Jump to content

How Many Weeks For Kozzy?

Demonstone
in Melbourne Demons

Kozzy Suspended? 135 members have voted

  1. 1. Will Kozzy Be Suspended For His Contact With Moore? If Yes, How Many Weeks?

    • Won't be cited by MRP
      9
    • Will be cited but found not guilty
      19
    • Will be found guilty but only fined
      9
    • One match suspension
      18
    • Two match suspension
      25
    • Three match suspension
      28
    • More than three match suspension
      18

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Featured Replies

2 minutes ago, chookrat said:

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.

It’s a perfect test case for outcome focussed decisions.

I posted the Trac photo above in jest, but I am spiteful about the incident. Putting his knee into Trac was intended to hurt.

Kossy was contesting the ball in a reasonable action, at an angle that causes an inevitable collision. He has no other option other than to pull out of the contest.

AND circumstances of high contact were outside of his control. Moore slid. Kossy was lucky not to be seriously injured.

He only needs to win one of those arguments. Both are solid.

This is a good case to be argued, it might finally be the precedent needed for an injury to the head caused by a player drawing high contact.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1
    • Clap 2
     
    5 hours ago, Redleg said:

    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.

    My point, exactly...

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

    Um, today Christian and Co. chose to fine an Essendon player who kicked his opponent. I am so disgusted by the AFL: nuff is enough. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Vomit 2
     
    20 minutes ago, Monbon said:

    Um, today Christian and Co. chose to fine an Essendon player who kicked his opponent. I am so disgusted by the AFL: nuff is enough. 

    You're joking. That deserved a week just for how bad it looks

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    1 hour ago, Monbon said:

    Um, today Christian and Co. chose to fine an Essendon player who kicked his opponent. I am so disgusted by the AFL: nuff is enough. 

    The player’s father is CEO of Collingwood and a former team mate of Christian.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    • Vomit 4

    13 hours ago, chookrat said:

    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.

    Agree. But if a dual offence were to be established - even though it really appears that Kozzie was innocently playing the ball - you could bet your last sixpence that Moore (as a Filth player and thus above the law) would be exonerated whilst Kozzie, an intense small player whose speed and agility are strikingly superior, would be most harshly treated of the two, particularly if an ex-Filth operative was to bear judgment on the limited contact so ascertained. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    I read Mark Robinson’s description of Kozzie’s actions on Friday night in The Tackle in the HS with  some trepidation but to my surprise it was an extremely balanced & articulate statement. We absolutely must challenge this . 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
     
    3 minutes ago, Deestar9 said:

    I read Mark Robinson’s description of Kozzie’s actions on Friday night in The Tackle in the HS with  some trepidation but to my surprise it was an extremely balanced & articulate statement. We absolutely must challenge this . 

    If we don't challenge it I will be bitterly disappointed with the club and it will just add to my frustrations with the people running it. We seem to have absolutely no back bone and seem incompetent of late.

  • Quote
    • Like 6

    Surely we will challenge this ban. I don't think he gets off completely, but surely we can reduce the ban to 1 or 2 weeks only

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    6 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

    Surely we will challenge this ban. I don't think he gets off completely, but surely we can reduce the ban to 1 or 2 weeks only

    The way the rules and tribunal are run it's either he gets off or it's 3 weeks, there is no middle ground.

    You have to argue that is wasn't careless, as he was attempting to get the ball and braced for contact right at the time Moore slid in. This is a very strong argument and if the tribunal find he wasn't careless then he will get off.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    By all means throw the kitchen sink at it but I'm not expecting much. I just don't have faith at all in any process, even if Moore electing to slide is a more plausible cause than Gus choosing the wrong running path.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
    Just now, layzie said:

    By all means throw the kitchen sink at it but I'm not expecting much. I just don't have faith at all in any process, even if Moore electing to slide is a more plausible cause than Gus choosing the wrong running path.

     

    That was one of the biggest jokes that that argument was accepted. Makes my blood boil every time I think about it. To lose Gus and potentially Trac because of two recent Collingwood games makes me hate them even more.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    7 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

    The way the rules and tribunal are run it's either he gets off or it's 3 weeks, there is no middle ground.

    You have to argue that is wasn't careless, as he was attempting to get the ball and braced for contact right at the time Moore slid in. This is a very strong argument and if the tribunal find he wasn't careless then he will get off.

    As it would be an appeal for the MRO sanction (rather than a Tribunal sanction) there is a bit more room eg if the classification is reduced from 'severe impact' to something lower (high, medium or low) then the penalty would come down accordingly.

  • Quote
    Just now, DistrACTION Jackson said:

    That was one of the biggest jokes that that argument was accepted. Makes my blood boil every time I think about it. To lose Gus and potentially Trac because of two recent Collingwood games makes me hate them even more.

    It was ridiculous and the fact that the AFL could sign off and practically agree with Gus causing his own concussion was the most insulting part of all of this for me.

    I just have no faith in anything they do now and don't want to waste energy over it.

  • Quote
    • Like 7

    12 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

    As it would be an appeal for the MRO sanction (rather than a Tribunal sanction) there is a bit more room eg if the classification is reduced from 'severe impact' to something lower (high, medium or low) then the penalty would come down accordingly.

    Would be hard to argue down the grading of severe given it he was 'concussed'... still debateable.

  • Quote
    13 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

    Would be hard to argue down the grading of severe given it he was 'concussed'... still debateable.

    I was referring to the the rules allowing a reduction in the sanction rather than would we be successful.

     

    Would we have a case on down grading from 'severe'?  I wold say so:  he bounced straight up and played on, no trainer even went to him.  Very different than when someone is knocked out cold and has to helped from the ground.  imv the latter is 'severe'. 

    I reckon there is a Kozzie 'tax' in the MRO's 'severe' grading. 

    Edited by Lucifers Hero

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    19 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

    Would be hard to argue down the grading of severe given it he was 'concussed'... still debateable.

    But was he concussed. Let's ask for test report. He was subbed out. Not taken off at the time?

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    if the club don’t appeal it will be an egregious betrayal of Kozzie and all the players by the club. The incident was purely accidental. The charge should be dropped in its entirety. 

    Edited by John Crow Batty

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    let's just hope they don't put up the usual half baked appeal

    and let's get a top professional friendly biomechanics expert

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Please PLEASE get a decent lawyer this time Melbourne. Enough with this clown who I swear works for the AFL not our club!

     

    Hey @Redleg are you free? 

  • Quote
    • Like 4
     
    27 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

    Please PLEASE get a decent lawyer this time Melbourne. Enough with this clown who I swear works for the AFL not our club!

     

    Hey @Redleg are you free? 

    Heading home from GC tomorrow.

  • Quote
    • Clap 3

    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...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • 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.

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • 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? 

      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • 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?

      • 142 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: St. Kilda

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • 40 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

      After kicking the first goal of the match the Demons were always playing catch up against the Saints in Alice Spring and could never make the most of their inside 50 entries to wrestle back the lead.

        • Like
      • 322 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: St. Kilda

      Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award as Christian Petracca, Jake Bowey, Clayton Oliver & Kozzy Pickett round out the Top 5. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1

      • 31 replies
      Demonland
    View All