55 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

I wonder if a Maynard throwing his arms up while he jumped forward help propel him even higher. The more I watch the footage the more I ask, how could have Maynard not have thought he would collide with poor Gus? The intent for some impact was certainly there. Since he's fluffed the truth once, I'm not sure he even cared about the smother. If the Afl doesn't stop this act with a hefty penalty, we will see plenty more " smothering" in the game and lots of careers jeopardized. 

yeah, but only from the thugs

SEN This morning saying Maynard was reluctantly let into the Brayshaw house bringing flowers, chocolate and wine. An unamed Melb player was there with Gus at the time and was so angry at Maynard, he had to leave the room. Fair to say the the Brayshaw and Frawley families are not happy with Maynard. I suspect they will be furious when his hearing is over

3 minutes ago, Stiff Arm said:

SEN This morning saying Maynard was reluctantly let into the Brayshaw house bringing flowers, chocolate and wine. An unamed Melb player was there with Gus at the time and was so angry at Maynard, he had to leave the room. Fair to say the the Brayshaw and Frawley families are not happy with Maynard. I suspect they will be furious when his hearing is over

I suspect that if Maynard isn't suspended, the AFL will be hearing a lot more from the Brayshaws and Frawleys.

He messed with the wrong footy family. 

4 hours ago, Older demon said:

Fear not WCW. Cripps was found guilty but the case was thrown out on a legal technicality in the the Chair didn't adequately brief and what options they had. Nothing to do with the guilty verdict which wasn't changed. The case was abandoned and Gil was furious and the rules changed to ensure it doesn't happen again. He is either guilty or not no downgrades lets wait and see 

I think Whately summed it up pretty well on 360,though it was too subtle for his stupid co anchor to hear. The umpire immediately both reported Maynard and gave a free kick  down field; ergo it was NOT a footy act becsuse it transgressed the rules and needed to be examined by the Tibunal.

There is no clear legislation around " smothering ", unlike tackling and bumping.

Both of those have been clarified over the last 2 (?) seasons and players have adjusted the way they play.

Whether or not Maynard is suspended, or an  inevitable appeal is successful ,clarification  relating to smothers will be in place next season. 

Sometimes it  seems that  Gerard actually  looks ,thinks and draws conclusions. 

You could have a reasonable discussion with him I reckon

Can we close this thread now please?

Edited September 11, 20231 yr by IRW

8 minutes ago, IRW said:

 

Can we close this thread now please?

Why? I guarantee you this thread will be nearly double its size before it’s finished. 

36 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

It bemuses me that a lot of the commentary both here and the media is made with little if any acknowledgement of the notion that this isn't just footy....it's finals footy.  As such the leashes at let loose...all bets off so to speak. There is an element of no tomorrows and we'll deal with the naughtiness later in the mean time win the flag....however you can.

If there were any semblance of Queensberry Rules through the h/a they most certainly get jettisoned by many come September.  Youd practically have to commit murder to be rubbed out if you happen to belong to certain clubs. And they know it...and use it.

Smell the flowers folks.... no level fields here.

There's no medal for nice....just for winning.

 

I agree with this. I also agree with your earlier point that he meant to take the body. A defender has to stop the ball or the man, or both.

But after reading this board I’ve changed my earlier position that it’s a football incident and there should be leniency for finals. Mundy is right, he had plenty of control in the air to choose how to collide.

I hope the AFL put a strong case as it’s fairly convincing when you read this board.

Should get multiple weeks.

No medal for Maynard.

8 hours ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

Because that’s what we fear will happen, and that fear is warranted. Cripps getting off last year means every subsequent appeal is highly likely to be successful despite how ridiculous it is.

Cripps' Brownlow for me will always have an asterisk against it, but he got off on legal technicality surrounding incorrect charges. Not evidence, medical reports etc.

90,000 saw the shoulder drop and Angus off on the cart.

 

On 360 Monday, Whately revealed that Maynard was immediately reported by the umpire and Robbo interrupted him saying he paid a free kick. This happened 2-3 more times with Whately trying to get the report point across about the report and Robbo interrupting about the free kick.

Was this deliberate by Robbo, or is it just his inability to comprehend and listen to an intelligent discussion?

14 minutes ago, IRW said:

I think Whately summed it up pretty well on 360,though it was too subtle for his stupid co anchor to hear. The umpire immediately both reported Maynard and gave a free kick  down field; ergo it was NOT a footy act becsuse it transgressed the rules and needed to be examined by the Tibunal.

There is no clear legislation around " smothering ", unlike tackling and bumping.

Both of those have been clarified over the last 2 (?) seasons and players have adjusted the way they play.

Whether or not Maynard is suspended, or an  inevitable appeal is successful ,clarification  relating to smothers will be in place next season. 

Sometimes it  seems that  Gerard actually  looks ,thinks and draws conclusions. 

You could have a reasonable discussion with him I reckon

Can we close this thread now please?

Sun already setting the discraceful narrative that he will get off on appeal. This site will explode then.

Also some of these Neanderthals obviously don't like seeing someone miss a grand final, missing the point that Brayshaw may also miss the grand final.

2 minutes ago, loges said:

Sun already setting the discraceful narrative that he will get off on appeal. This site will explode then.

I don’t think it will explode, we all know it will happen.

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

I don’t think it will explode, we all know it will happen.

Will still happen.

I’ve reflected on this a lot since Thursday. 

My position is he should be suspended. Don’t focus on the split second he’s in the air, he made a decision, many seconds before, to run full pelt at Brayshaw and to jump straight at him. The AFL’s position should be “sure, you can do that, but you can’t do it in a way which exposes your opponent to a head injury”. The same principle as a tackle. 

Don’t worry about Maynard’s intent. Don’t worry about corruption or the MRO or even that it’s a final. Just focus on the action - it’s recklessness in the purest sense and should be met with suspension. 

I am so fed up with the AFL. The sooner our season ends and I can stop giving my hard earned money and emotional energy to this corrupt garbage of an organization the better. 

8 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Cripps' Brownlow for me will always have an asterisk against it, but he got off on legal technicality surrounding incorrect charges. Not evidence, medical reports etc.

90,000 saw the shoulder drop and Angus off on the cart.

 

90,000 saw, but maybe 60,000 plus most commentators are in denial. 

I'm losing my faith in humanity over this.

26 minutes ago, IRW said:

I think Whately summed it up pretty well on 360,though it was too subtle for his stupid co anchor to hear. The umpire immediately both reported Maynard and gave a free kick  down field; ergo it was NOT a footy act becsuse it transgressed the rules and needed to be examined by the Tibunal.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Redleg said:

On 360 Monday, Whately revealed that Maynard was immediately reported by the umpire and Robbo interrupted him saying he paid a free kick. This happened 2-3 more times with Whately trying to get the report point across about the report and Robbo interrupting about the free kick.

Was this deliberate by Robbo, or is it just his inability to comprehend and listen to an intelligent discussion?

Interesting discussion also on 360 with Scott & Lyon.

Whilst neither directly threw Maynard under the bus you could read between some pretty pointed lines.

AS for the comments made by many about him not having time to react...Lyon made a comment along the lines of have you seen how quick these guys make decisions in tight spaces these days.

Scott commented that if it was at training do you think he would have knocked out his teammate.

Edited September 11, 20231 yr by rjay

11 minutes ago, Redleg said:

On 360 Monday, Whately revealed that Maynard was immediately reported by the umpire and Robbo interrupted him saying he paid a free kick. This happened 2-3 more times with Whately trying to get the report point across about the report and Robbo interrupting about the free kick.

Was this deliberate by Robbo, or is it just his inability to comprehend and listen to an intelligent discussion?

Robbo was caught out not being aware of the on-field report and seemed to have trouble processing the information as it was detrimental to his pre-conceived position of no suspension.

It was funny to watch actually.  Poor Robbo.

1 minute ago, sue said:

90,000 saw, but maybe 60,000 plus most commentators are in denial. 

I'm losing my faith in humanity over this.

Don't get me wrong i am furious at Maynard but the Pies supporters chanting COLLINGWOOD while Brayshaw was out cold and getting a neck brace secured on was even more sickening

9 minutes ago, Redleg said:

On 360 Monday, Whately revealed that Maynard was immediately reported by the umpire and Robbo interrupted him saying he paid a free kick. This happened 2-3 more times with Whately trying to get the report point across about the report and Robbo interrupting about the free kick.

Was this deliberate by Robbo, or is it just his inability to comprehend and listen to an intelligent discussion?

in the hun this morning robbo defined it as a "pure" footy action, yes, pure!

the guy is a compromised imbecile ... as if we didn't always know that

how someone like him can be the chief football writer at the paper always amazes me

4 minutes ago, sue said:

90,000 saw, but maybe 60,000 plus most commentators are in denial. 

I'm losing my faith in humanity over this.

So logically Sue 30,000 plus savvy media and ex-players are NOT in denial.

That's sound good to me.

Some of the reporting around this incident is just plain stupid.  Deal with this action and get off the band stand about this will change to game.  

Each week in the AFL there are hundreds of body collisions, only a very small percentage cause injury and those ones need to be dealt with by the tribunal or mro.

To say if Maynard gets weeks it will change the game, bring in high marks and other contacts into the discussion is just stupid.

The AFL already has a couple of class actions pending for concussions.  That is at AFL level, there will be the next wave of state league footballers, followed by local footballers all that at the time of playing would have had insurance policy through the relevant league appointed insurers.

Changing our thinking on protecting the head is vital to ensure the game is a product that a company will continue to insure the participants.

Deal with the incident at hand, he went past the ball, turned a smother into a bump hit a player high and knocked him out.  

What a shame as well, no matter what happens tonight everyone is talking an appeal, if the appeal fails for Collingwood we are hearing court action.  Meanwhile you have a bloke not playing with a chance he may never play again.  

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

in the hun this morning robbo defined it as a "pure" footy action, yes, pure!

the guy is a compromised imbecile ... as if we didn't always know that

how someone like him can be the chief football writer at the paper always amazes me

I think it's more an indication of the readership. The writers can't be smarter than it's buyers. I'm sure you just borrowed a friend's or inadvertently clicked on the wrong link so all good here.

You cannot hit players in the head.

NRL could be a good source for examples of smothering the ball off the kick. Their kicker never goes down like how Gus went.

Edited September 11, 20231 yr by kev martin

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

in the hun this morning robbo defined it as a "pure" footy action, yes, pure!

the guy is a compromised imbecile ... as if we didn't always know that

how someone like him can be the chief football writer at the paper always amazes me

Look at Robbo as the clown he is Daisy. And I mean that in the true sense of the word.

His job for NewsCorp is to sell papers. Nothing more, nothing less.  So,................

That involves being controversial

Toeing the AFL party line mostlty

Not Upsetting major teams with dubious culture and leadership quality and their readership in Pies, Blues, etc. (Dees, now Bombers and Tiges not in this camp given their CEO/Board standards).

Its not mandatory to engage the brain before the mouth.

Be entertaining to neutral Sun readers.  "Its about paper sales and clickbait stupid."

Murdoch understands this issue perfectly - Cue the Fox News strategy and court cases in the US last year.

Go Dees for Friday.

15 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

So logically Sue 30,000 plus savvy media and ex-players are NOT in denial.

That's sound good to me.

That should cheer me up, but sadly it doesn't.