10 minutes ago, biggestred said:

i agree that he didnt have malice, however i think he could have protected gus more by opening his body up instead of dropping the shoulder. i think it was careless. it would have been awkward and they would have gone for a tumble but he could have done more to alleviate the damage so to speak. imho.

His on coach said he had malice (just not much - doesn't take much) 

Malice doesn't matter, "duty of care" protect the head all that...right AFL?  

The comment about half the story with the biomechanist is spot on, the experts on their side will interpret the facts to favor their argument.  The other side also needed some experts to either confirm or mount an opposing argument.  Did they have that?  Doesn't seem like all the facts were actually on the table, the lawyers won this one, they really are the best humans.

Sick of looking at Maynard's dog ugly head splashed all over the media(internet).

No mention of AFL appealing? What a miserable week of football and we havent even started  the semis.

Dont know if i will bother this Friday.

AFL will definitely want us eliminated from September  ASAP.

 

 

1 hour ago, Macca said:

Well, in the end, if the tribunal has a modicum of sense, they would have realised that Brayshaw has no choice but to move to his right when kicking

It seems to me that Maynard was found not guilty on a technicality when an overall technicality should have incriminated him

We only got half the story on the biomechanics

I thought he moved the right way, opposite to the balls movement. 

If number 4 was playing the ball, he would have gone to his right.

Gus moving diagonally away from the ball means he clears from the impact area, if the ball was being played at.

Number 4 was tracking Gus.

Gus moved the correct way so as to avoid a collision, if was expecting the opponent to attack the ball.

Number 4 launched before he knew where the ball was heading, as shown by having to reach out when in Frisbee mode, therefore he jumped into the players line and had no idea where the ball was.

Football action (haha), and if so then an unrealistic attempt, causing concussion. 

Edited September 13, 20232 yr by kev martin

11 minutes ago, Demonsterative said:

I thin’ there was a lot of emotional posting last night Dazzle. Therefore most were not their usual selves. I didn’t read anything that was out of hand. 
 

 

I agree, certainly lot of emotions. And trust me, I'm no saint either which I'm working hard on but last night was almost next level.

Let's not stoop to the level of Collingwood supporters and being absolutely vicious to one another.

These directions from Gleeson absolutely stink why is he needing to direct other tribunal members who should be able to make up their own mind. Don't recall him being so generous when they tried to rub out JVR in fact I think it was the opposite. If he really is a Filth supporter then he's terribly conflicted.

33 minutes ago, biggestred said:

i agree that he didnt have malice, however i think he could have protected gus more by opening his body up instead of dropping the shoulder. i think it was careless. it would have been awkward and they would have gone for a tumble but he could have done more to alleviate the damage so to speak. imho.

Yeah I fair enough.

6 minutes ago, loges said:

These directions from Gleeson absolutely stink why is he needing to direct other tribunal members who should be able to make up their own mind.

Is Gleeson hopelessly conflicted in this proceeding?

If he is the only legally trained member of the tribunal and if he acts like a judge by giving directions to the other tribunal members and then he sits in judgement on his own direction, how is this not an egregious breach of procedural fairness and natural justice?

To a non-lawyer this seems to be grounds for an appeal against the tribunal and the decision. What do the lawyers say?

Anyone viewed the footage of McGuire at an eatery last night post the tribunal decision? What a massive preeck.....

3 minutes ago, Diamond Tim said:

Anyone viewed the footage of McGuire at an eatery last night post the tribunal decision? What a massive preeck.....

Grubby wasn't it.

 

10 minutes ago, Diamond Tim said:

Anyone viewed the footage of McGuire at an eatery last night post the tribunal decision? What a massive preeck.....

The Age article quotes Eddie as saying 

“We need to get a bit of fun back into the footy,” he told us. “It’s been pretty tough this week.”

The mind boggles, what a circus this is 

Edited September 13, 20232 yr by Delusional demon 82

Hope eddie didnt get food poisoning 

29 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I agree, certainly lot of emotions. And trust me, I'm no saint either which I'm working hard on but last night was almost next level.

Let's not stoop to the level of Collingwood supporters and being absolutely vicious to one another.

100% @dazzledavey36 - we can't do anything about it now. Time to re-group as a great bunch of supporters and turn our collective attention to beating the Blues on Friday night.

Does this mean now that there is no careless grading if you bump? Only intentional?

 

1 hour ago, AzzKikA said:

Oh ok so we insult someone with a different view, how mature of you all.

There is a lot of viewing through red and blue glasses here. I guarantee with 100% accuracy if it was gus jumping into Maynard all of your opinions would be reversed. I hate Maynard and think he is a dirty player but in this instance I don't not believe there was malice. I also don't believe either player is to blame hence the football act.

Don't know why I am bothering as you all will only see it 1 way. Next time I'll keep my opinion to myself so I don't get jumped on for having a differing one.

Except Gus' default mindset would be "try not to hurt him"...

Maynard's default mindset was "try to hurt him"...  

1 minute ago, 3183 Dee said:

100% @dazzledavey36 - we can't do anything about it now. Time to re-group as a great bunch of supporters and turn our collective attention to beating the Blues on Friday night.

How can we focus on the footy when the AFL has made it clear who are their darlings in the competition?

This stinks of them wishing for a GF that has Carlton and Collingwood.

Did the AFL show any of the countless other examples where a player could have elbowed a kicker in the face but chose not to? 
 

Woods is a muppet! AFL should have got Carlton’s legal team…

1 hour ago, ElDiablo14 said:

For Integrity sake?

AFL and Integrity?

Roll me over and call me Susan

 

21 minutes ago, Diamond Tim said:

Anyone viewed the footage of McGuire at an eatery last night post the tribunal decision? What a massive preeck.....

 

It is infuriating that the evidence of Maynard was not challenged.

He "jumped straight into the air" is a flat out lie. He ran full tilt and dived forward into Brayshaws path. The closing speed of the two players makes this dangerous and reckless. The side on view suggests he travelled at least 2m fwd

Its front on which is illegal

I didn't see him. - But I ran straight at him like a maniac

I touched the footy - Flat out lie. He was miles off it

I wouldn't have hit him had Brayshaw not changed direction is the biggest lie of the lot

I am over the AFL. lets win flag and the rest can f off

The precedent that has been set here is that if you turn yourself into a human frisbee and knock out an opponent for 2 minutes your punishment will be:

- one or at the most two outraged journos calling for your head

- the cold shoulder from a couple of MFC players upon visiting the victim

- a rebuke from the victim's mother over the phone

- enduring four hours in front of a kangaroo court while biting nails and clutching onto a mini football like a toddler with a security blanket 

Meanwhile the victim is subbed out of the game, misses the next game and possibly enters early retirement with the prospect of a damaged brain and ongoing mental health issues.

Yep seems like a fair and just system.

Edited September 13, 20232 yr by leucopogon

3 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Choi's in Hawthorn

10 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

How can we focus on the footy when the AFL has made it clear who are their darlings in the competition?

This stinks of them wishing for a GF that has Carlton and Collingwood.

Let Carlton and Collingwood and their supporters continue to bray and brag. Our club, meanwhile, will speak softly and carry a big stick.

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

Let's keep politics out of footy threads.

So long as you are consistent on this because theres a lot that gets through