14 hours ago, FreedFromDesire said:

I can't shake the feeling this will e the second year in a row where a rule change/system adjustment will come in post-concussion incident in a Demons vs Magpies game. 

We saw the shift after the Maynard incident, and I feel there is the potential for a groundswell around this incident where the flawed MRO system gets looked at. Having so few spaces to try and fit so many thousands of different incidents in is simply not working. The suspensions are varying too wildly now.

In the game last night, the two incidents with Magpies players lowering their heads in the contest both resulted in sanctions for Melbourne players, despite them instigating or making the incident worse in both cases. If the AFL are going to seriously tackle concussion they are going to have to recognize that having a purely punitive system when there's so many accidents and other factors is flat out not working. They are going to have to do something about the regularity now where players are looking for high contact. It's now a footy cultural issue.

Didn't the AFL say a few years back that to discourage head high contacts they would award frees against players for ducking.  But they did not follow through - all they have done is (sometimes) not award a free against the opponent for head high contact.

8 hours ago, Bowserpower said:

Do you honestly think that they will see it that way?

No I don’t, so we should get the appeal ready, where you run a very legal argument, not a common sense, factual one.

8 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Not a hope in hell gets off. Your opponent gets concussed you’re gone in 2024.

If a Collingwood player did it to one of our players we’d be screaming blue murder and booing him for the remainder of the game.

Kozzie needs to stop putting himself in these vulnerable positions, and they’ll be livid he’ll be unavailable until round 4.

What going for the ball?

Is that we Kozzie shouldn't do?

He's cleaned up his act a LOT this year and some on here should recognise this.

There was nothing malicious or reckless about what he did.

A player dropped his knees and slid into him while he had eyes for the ball only.

FFS. Watch it at speed. He wouldn't have have had time to shirk the contest anyway

Do you lot expect him to turn into a soccer player and start taking a dive?

He's now in our top 4 players and he's being suspended for 3 critical weeks because of an illegal action by the captain of the Collingwood football club.

He got up took his kick and was fine and laughing after the game. Something really stinks.

We've been bent over by the pies and their mates again.

 

Edited August 24, 2024Aug 24 by Brownie

11 hours ago, No10 said:

I'd say this is wrong - but indeed was the basis of the decision.

The appeal should be that BOTH players elected to bump. But Moore SLID, KNEE first.

That's an illegal action and Moore sliding caused the incident.

Knees first into any contact is dangerous. Sliding specifically is illegal. That's why Moore has to be held accountable and Kossy should be cleared.

Will win on appeal.

You just shouldn’t be able to be suspended when another play does an illegal act. That is sliding in and is actually outlawed, but the umpire didn’t pay it. Moore could have broken Kozzy’s leg or something like that.

11 hours ago, No10 said:

I'd say this is wrong - but indeed was the basis of the decision.

The appeal should be that BOTH players elected to bump. But Moore SLID, KNEE first.

That's an illegal action and Moore sliding caused the incident.

Knees first into any contact is dangerous. Sliding specifically is illegal. That's why Moore has to be held accountable and Kossy should be cleared.

Will win on appeal.

If you watch it in slow motion Kossie's foot gets hit by Moore's knee which forces Kossie off balance, this then causes the collision, so in fact Mooe helped the collision to happen.

When can we expect to know if the Club is going to appeal or not?

17 hours ago, Demonstone said:

For those arguing that Pickett should not be suspended, here's a hypothetical.

Would you take the same view if all circumstances were identical but Maynard was the player making contact and Kozzy was subbed out with concussion as a result? 

In other words, are you seeing this incident through a red and blue lens (like we all do at times)?

Absolutely I am taking the same view. The fabric of game is being pulled apart. I get why the AFL is going this direction but it’s completely changing the game, and not for the better 

Edited August 24, 2024Aug 24 by Gawn's Beard

In the past Kossie deserved his suspensions. Not this one, there was no malicious intent. A hip and shoulder on a 6ft 8" Darcy Moore looks very different when he dips down to fist the ball at ground level.

I don't believe he was concussed. Did they confirm Moore did a HIA and did not pass that?

Too many on here concentrating on the outcome and not the causation,both are approaching the ball at a slightly different angle about the same distance from the ball, there was always going to be contact/bump, it was Moore recklessly deciding to slide at the last second that caused the concussion. I would be arguing along those lines 

Edited August 25, 2024Aug 25 by loges

i don't understand why people are saying kozzy elected to bump.

i don't see anything i'd call an intentional bump

both players charging for the ball in the same direction but slightly different angle

kozzy maybe slightly in front. a side-side collision (you see a 100 times a game) was inevitable but not what i'd call an intentional bump

you know the rest with moore strangely and intentionally dropping to his knees and sliding

i don't see moores dropping to his knees any different to a player dropping his head to cheat a free which is explicitly not allowed and makes any injury resulting from such, the fault of the ducker.

i think there's a strong case that kozzy is being denied natural justice due to the afl's arbitrary outcomes rules

3 weeks is excessively harsh and should be appealed. Just need a decent advocate, but

Edited August 25, 2024Aug 25 by daisycutter

30 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i don't understand why people are saying kozzy elected to bump.

i don't see anything i'd call an intentional bump

both players charging for the ball in the same direction but slightly different angle

kozzy maybe slightly in front. a side-side collision (you see a 100 times a game) was inevitable but not what i'd call an intentional bump

you know the rest with moore strangely and intentionally dropping to his knees and sliding

i don't see moores dropping to his knees any different to a player dropping his head to cheat a free which is explicitly not allowed and makes any injury resulting from such, the fault of the ducker.

i think there's a strong case that kozzy is being denied natural justice due to the afl's arbitrary outcomes rules

3 weeks is excessively harsh and should be appealed. Just need a decent advocate, but

If we go with Adrian Anderson we will probably lose and then the tribunal will give him a life ban

1 minute ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

If we go with Adrian Anderson we will probably lose and then the tribunal will give him a life ban

This. Ffs get a better lawyer. 
 

3 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

This. Ffs get a better lawyer. 
 

This, plus you've got to get past Gleeson the tribunal chairman's bias.

1 hour ago, loges said:

This, plus you've got to get past Gleeson the collingwood supporting tribunal chairman's bias.

fixed it for you

1 hour ago, loges said:

This, plus you've got to get past Gleeson the tribunal chairman's bias.

You mean the Pies’ supporting Tribunal Chairman.

It has been reported somewhere he is a Pies’ fan.

Maybe the female alternate Chairman will officiate.

Anyway until one second before impact there is absolutely no possible way Moore’s head is involved. While Kozzie is looking down at the ball Moore drops to his knees. That caused the bump. Kozzie’s feet seem to be slightly taken out from under him as well.

That is classic exemption of “ circumstances beyond the player’s control” and that is what you run.

I would call a biomechanic expert to show when Moore dropped there was nothing Kozzie could do in a split second at the pace he was contesting.

Are Carlton's Lawyers busy atm ?? ;)

I watched bits and pieces of the Brisbane game last night and saw on multiple occasions where 2 players chasing the ball, very similar to the Kozzie incident, and in each contest there was a bump as they were contesting the ball. Only difference was neither of those players chose to slide to the ball.

I bet they won’t get a 3 week suspension.

12 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Are Carlton's Lawyers busy atm ?? ;)

On the way to Marvel Stadium right now, but call tomorrow morning.

6 hours ago, Brownie said:

What going for the ball?

Is that we Kozzie shouldn't do?

He's cleaned up his act a LOT this year and some on here should recognise this.

There was nothing malicious or reckless about what he did.

A player dropped his knees and slid into him while he had eyes for the ball only.

FFS. Watch it at speed. He wouldn't have have had time to shirk the contest anyway

Do you lot expect him to turn into a soccer player and start taking a dive?

He's now in our top 4 players and he's being suspended for 3 critical weeks because of an illegal action by the captain of the Collingwood football club.

He got up took his kick and was fine and laughing after the game. Something really stinks.

We've been bent over by the pies and their mates again.

 

I reckon we can successfully argue that Kossie's action was not careless because

1. He was contesting the ball and it was reasonable to do so in that way - Kossie actually gets to the ball first and pedals it with his foot at the same time the contact is made, he is playing the ball.

2. The circumstances were out of Kossie's control, he could not have anticipated that Moore would slide on his knees, an action which also constitutes rough conduct. Were Moore not concussed and Pickett suffered a serious leg injury then it could actually be Moore facing suspension.

Here is what the 2024 Tribunal Guidelines state:

1. Rough Conduct (High Bumps)

The AFL Regulations provide that a Player will be guilty of Rough Conduct where in the bumping of an opponent (whether reasonably or unreasonably) the Player causes contact that is at least Low Impact to be made with any part of his body to an opponent’s head or neck. If not Intentional, such conduct will be deemed to be Careless, unless:

» The Player was contesting the ball and it was reasonable for the Player to contest the ball in that way; or

» The contact to the opponent’s head or neck was caused by circumstances outside the control of the Player which could not be reasonably foreseen.

 

4. Rough Conduct (Contact Below the Knees)
Under the Laws of Australian Football, it is prohibited to make contact with an opponent below the knees. Players who keep their feet are vulnerable to serious injury from opponents who lunge, dive or slide toward them and make contact below the knees. 

» The degree of momentum and/or force involved in the contact;

» Whether the Player causes contact below the knees, without limitation, by sliding with his foot, feet, knee or knees in front of him;

» Whether the opposition Player was in a position that was vulnerable to contact below the knees (for example, standing over the ball or approaching from the opposite direction); and

» Whether the Player making contact had any realistic alternative ways of approaching the contest or situation

19 hours ago, demon3165 said:

Now I'm one who doesn't winge about umpires or MRV but 3 games for that, Moore went to ground nearly the same time as he came through there is know why he expected More to drop lower what a joke, I expect the club to appeal.

I might add I sent an email to the club about this, but I expect they would have seen the same thing I hope....

21 hours ago, fr_ap said:

Despite all of that...you're missing the point.

He elected to bump. How circumstances turned against him after that election are irrelevant. 

He elected to bump and concussed a player. 

It's a textbook suspension, everything else is irrelevant 

He did not elect to bump.

Had he done so he would have put his arm against his body and used himself as a battering ram.

HE could have raised his elbow to attain balance and soccer the ball.

In fact this open stance also provided a crumple zone to mitigate the damage that a compressed body may have caused.

Does need evidence of concussion.

Moore going down at last minute was a definite factor and should be considered as contributing to contact. Moores action was dangerous he showed no duty of care. 

THis was a footy act 

7 hours ago, demon3165 said:

If you watch it in slow motion Kossie's foot gets hit by Moore's knee which forces Kossie off balance, this then causes the collision, so in fact Mooe helped the collision to happen.

I felt that was part of his reflex action to throw his right arm up which was braced for collision just to try and keep his balance as his feet were getting taken out.

In some ways, if he'd lost his feet, the penalty may not have been as severe.

But they're taught to stay on their feet.

On 24/08/2024 at 16:11, DistrACTION Jackson said:

I don’t know how anyone can compare Houston’s bump to Kozzy’s contact last night. They are very very different.

It is difficult to determine whether or not it was " Kozzie's contact " because of the correcting and deliberate movement of Moore's attempt to get lower and lower, lining up for a head contact (incomplete) in order to assure himself a free kick/find a staged head contact rather than lose the incomplete and deteriorating possession attempt of the ball. It's all a construct of bull****! 

2 hours ago, chookrat said:

I reckon we can successfully argue that Kossie's action was not careless because

1. He was contesting the ball and it was reasonable to do so in that way - Kossie actually gets to the ball first and pedals it with his foot at the same time the contact is made, he is playing the ball.

2. The circumstances were out of Kossie's control, he could not have anticipated that Moore would slide on his knees, an action which also constitutes rough conduct. Were Moore not concussed and Pickett suffered a serious leg injury then it could actually be Moore facing suspension.

Here is what the 2024 Tribunal Guidelines state:

1. Rough Conduct (High Bumps)

The AFL Regulations provide that a Player will be guilty of Rough Conduct where in the bumping of an opponent (whether reasonably or unreasonably) the Player causes contact that is at least Low Impact to be made with any part of his body to an opponent’s head or neck. If not Intentional, such conduct will be deemed to be Careless, unless:

» The Player was contesting the ball and it was reasonable for the Player to contest the ball in that way; or

» The contact to the opponent’s head or neck was caused by circumstances outside the control of the Player which could not be reasonably foreseen.

 

4. Rough Conduct (Contact Below the Knees)
Under the Laws of Australian Football, it is prohibited to make contact with an opponent below the knees. Players who keep their feet are vulnerable to serious injury from opponents who lunge, dive or slide toward them and make contact below the knees. 

» The degree of momentum and/or force involved in the contact;

» Whether the Player causes contact below the knees, without limitation, by sliding with his foot, feet, knee or knees in front of him;

» Whether the opposition Player was in a position that was vulnerable to contact below the knees (for example, standing over the ball or approaching from the opposite direction); and

» Whether the Player making contact had any realistic alternative ways of approaching the contest or situation

Absolutely. You’re right. Kossy didn’t elect to bump. Going for the ball. A collision was inevitable.

Moore attacked the contest knees first, dangerously, illegally.

Despite it not being an illegal slide, this photo should also be shown to remind the tribunal that Moore often attacks contests with his knees:

Another perspective on this is that if Kossie's leg was seriously injured in the collision then Moore would have been on report. I wonder what happens if both Moore was concussed and Kossie's leg broken in the same incident, would both players be suspended?

There is nothing in the Tribunal Guidelines which prioritises one reportable offence over another, and if Moore's action is not considered for Kossie's report then the same argument would apply if both players were injured, e.g. ignore the other players action and purely focus on the bump and slide separately for each reportable offence.