what happened but we were like rabbits in the headlights for a good part of the 1st quarter ... and effectively, we lost the game there and then

The old Collingwood tradition of starting a fight and then banging on 5 goals while the other mob are distracted worked

So let the punters vent, layz

1 minute ago, jnrmac said:

No you have it wrong. Its not the smother. Its the turn, tucking the arm in and hitting Brayshaws head with the point of his shoulder 

Fair point. But what if the elbow was flailing around and he collected him with that UFC style? 

Where do we draw the line jnrmac that's all I want to know. What is the fail-safe thing Maynard should do to not get in trouble? 

1 minute ago, layzie said:

...What is the fail-safe thing Maynard should do to not get in trouble? 

Simple.  His actions should make it clear his aim was solely to smother the ball, not take out his opponent.

9 minutes ago, layzie said:

So according to this thread tackling, smothering, marking contests and any sort of collisions should be outlawed. 

Honestly this game has 20 years left as we know it and I mean that sincerely. There's no way you are going to stop concussions completely and until there is some kind of technology that can pad the brain better then we'll obviously need to keep doing these kinds of measures. 

"Go hard, put pressure on the ball carrier but don't leave the ground or stop mid air or make the split second decision to turn the shoulder the right way"

"Don't go for a smother, let him kick the ball inside 50"

"Tackle hard but not too hard"

"Pull out of marking contests"

I care about protecting the head as much as the next person but this is getting out of hand if you want to follow the sport.

That's why a red card and off the ground for 10 minutes makes sense

15 minutes ago, layzie said:

So according to this thread tackling, smothering, marking contests and any sort of collisions should be outlawed. 

Honestly this game has 20 years left as we know it and I mean that sincerely. There's no way you are going to stop concussions completely and until there is some kind of technology that can pad the brain better then we'll obviously need to keep doing these kinds of measures. 

"Go hard, put pressure on the ball carrier but don't leave the ground or stop mid air or make the split second decision to turn the shoulder the right way"

"Don't go for a smother, let him kick the ball inside 50"

"Tackle hard but not too hard"

"Pull out of marking contests"

I care about protecting the head as much as the next person but this is getting out of hand if you want to follow the sport.

No, you are off the mark mate.

You can be hard but fair.

We want players to avoid dangerous techniques while tackling, smothering or any other footy act. It is dangerous to their peers and themselves.

10 minutes ago, layzie said:

Fair point. But what if the elbow was flailing around and he collected him with that UFC style? 

Where do we draw the line jnrmac that's all I want to know. What is the fail-safe thing Maynard should do to not get in trouble? 

He should have landed with his arms outstretched across Gus to protect his own fall. 

The minute he chose to get off the ground, he had to avoid turning his body and tucking in the elbow. 

If you choose to leave the ground, accept that if you collect someone high, you better not be doing it in a twisting motion. 

1 hour ago, Stiff Arm said:

Like it or not, footy will become less and less of a contact sport due to concussion liabilities. Knee to head in marking contest will go at some point. Not if, but when

It is possible to train out these habits. We've trained out the deliberate hip and shoulder, we've trained players to turn their bodies to avoid head-on contact.

In 15 years time, what is acceptable now will look like a 1980's biffs, bumps and brawl VHS video

I know plenty of parents who are nervous about their kids playing footy due to concussions. The AFL will change the game to respond accordingly 

I would hate to see knee to the head disappear out of our game...

Latest Media headline......

CLASSY MAYNARD

"I love that guy ( Brayshaw) to bits". 

It just popped up when i was reading something in USA.

He'll get off.   Insane

Cant do this anymore. No more AFL and corporate media till further notice. Im done.

 

Bet ya he gets off and JVR gets a week. 

You can see it coming a mile off. 

The afl at its best. 

Maynard turned himself into a guided missile the moment he braced for a collision between his shoulder and Brayshaw's head. If the AFL regards that as acceptable, its "protect the head" policy will be seen to be a pathetic and fraudulent attempt to forestall threats of legal action over brain injuries. Jumping vertically to attempt a smother is fine, but doing so while charging directly at an off-balance opponent is clearly dangerous.

24 minutes ago, layzie said:

So according to this thread tackling, smothering, marking contests and any sort of collisions should be outlawed. 

Honestly this game has 20 years left as we know it and I mean that sincerely. There's no way you are going to stop concussions completely and until there is some kind of technology that can pad the brain better then we'll obviously need to keep doing these kinds of measures. 

"Go hard, put pressure on the ball carrier but don't leave the ground or stop mid air or make the split second decision to turn the shoulder the right way"

"Don't go for a smother, let him kick the ball inside 50"

"Tackle hard but not too hard"

"Pull out of marking contests"

I care about protecting the head as much as the next person but this is getting out of hand if you want to follow the sport.

he literally turned his shoulder to bump.... im not sure how you are saying that is the ok thing to do?

24 minutes ago, Macca said:

Now, we should have been able to deal with what happened but we were like rabbits in the headlights for a good part of the 1st quarter

I strongly think that is a reductionist view Macca.

Dealing with it meant we had less rotations, a key player out  for 4/5th of the game  - and we still got within 7 points (and should have won if not for shonky kicking.

 

16 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

No, you are off the mark mate.

You can be hard but fair.

We want players to avoid dangerous techniques while tackling, smothering or any other footy act. It is dangerous to their peers and themselves.

No he is not and the variance of opinions on this just show how much the AFL has cocked up their tribunal system (or lack thereof).

I can't actually believe people are claiming that Maynard "lined him up", it was a clear football action and an obvious attempt to spoil. The turning of his body (a split second reaction) in ingrained in all football players, to protect oneself. What's he honestly supposed to do? Face plant into Brayshaw and possibly causing more damage, to both of them?

At some point these blokes need to be allowed to actually play the game. It's awful what happened to Brayshaw, but it's a contact sport. He should only get a week no matter how much of a [censored] Maynard is.

Edited September 8, 20231 yr by Jibroni

10 minutes ago, Deebauched said:

Latest Media headline......

CLASSY MAYNARD

"I love that guy ( Brayshaw) to bits". 

It just popped up when i was reading something in USA.

He'll get off.   Insane

Cant do this anymore. No more AFL and corporate media till further notice. Im done.

 

#freebruz

Maynard's the victim, didn't you know?!

10 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

I strongly think that is a reductionist view Macca.

Dealing with it meant we had less rotations, a key player out  for 4/5th of the game  - and we still got within 7 points (and should have won if not for shonky kicking.

 

This. We lost Gus which meant Trac had to move into the middle. It threw everything off.

He is an enormously versatile and important player who has been incredibly dominant in the midfield. His loss was costly and really hurt our plans.

Edited September 8, 20231 yr by Jaded No More

Surely the sensible ruling is to say "if you choose to run, jump and or slide into player from front on, even if it is in the instance of smothering, and you severely concuss them, then you are liable for suspension". I don't care if it was a footy act. Bumping was a footy act, and it's dangerous if done incorrectly. No different here. I'm sure he didn't mean for what happened, but I'm sure he tried to hit him. 

Edited September 8, 20231 yr by pilgrim

1 minute ago, Jibroni said:

At some point these blokes need to be allowed to actually play the game. It's awful what happened to Brayshaw, but it's a contact sport. Suspensions shouldn't be for this kind of contact, no matter how much of a [censored] Maynard is.

So Hunter got a week for 'hitting' Butters who went on to have 900 touches and win the game.

Maynard should get off tho because we should be letting players just play the game?

Plenty of spoils occur in footy every week. We had about 10 last night. None of them ended up with a player getting knocked out. 

5 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

I strongly think that is a reductionist view Macca.

Dealing with it meant we had less rotations, a key player out  for 4/5th of the game  - and we still got within 7 points (and should have won if not for shonky kicking.

 

Specifically the first quarter? 

We were rattled and let them get away.  Effectively, that was enough but we nearly caught them

And they missed 3 very gettable shots in the first quarter

As for the rest of the game, we just blazed away with not enough purpose