Maynard's evidence has concluded. He takes a sip of water. His hair is immaculately gelled.
 

Love Zeets so much 😁

Just now, layzie said:

Maynard's evidence has concluded. He takes a sip of water. His hair is immaculately gelled.

Slippery little sucker

You beat me too it

AFL counsel went easy on him judging by the blog summary

13 minutes ago, sue said:

Quite diffferent. They were contesting the ball.  May still be worth a penalty but nothing like the present case.

I know they are different, I was just pointing out that Viney has jumped off the ground in a very dangerous manner in the past. The earlier poster suggested Viney would never do such a thing. 

Anyway, I await the tribunal decision and hope the Thug gets 3 or more weeks. My ongoing support of the AFL may well hinge on this outcome.

If Maynard gets off, he legitimises every player from this week on trying to smother and then dropping the shoulder into the opponent's head. He will have set the precedent for others to follow. AFL need to be very, very careful

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by Stiff Arm

Standing room only in here I see.

i know the live blog is not showing every word 

... but the afl counsel is coming across as very timid

The thing about witnesses and lawyers, is that ultimately the evidence, no matter if it is/isn't coached, ultimately it still needs to be delivered by the witness.

I don't want to be mean, but Maynard is not a very smart man. Counsel would know they're pushing up hill with his testimony.

I say the more he talks, the better - let him talk :-)

Remember he has been with lawyers all day coaching him. 

Don't reckon he is a good student

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by Rocknroll

All the pie fans giving the thumps up or down must think it's one of their reality  TV shows and their voting someone off. 

Woods (AFL): This type of contact isn't common. Leaping forward in the air with force to an opponent running in the opposite direction holds a key risk of badly injuring their opponent. It's a dangerous action to undertake & it breaches the duty of care owed to the other player.

1 minute ago, Red But Mostly Blue said:

 

I don't want to be mean, but Maynard is not a very smart man. Counsel would know they're pushing up hill with his testimony.

I say the more he talks, the better - let him talk :-)

I do. He’s dumb as dog-[censored]

25 minutes ago, Stiff Arm said:

If Maynard gets off, he legitimises every player from this week on trying to smother and then dropping the shoulder into the opponent's head. He will have set the precedent for others to follow. AFL need to be very, very careful

Doesn't have to be a smother, could be trying to intercept any disposal. Straight line the ball, and hope they try and dispose of it, as they launch themselves into the ball user. Not a bump, but the ball was what I was hoping to get. No one will won't to get the ball, stuffs the game as chasers have been given huge incentives. 

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by kev martin

Looking at the running upvotes/downvotes on each blog post there is a 3:1 Collingwood to Melbourne supporter ratio.

"I didn't see him"

Who or what did he think was kicking the ball?

FMD what a moron. Witness coaching gone wrong

4 minutes ago, Satan said:

You beat me too it

You can just see Maynard getting half the tub through his hair before a hot date. 

Dennis denuto  representing maynard? 

I like this Woods guy

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by Jibroni

3 minutes ago, Chook said:

Looking at the running upvotes/downvotes on each blog post there is a 3:1 Collingwood to Melbourne supporter ratio.

I'm going to start doing that now, thanks for the tip!

"I jumped straight into the air"

More like "I launched myself at Brayshaw like a scud missile"

This is a dumb line of reasoning from the AFL here IMO. To me the issue was it became a head-high bump when he failed to successfully smother and hit him high with his hip. Everything else is secondary.

I have been wrong many many times with these hearing but I just don't see how he gets off.

Dane swan is a moron but we already knew that 

Live pictures of Maynard's testimony

 

 

He put his foot in his mouth.

He did not take any duty of care into that football act.

"Ihle (Pies): Did you consider at the time Brayshaw kicked the football he was in a vulnerable position?

Maynard: No."

The outcome proves otherwise.

Duty of care is the main aspect of this adjudication. 

Edited September 12, 20232 yr by kev martin