55 minutes ago, McQueen said:

If Steve May collected Nick Daicos in that fashion the media would have him hung, drawn and quartered.

 

I just don’t get the ‘love-fest’ for this bloke. 
It’s almost like he’s developed this persona of being the tough but fair player that regularly gets away questionable acts of white line fever in games that he’s now somehow earns a friggin prize for it. 

It’s nauseating. 

To feel better watch the oft maligned Caro on this mornings insiders on abc IView now.

She and the rest of the panel nailed all the issues forcefully and with facts.

Appalled at the ex players commentary. Praised Laura Kane for upfront management. And called for mro officer resignation.

Thanks Caro.

1 hour ago, leave it to deever said:

I don't think you can rule out the fact Gus's injury may have determined tge game or not. It was a 7 point difference . It's quite possible being a good player down played a part. Especially how our mids were dominated in the first half.

That said the issue is for Maynard to be punished and players protected

The media went into overdrive at every turn to protect this bloke. A player with his experience must of known he would collect Gus with all his weight. I can't say if it was  premeditated or a simple rush of adrenaline bit an experienced player like Maynard knew a collision would result. 

And he certainly chose at the last second to put his shoulder in.

This is why they judge on impact.

I don't dispute that his injury was both reportable or a factor in the loss.

I just  think its more relevant to say that the  7 points rather suggests the Pies arnt flag favourites.

And also that given the Dee's played  "spooked " for one quarter,"scrambled" for the next two, then choked in the last, they are hardly likely to take their dysfunctional and injury riddled front half to a rematch this season.

It's a pitythough, because knocking both Collingwood and Carlton out in one series would be a September for the ages

1 minute ago, IRW said:

I don't dispute that his injury was both reportable or a factor in the loss.

I just  think its more relevant to say that the  7 points rather suggests the Pies arnt flag favourites.

And also that given the Dee's played  "spooked " for one quarter,"scrambled" for the next two, then choked in the last, they are hardly likely to take their dysfunctional and injury riddled front half to a rematch this season.

It's a pitythough, because knocking both Collingwood and Carlton out in one series would be a September for the ages

Still may happen. If it does it would be the best flag ever. Especially with Maynard watching from the sidelines.

But yea, if Gus wasn't knocked out we probably would be in a prelim.

59 minutes ago, Kent said:

sounds like Kane Kornes What a tossser

 

The never played the game argument is a dead give away the proponent has no other cogent arguments in favour of Maynard.

As with cornes argument the port doctor saved my son so leave him alone.

There is not much support for a ban in the media. Just looked at the Sunday footy show and none of Cornes, Lloyd, Nathan Brown or Damian Barrett think he should be suspended. What am i missing here? I haven't seen too many pundits make the case for a suspension. I reckon he's going to get off.

28 minutes ago, Stiff Arm said:

Spoke with a couple of random Collingwood supporters this morning who recited the 'it was a football act' and 'if you've ever played a contact sport you'd know it was ok'.

Funnily enough, I played the game in my youth and when questioned, neither if them had! Ha!

As an aside, does anyone from MFC attend the tribunal? Maybe our club doctor or someone from the FD? The hearing needs balance 

A medical report from the club is mandatory to assist the tribunal judge impact. It's why Toby Bedford was cleared. No damage.

It's why Maynard's starts his off season now.

2 minutes ago, BDA said:

There is not much support for a ban in the media. Just looked at the Sunday footy show and none of Cornes, Lloyd, Nathan Brown or Damian Barrett think he should be suspended. What am i missing here? I haven't seen too many pundits make the case for a suspension. I reckon he's going to get off.

Funny, I have the same feeling. Why? It's cfc. Media want them up and winning. $$$.

Will set a horrible precedent and fly in the face of everything the Afl says it cares about.

 

1 hour ago, McQueen said:

If Steve May collected Nick Daicos in that fashion the media would have him hung, drawn and quartered.

 

I just don’t get the ‘love-fest’ for this bloke. 
It’s almost like he’s developed this persona of being the tough but fair player that regularly gets away questionable acts of white line fever in games that he’s now somehow earns a friggin prize for it. 

It’s nauseating. 

Last year when tackled Langdon - after the all duck no dinner comment - he smashed his head into the turf and won a free kick Unbelievable.

5 minutes ago, BDA said:

There is not much support for a ban in the media. Just looked at the Sunday footy show and none of Cornes, Lloyd, Nathan Brown or Damian Barrett think he should be suspended. What am i missing here? I haven't seen too many pundits make the case for a suspension. I reckon he's going to get off.

Those turkeys are the ones needding suspension.

3 hours ago, Jara said:

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. 

Spot on!

I'd rather have no friends than those type of "friends".

Edited September 10, 20231 yr by ElDiablo14

17 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

To feel better watch the oft maligned Caro on this mornings insiders on abc IView now.

She and the rest of the panel nailed all the issues forcefully and with facts.

Appalled at the ex players commentary. Praised Laura Kane for upfront management. And called for mro officer resignation.

Thanks Caro.

Just watched that. Good to see that unlike the Ch7 mob some in the media have half a brain (possibly because they DIDN'T play footy themselves).  At one point Caro made a reference to some people having said Brayshaw should have been off for  concussion review before he was hit by Maynard. What are they referring to?  (In any case, surely that line of argument is the ugliest grasping at straws.)

53 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

The various quotes from Trac “footy is just one thing… brain for life..” doesn’t sound like the right things you want to hear regarding Gus’s immediate football career.

I wouldn’t doubt that his family and loved ones are not telling him to give it up. If he was my son, 100% I would be having the discussion. We know he considered giving up earlier on and the severity of this knock may have just pushed him over the line.

If the fact that this is being considered  is to be the case, it has to be submitted to the hearing to set the tone on the significance of the impact on the player and the club. It is such a profound incident and I cannot believe how the footy world and media are not rallying behind him. It’s outright disgusting. 

The other striking thing from that interview was tracc's evident distress when recalling the incident and aftermath.

It's impossible to quantify the psychological impact on tracc and the rest of the team of seeing someone who tracc calls once of his best mates, a player with a terrible history of head knocks, knocked out cold 3 minutes into the game. They are not automatons. 

Sure you could argue the players should be able to compartmentalize, and i think they eventually did, but it is human nature for any group of players, let alone one so close they frequently express their love for teammates, to be impacted emotionally and psychologically by such an event in such a way that it impacts performance. 

And i think they were, just as they were when maxy went down against the Lions. 

Edited September 10, 20231 yr by binman

31 minutes ago, BDA said:

There is not much support for a ban in the media. Just looked at the Sunday footy show and none of Cornes, Lloyd, Nathan Brown or Damian Barrett think he should be suspended. What am i missing here? I haven't seen too many pundits make the case for a suspension. I reckon he's going to get off.

None of them are addressing the precedent that would be set if Maynard gets off

Apart from anything else, the whiplash effect from such a vicious shirtfront could cause more damage than a concussion or broken jaw

A head snapped back in such a way must put huge pressure on the neck area

So you're not missing anything, BDA, the commentary is coming from neanderthals (or those who should know better/ completely out of touch)

The seriousness of this hit seems to be lost in the name of the lame 'footy act' narrative

Edited September 10, 20231 yr by Macca

7 hours ago, biggestred said:

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.

This is where I am at. I've seen a lot of people run at the ball carrier and jump, the large majority don't hit the player on the way down. 

The last smother attempt gone wrong I can recall is a couple of years back with Mitch Duncan collecting Aaron Hall, https://www.afl.com.au/video/598079/hall-knocked-out-after-duncans-smother-attempt?videoId=598079&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1618731665001 
Duncan escaped both a free AND suspension, but listen to the commentary... Given where we are at now with concussion, CTE etc, There was less 'footy act' talk then than Thursday night. Obviously the main difference is Duncan was spinning and had 'less' of an idea where he was going to end up. Maynard on the other hand knew exactly what was happening. 

18 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

 

Yes, the tribunal will see the raw footage from the rear angle (showing the deliberate turn into Brayshaw) and side on angle (showing the cannonball-like launch into Brayshaw) and suspend him for 3 weeks. The problem will be on appeal when your former colleagues get involved and use all their cunning, trickery and legal jargon to get him off, as what happened with Cripps last year

Edited September 10, 20231 yr by dice

31 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

To feel better watch the oft maligned Caro on this mornings insiders on abc IView now.

She and the rest of the panel nailed all the issues forcefully and with facts.

Appalled at the ex players commentary. Praised Laura Kane for upfront management. And called for mro officer resignation.

Thanks Caro.

And they talked about how Maynard was quoted in the lead up as saying they would come out hard.

He stuffed up and must pay the price.

11 minutes ago, binman said:

The other striking thing from that interview was tracc's evident distress when recalling the incident and aftermath.

It's impossible to quantify the psychological impact on tracc and the rest of the team of seeing someone who tracc calls once of his best mates, a player with a terrible history of head knocks, knocked out cold 3 minutes into the game. They are not automatons. 

Sure you could argue the players should be able to compartmentalize, and i think they eventually did, but it is human nature for any group of players, let alone one so close they frequently express their love for teammates, to be impacted emotionally and psychologically by such an event in such a aw thta impacts performance. 

And i think they were, just as they were when maxy went down against the Lions. 

You only have to look at the Brisbane game when gawn went down to see how players are affected.

19 hours ago, rollinson 65 said:

I just think it is totally unfair to the young player. Not one of ours but a player talented enough to make an AFL list.

But life and footy is never fair. Injury cost Garry Lyon a chance to play finals when he could have been the difference. Jim Stynes' brain fade cost Robbie Flower the chance to play in a Grand Final etc etc.    

Robbie had a broken collarbone (thanks to that other thug Dipper) so would never have played in the GF and the only brain fade was from the field umpire David Howlett who didn't hear the siren, you tw*t

On a lighter note... it was Brayden Maynard who stood the mark when Dom Sheed kicked a certain excellent goal once upon a grand final. So, he'll always have that.

Similar to what Binman said a few pages ago in this thread filter out the white noise surrounding this and consider this.

If you chose to <Insert ANY Football Act> and it results in head high contact (or forceful head contact with the ground) to the opposition player, ....... 

• Tackle - You'll be suspended
• Bump - You'll be suspended
• Spoiling the ball - You'll very likely be suspended

In fact the only scenario I can think of where it's not would be jumping for a mark. But that is a disputed ball contest where two or more players are going for the ball. 

This ball was not in dispute, therefore fairly sure the AFL would say 'Smothering the ball' and it resulting in head high contact would be very much in line with Bumps and Tackles.

Edited September 10, 20231 yr by Ouch!

I actually find it sickening the support Maynard is getting in the media, and from so called journalists who have been pretty big on protecting the head at all costs 

14 hours ago, Monbon said:

What contest? Brayshaw had kicked the ball over Maynard's head, Maynard jumped and then directed his shoulder at Brayshaw's after-kick momentum.

With respect, that's not true at all. Play this video at .25 speed and you will clearly see Maynard jumps to attempt his smother before the ball even touches Brayshaw's boot.

That said - I don't think the fact he was legitimately attempting a smother absolves him of responsibility for his actions and their consequences so I think he should cop a few weeks for it. Running full tilt at a player and jumping is always going to carry the risk of an outcome like this and when that happens, you wear the punishment.

Edited September 10, 20231 yr by deva5610

Thought this was interesting 

28 minutes ago, dice said:

Yes, the tribunal will see the raw footage from the rear angle and side on angle and suspend him for 3 weeks. The problem will be on appeal when your former colleagues get involved and use all their cunning, trickery and legal jargon to get him off, as what happened with Cripps last year

The side angle shows it was an old fashioned front on charge with a leap in the air that made it even worse. If Brayshaw hadn’t kicked the ball a collision would have still happened without the leap. 

38 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

And they talked about how Maynard was quoted in the lead up as saying they would come out hard.

He stuffed up and must pay the price.

Just watched the seven news on 7play from the 06/09 and the story about all duck and interview with maynard is there but the end has been removed where he was asked who do you want to hurt.