Jump to content

Featured Replies

 
 

Weeks. Elected to bump, knocked a guy out. Whether it's body contact or head, AFL will come down like a tonne of bricks.

19 minutes ago, Demonland said:

The hit with the commentary. 

 

Happy holiday Houston. 6 weeks. No attempt to tackle.  Bumps. High contact.  High impact. Intentional. Indeed actually 8 weeks. Bye bye 2024 !! 
 

anything else is criminal and AFL hypocrisy and AFL corruption 


40 minutes ago, Mickey said:

Weeks. Elected to bump, knocked a guy out. Whether it's body contact or head, AFL will come down like a tonne of bricks.

Looks like a Maynard-esq  so called “football act”. Actually Houston had much less time to pull out. 

 

I know I'm a dinosaur, but for me it was a fair bump.  No head high contact, just a bone shattering bump that caused secondary damage.

I know he'll get a minimum of 3-4, but I'd give him nothing.

2 minutes ago, Gator said:

I know I'm a dinosaur, but for me it was a fair bump.  No head high contact, just a bone shattering bump that caused secondary damage.

I know he'll get a minimum of 3-4, but I'd give him nothing.

We all know that is no longer wanted in the game and for good reason, there are law suits that will cost millions and players are having to retire early such as our hero Gus.

You just need to get with the times, if there’s no need for the contact then it shouldn’t occur.


Phrase "Houston we have a problem" has never been more appropriate. Cant see him playing finals.

1 hour ago, Gator said:

I know I'm a dinosaur, but for me it was a fair bump.  No head high contact, just a bone shattering bump that caused secondary damage.

I know he'll get a minimum of 3-4, but I'd give him nothing.

He'll get six minimum.

Deserves eight. 

image.png.394f300e54babac1efc25dc9adc3b3e4.png

It’s definitely 6 weeks.  It’s on the same level as the St Kilda blokes hit on Simpkin 

Edited by Demons11

9 hours ago, Mickey said:

Weeks. Elected to bump, knocked a guy out. Whether it's body contact or head, AFL will come down like a tonne of bricks.

Severe impact so will go to the tribunal with a minimum of 3 weeks. I reckon it will be 4 - 5 weeks which is effectively the season and probably GF appearance if they make it.


9 hours ago, Demonland said:

What is it with these prison bar guernseys?

They all.behave like thugs, Port and Pies are the same filth.

On 17/07/2024 at 21:39, Binmans PA said:

Righto, maybe that can be my new display name when I'm allowed to change it again...

How about...."The poster formerly known as Binman PA."

8 hours ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

We all know that is no longer wanted in the game and for good reason, there are law suits that will cost millions and players are having to retire early such as our hero Gus.

You just need to get with the times, if there’s no need for the contact then it shouldn’t occur.

Bravo.

I'm personally tired of the go watch golf response to these sort of incidents. One can always retort go watch kick boxing.

I see a young man going about playing a sport, I presume he loves being deliberately lined up and smashed.

What sort of chance did he have to brace or protect himself?

Just like poor Gus.....Zippo.

And yea a lot of us have a little blood lust in us.

Surely that is satiated in fair bumps and shepherds in what is still a very physical game

But this sort of thuggery is not right. Imagine if that was your young son out there going about his business.

The AFL has a responsibility and duty of care to protect these guys.

7 weeks.

Edited by leave it to deever

More likely 4 or 5.  5 would kill off any chance of a premiership for him, which is a bigger punishment than anything else they can dish out. It's a shame for him because he has been a very fair player over his career. 

9 hours ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

We all know that is no longer wanted in the game and for good reason, there are law suits that will cost millions and players are having to retire early such as our hero Gus.

You just need to get with the times, if there’s no need for the contact then it shouldn’t occur.

I know all of the arguments, I just don't agree that torso bumps that result in an unforeseen concussion should be penalised.

I accept I hold a minority view.


22 minutes ago, Gator said:

I know all of the arguments, I just don't agree that torso bumps that result in an unforeseen concussion should be penalised.

I accept I hold a minority view.

I agree that if bumping (footy act with due care, not thuggery) is allowed then it is unfair that the punishment should depend on the outcome (though if you look at the law generally, this is common). 

The resolution of this will be the total ban on bumping.   That will make gentle shepherding another realm for the umpires and MRO to be confused about.

26 minutes ago, Gator said:

I know all of the arguments, I just don't agree that torso bumps that result in an unforeseen concussion should be penalised.

I accept I hold a minority view.

I get this point of view. I guess the issue is its hard to argue that kind of impact to the body results in an 'unforseen' concussion. There have been plenty of instances of the whiplash concussion from those sorts of bumps that players should know it's a risk, and just not do it. Especially when you have the chance to tackle

10 hours ago, Earl Hood said:

Looks like a Maynard-esq  so called “football act”. Actually Houston had much less time to pull out. 

And he didn't jump at him

 
1 hour ago, Swooper1987 said:

More likely 4 or 5.  5 would kill off any chance of a premiership for him, which is a bigger punishment than anything else they can dish out. It's a shame for him because he has been a very fair player over his career. 

On reflection, you may be more on the mark than my seven.

Missing finals should be taken into consideration.


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 528 replies