A previous poster said he managed to watch the incident in slow motion and that when Moore slides in his leg clips Kozzie around the knee area causing him to stumble towards Moore. If we can manage to show that it should be game over illegal act and all. But we probably get screwed again.

I'd be ringing carlton asking if we could borrow their lawyer. 

Or someone else than Adrian Anderson 

20 hours ago, No10 said:

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:

 

20 hours ago, No10 said:

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.

Great posts, nailed it No10. Disgusted by this tactic of Moore's Broke Jarrad Witt's vertrebrae only a month or so after doing this to Tracc. Disgraceful it didn't raise a mention. Steve May would have been brought before a magistrate

Further on Moore, did he stay on the ground for sometime before coming off or am I mistaken? 

Edited August 26, 20241 yr by Dee*ceiving

Do all high tackles/bumps that go to the tribunal get classified as ‘rough conduct’ as Kozzie’s has?

Edited August 26, 20241 yr by The Jackson FIX

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

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

and let's get a top professional friendly biomechanics expert

They're only challenging the rought conduct part of the charge.

So yeah, exactly half baked already

27 minutes ago, loges said:

A previous poster said he managed to watch the incident in slow motion and that when Moore slides in his leg clips Kozzie around the knee area causing him to stumble towards Moore. If we can manage to show that it should be game over illegal act and all. But we probably get screwed again.

You don’t need slow motion even if it helps Kozzy’s case. At normal speed, it’s clear that Kozzy was attacking the football at great pace which is exactly what you want your player to do. At the same time Moore is coming into the contest from the side and stumbles into his path clumsily, contributing to an accidental collision. On review, that is not rough conduct and should be reduced to a much lesser grading.

19 minutes ago, Dee*ceiving said:

 

Great posts, nailed it No10. Disgusted by this tactic of Moore's Broke Jarrad Witt's vertrebrae only a month or so after doing this to Tracc. Disgraceful it didn't raise a mention. Steve May would have been brought before a magistrate

Further on Moore, did he stay on the ground for sometime before coming off or am I mistaken? 

Yes he did stay on. Only subbed at half time and laughing and joking after the game.

It would be good for our defence to get some pics of him on the beers with his team mates next day. Buuut probably not in the scope of the appeal

3 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Yes he did stay on. Only subbed at half time and laughing and joking after the game.

It would be good for our defence to get some pics of him on the beers with his team mates next day. Buuut probably not in the scope of the appeal

👍

Not only that but where's the persecution of the Collingwood club Dr?

This incident is Darcy Moore's fault completely and utterly. He decided to go to ground in a 50/50 contest in which both players were contesting a loose ground ball, thus causing the contact to be high. This is no different to a player ducking his head in a tackle to attempt to con an umpire into awarding a free kick. Furthermore, the sliding in action should clearly have been paid as a free kick to Kozzie for contact below the knees. What Moore did was the epitome of an illegal below the knee contact action, which was rightly outlawed all those years ago to prevent horrific lower leg injuries from occuring. Kozzie is lucky he didn't have his ankles snapped.

If Kozzie doesn't get exonerated for this, that'll be the final straw for my interest in AFL.    

Edited August 26, 20241 yr by leucopogon

5 minutes ago, leucopogon said:

This incident is Darcy Moore's fault completely and utterly. He decided to go to ground in a 50/50 contest in which both players were contesting a loose ground ball, thus causing the contact to be high. This is no different to a player ducking his head in a tackle to attempt to con an umpire into awarding a free kick. Furthermore, the sliding in action should clearly have been paid as a free kick to Kozzie for contact below the knees. What Moore did was the epitome of an illegal below the knee contact action, which was rightly outlawed all those years ago to prevent horrific lower leg injuries from occuring. Kozzie is lucky he didn't have his ankles snapped.

If Kozzie doesn't get exonerated for this, that'll be the final straw for my interest in AFL.    

Agree entirely. I honestly hope your weekends don't become entirely free between March and September every year but I worry they might...

3 minutes ago, Dee*ceiving said:

Agree entirely. I honestly hope your weekends don't become entirely free between March and September every year but I worry they might...

Don't worry, my weekends are spent playing Uber driver for my two kids to their sports (junior footy). I'll need to wait a few more years yet before I can have a free weekend during the winter.

23 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Yes he did stay on. Only subbed at half time and laughing and joking after the game.

It would be good for our defence to get some pics of him on the beers with his team mates next day. Buuut probably not in the scope of the appeal

I hope we question Collingwood’s medical team and ask why no concussion test was done straight away. Either Moore had concussion symptoms that would have been picked up by a concussion test immediately following the incident, or he developed the quickest delayed concussion symptoms ever recorded in medical history. 
 

42 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Yes he did stay on. Only subbed at half time and laughing and joking after the game.

It would be good for our defence to get some pics of him on the beers with his team mates next day. Buuut probably not in the scope of the appeal

If Moore was in fact drinking beers the next day, that would be very interesting, as it takes 3-5 days for concussion to reach its peak and then start subsiding 7-10 days, hence the 12 day AFL ban after concussion.

If he was drinking alcohol the next day, he either didn’t have concussion, was not told to avoid alcohol, or ignored the advice if he was told to abstain from alcohol.

Does the “victim’s” head size get taken into account? Because Moore has a massive head that would be harder to miss. 

1 hour ago, Whispering_Jack said:

You don’t need slow motion even if it helps Kozzy’s case. At normal speed, it’s clear that Kozzy was attacking the football at great pace which is exactly what you want your player to do. At the same time Moore is coming into the contest from the side and stumbles into his path clumsily, contributing to an accidental collision. On review, that is not rough conduct and should be reduced to a much lesser grading.

Agree,, but I would argue that Moore was responsible for the outcome and Kozzie should be cleared, but looks like we're only going for a downgrade only which I think is a bit weak.

2 hours ago, loges said:

Agree,, but I would argue that Moore was responsible for the outcome and Kozzie should be cleared, but looks like we're only going for a downgrade only which I think is a bit weak.

I don’t think there’s a downgrade outcome here as the conduct is already graded careless rather than intentional.

Challenging on Conduct, this is the first part of the ruling, is the best approach and the strongest argument.

The other is High contact, which is true. And Severe impact, which is automatic when a player is concussed. Questionable, but not worth arguing.

If Conduct is not upheld then the entire incident falls away.

There are two aspects: reasonable action, yes, Kossy was contesting the ball and a collision was inevitable. And the high contact was outside of his control, yes, Moore illegally slid.

He only needs to win one of these and he’s free to play. Should win.

"Match review officer Michael Christian graded the incident as careless conduct, severe impact and high contact, drawing a three-game ban." - ESPN, Aug 26, 2024, 04:57 pm.

"Match Review Officer Michael Christian reportedly threatened to quit his role over conflict with AFL bosses regarding Brayden Maynard’s charge for concussing Angus Brayshaw as part of a “dramatic” Friday." - FOX Footy, September 12th, 2023 10:40 am.

One, the recieving player dropped the knee in a chase to the ball where shoulder contact and a well timed side bump is trained to be made. That player took the knock, got up, continued playing, and was pulled due to protocols. The other situation, the receiving player was standing up right and landed on with a flying elbow, knocked out cold which ultimately ended his career. Can you pick which one Christian is giving 3 weeks for and the one he threatened to quit over?

Is the hearing tonight?

13 minutes ago, SPC said:

Is the hearing tonight?

Yes. Not sure what time though.

There’s no way he’s getting off this, but when watching the incident in slow motion, Kozzy has a look of shock after he collides with Moore which clearly indicates the incident wasn’t premeditated.

But he’s not getting off.

The hearing is at 6.30pm tonight.

9 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

The hearing is at 6.30pm tonight.

Going to have to remove myself from the Trac drama for the MRO drama 

I think i've spent all my outrage credits in the christian Petracca thread today. Not sure i can summon the energy to follow the tribunal.

Yeah really cbf watching this and listening to Gleeson try to justify the suspension. 

He will be available for the 2025 Grand Final and will kick 8 goals to give us another flag against Collingwood!!!!!

If nothing else the impact should be downgraded from severe to high or medium. He wasn't knocked out and stood up quickly to take his kick. How anyone can call that severe is beyond me.