8 hours ago, Jibroni said:

Of course it's not all I'm saying I don't think Maynards intention was to take him out.

Bullsh..t.

 

6 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

Can't believe this thread.

It was an honest footy action, fractions of seconds of time to make decisions.

I saw lots worse in my playing days (long ago). 

What would Maynard's coach and fellow players have said if he had shrunk from the contest?

It is a contact sport FCS !!

I am ashamed to be a demonlander when reading some of the posts on this thread. 

 

What 'contest'? Brayshaw had kicked the bloody ball, Maynard jumped, missed touching the ball by a mile than turned his shoulder into Brayshaw's natural momentum. Where is this a 'contest"?????????????

6 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

Fractions of seconds, people.

Fractions of seconds.

It is a contact game.

I am not playing the "I played and you did not" card but please consider.

Angus had the ball and was about to deliver a potentially dangerous kick. He is a dangerous kick, one of our best. Maynard saw the opportunity to smother and committed his body. His body.

Sometimes on the field, the mind takes a rest and the body takes over.

I am ashamed of some of the things I did on the field, but this was a football action, pure and simple. Maynard's past history is simply irrelevant. Ask any lawyer.

You should stop embarrassing yourself. So you were a shameless thug. Good on you. Live with it. Don't excuse equally shameless thugs who are still out there to injure and maim opposition players. 

5 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

Agree 4-6 weeks.

The AFL will make a political statement.

I am sorry but I feel sad for Maynard. What if he had been playing for us?

The next poster who says I do not feel sad for Gus will get a visit from me and a severe beating with my walking stick. :)

Wtf does it matter if he was playing for 'us'. If you are one of 'us', count me out...

5 hours ago, Billy said:

Rollo l know it’s your opinion but you need to quit while you’re ahead.

 

I'd get a head first, Rollo...

4 hours ago, Ouch! said:

No, Pickett's attempt at a smother was a pure football action. Almost identical, but amazingly didnt attempt to knock  Hoskin-Elliott into next week.
Maynard shuffled before he jumped, and changed his angle at the last minute to line up Brayshaw. He had intent to make contact with the player.  

How many of these 'pure football actions' have you seen in the last 5-10 years where people attempt to smother the ball, and knock out the player kicking it? 

Pardon - who HAS kicked it over his numbskull head...

I don’t like Maynard. But he’d be stiff to miss a grand final on that. The rules are predicated on players sacrificing themselves at the expense of their opponents though, so I suspect he may end up missing the grand final game (should the pies make it). The adjudicators make the rules though. They’ll eventually foot a very big bill in the future, as they have a league full of players they encourage to recklessly sacrifice their own health. 

 

4 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

I see I have no support on this thread so I shall desist. I hope that the Tribunal sees the footage from all angles. As a retired lawyer, I think that must absolve Maynard from any penalty. But, as has been pointed out by deep thinkers on this thread, the Tribunal's decision may be political - not fair to player Maynard but politically correct. 

Regards to all and Go Dees,

Rollo

 

Go figure, a retired 'lawyer'. Is anyone surprised by the semantics and sophistry and jesuistry you display? Not to mention your affirmation of football field violence, just like in your 'good ol days'....

4 hours ago, Superunknown said:

This would be laughable if not so seriously stupid. Are they seriously suggesting players can attack others and it is up to the victim to ensure they protect themselves at all times. Isn’t Dangerfield on the players union?

I hope Laura Kane is on the phone to him and all media bosses demanding a cease and desist on the incredibly unhelpful commentary. If nothing else it harms their litigation - here you have the media basically victim blaming ?!

Jesus wept the collingwood protection racket is worse the imagined

a decent silk prosecuting Maynard would be loving this. The systemic bias against the victim is incredible especially in the context of a Collingwood protection racket - which is what it is

This is a big test for kane

Yes, I call to mind a certain aPellation...

15 hours ago, 640MD said:

I would like Justice,    probably will not happen though.

I want scores level between Collingwood and the Demons at the last minute and for Gus to be awarded a free kick for high contact 30 metres out dead in front.   I want the cameras on Maynard sitting in the stands.

 

Not sure my head or heart could stand the strain mind you  but it would be Justice !

I'd prefer it if Gus kicked the goal that put us over 100 points ahead ...

7 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

Fractions of seconds, people.

Fractions of seconds.

It is a contact game.

I am not playing the "I played and you did not" card but please consider.

Angus had the ball and was about to deliver a potentially dangerous kick. He is a dangerous kick, one of our best. Maynard saw the opportunity to smother and committed his body. His body.

Sometimes on the field, the mind takes a rest and the body takes over.

I am ashamed of some of the things I did on the field, but this was a football action, pure and simple. Maynard's past history is simply irrelevant. Ask any lawyer.

No, Maynard was reckless in jumping in the air and lunging towards Brayshaw. Brayshaw was not contesting the ball, he had the ball and was disposing of it. He was open without an ability to protect himself and Maynard had a duty of care. Maynard was clearly determined to "make him earn it" and propelled himself into Brayshaw in a bumping action with elbow tucked and hitting Brayshaw with his shoulder. Whether it happened after he was attempting to smother is irrelevant. Once he had missed the smother he could have done a number of things to stop him cannoning into Brayshaw but instead of trying to minimise the force he barrelled into him, causing a concussion. Part of the duty of care is also making sure he does not act recklessly when attempting to smother, tackle, mark etc.

He must get at least 3 weeks or the AFL will again be seen to be a hypocritical joke.

Edited September 9, 20232 yr by Dr. Gonzo

Kane Cornes ( an admitted shock jock and fan of the negative football - which aligns with his unimaginative and limited, yet allegedly disciplined skill set) ranted against Manynard's suspension and his main points were ...

-we are asking too much of our players, we want intense finals footy, so we should shutup when accidents happen

- there was nothing else he could have done. what do you want him to do? he cant disappear into mid air...

- (And my favorite) If anyone questions this > how much footy have you played yourself? you don't know what your talking about and should shutup...

- He refers to the Tom Lynch bump earlier in the year as precedence.  but this was much different, tom was  in a pack, they were all contesting the ball, and the hit was not as bad...

 

even for this hit, interesting that Bucks (one of the few prominent outliers here) thought it should go to the tribunal as he did for the maynard case...

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/04/11/why-buckley-disagrees-with-afl-tribunals-lynch-call/

Can't really see how kane has got maynard off :

- forgets the ongoing head injuries law suits and general trend to protect the heads

- ignores the fact that it was a dog act by maynard, not a footy act, which is the popular euphemism these days for a dog act...

- and yes forgets how maynard lined gus up as much as an A380 coming into to land at tullamarine

- general condescending remarks about those holding the opposing view perfectly exemplifies just how out of touch he is to the issue and how he needs to "play the man" and not the substance, to win an argument (just like he did in his playing days, to moderate success). 

3+ weeks thanks!

Edited September 9, 20232 yr by RickyJ45

Wonder if Collingwood supporters things Bucks has it in for them?

The more i think aboit this the worse it gets. Never seen anyone before end an attempt to smother by dropping the shoulder into a head. He could have turned the other way, put his arms out or anything else than what he did.

9 hours ago, jane02 said:

I would have set my dog on him first. If anyone has seen ‘Once upon a time in Hollywood’ ( Brad Pitts dog) - that’s the sort of dog I mean.

Except your dog would get rabies.

Is Ben Sutton employed by the Cfc.

What a complete load of Bs.

Why are Goodys comments strange?

https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/simon-goodwin-delivers-strange-post-match-comments-on-brayden-maynard-incident-c-11835522

What footy world consensus?

Edited September 9, 20232 yr by leave it to deever

I'm over my black mood re Thursday's match ... except for my hatred of that dog, and the filth generally.

I can still smile when remembering 2021.

He’ll get 3 weeks at the tribunal and then the Pies will win the appeal and he’ll be free to play 

the media and football world will rejoin that justice has been done and the AFL will be happy as they covered their backside as they don’t control the tribunal. 

does anyone honestly believe Maynard will be suspended? i cant see it. the system is rigged

6 minutes ago, DubDee said:

He’ll get 3 weeks at the tribunal and then the Pies will win the appeal and he’ll be free to play 

the media and football world will rejoin that justice has been done and the AFL will be happy as they covered their backside as they don’t control the tribunal. 

does anyone honestly believe Maynard will be suspended? i cant see it. the system is rigged

As I said before, if that does eventuate and by a miracle we face them again in this finals campaign, I hope May decks the thug at the very first opportunity. 😤😤

13 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

Agree 4-6 weeks.

The AFL will make a political statement.

I am sorry but I feel sad for Maynard. What if he had been playing for us.

Well, his dad did didn’t he!

Collingwood coach Craig McRae hopes Maynard will avoid suspension.

 

“The act itself, didn’t look it had much malice. I will leave it up to others to decide if that’s worthy of a suspension or not. I don’t know,” he said.

 

So we are all agreed there was malice. Tx. Witness for the prosecution.

Let's move on to impact. 5 weeks.

Edited September 9, 20232 yr by leave it to deever

This thread has been one of the most disappointing things I've seen in my many years on Demonland.

How can anyone who feels 'sorry' for Maynard, or who utters a syllable in his defence, call themselves a Demons' supporter?

Maynard says he's a mate of Gus's, even dropped around with a bottle of wine to demonstrate it (aw shucks, what a guy). Therefore he obviously knows how the horrors of concussion have affected Gus's and his partner's families. Despite this, he jumped late at Gus when he was at his most vulnerable, totally exposed. Then, rather than simply putting out his hands, he twisted and lowered his shoulder so that he bashed him in the skull and knocked him out of the finals.

Maynard knew exactly what he'd done (indeed, he'd apparently been talking about it in the days before) . Look at that pathetic footage of him trying to show the umpire that he was putting out his hands. Er no, you vicious mongrel, you didn't put out your hands, you put in your bloody shoulder.

That act of what even Maynard's coach admits was malice (see the previous post by Leave it to Deever- McCrae says there wasn't much malice in it - ie there was some) more than likely cost us the game and could have cost us a premiership. 

 

If Maynard does get off on appeal, it will only be due to the brute force of the Collingwood media machine, which sprang into action as soon as the incident occurred (oh BT).

So please, anybody on this site, don't add your voice to it. 

Edited September 9, 20232 yr by Jara

16 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

Can't believe this thread.

...

I am ashamed to be a demonlander when reading some of the posts on this thread. 

 

15 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

Yes, let's all agree to drop that one.

Let's concentrate on the fractions of seconds and opinions that could deny a young player the opportunity to play more finals footy. What if a Melbourne player had done the same? Would we not all be defending a pure football action? It is a contact sport. 

You've posted some batturd crazy stuff over the past 20 years or so both on Demonology and here, but you've really crossed the line with this unhinged commentary.

Demonlanders should be ashamed?  How about Collingwood supporters chanting "Collingwooood" as Gus goes off on the stretcher.  Melbourne supporters are rightly incensed by what has happened and as time has progressed, instead of becoming more calm, even the most rational Demon supporters I know have become even more upset.

Your suggestion that we should feel some sympathy for Maynard, a thug with a history of premeditated violence - see Ed Langdon's "all duck, no dinner" incident, who clearly came out with a will to inflict damage and did so - is deeply insulting.  All our sympathy is rightly with Angus Brayshaw and his family.

The incident had a material impact on the outcome of a critical match because it limited our flexibility to send Petracca forward to score.  All as a result of an act that can most generously be described as reckless.

16 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

I am ashamed of some of the things I did on the field, but this was a football action, pure and simple. Maynard's past history is simply irrelevant. Ask any lawyer.

You absolutely have the right to post your opinion and I have the right to criticise it.  You need to take a good long hard look in the mirror and reflect on what you see..

Edited September 9, 20232 yr by old55

14 hours ago, Ouch! said:

No, Pickett's attempt at a smother was a pure football action. Almost identical, but amazingly didnt attempt to knock  Hoskin-Elliott into next week.
Maynard shuffled before he jumped, and changed his angle at the last minute to line up Brayshaw. He had intent to make contact with the player.  

How many of these 'pure football actions' have you seen in the last 5-10 years where people attempt to smother the ball, and knock out the player kicking it? 

And it could be argued that pickett has modified his behaviour after being suspended for the Smith bump

He rarely goes for the body now and often'pulls up' after trying to put pressure on. 

Maynard is a long term thug whose behaviour should be rubbed out of the game.  The opportunity is there for the AFL or else duty of care is extinguished. Any thug can run straight at the body front on and claim it was a footy action. 

 

He had choices but once you leave the ground you're beholden to the result. There was no duty of care,  he was late, a totally unrealistic attempt he went for the body,  turned and shouldered his head

If the Afl is serious he had to go. As should have Cripps and Dangerfield

15 hours ago, Supreme_Demon said:

Apparently Brayden "the scumbag dog" Maynard went to the Brayshaw Household to give Angus Brayshaw a bottle of wine?!

Why would you give someone a bottle of wine who has had a concussion injury?! 🤦🏼‍♂️

It would be like giving a person who is scared of heights free tickets for bungee jumping.

Your fruitless attempt to "suck up" and apologise will fail Brayden Maynard you vile grub! 🤬🤬🤬🤬

They really are a bunch of classless morons down at Collingwood!

I think you’ll find they’re friends and Brayshaw is keen on his wine. Let’s stick to the incident shall we.