I genuinely think he had no intention whatsoever of going for the ball. He made up his mind very quickly that he wanted to hurt his opponent. Had no interest in the ball whatsever.

Edited April 22, 2025Apr 22 by Return to Glory

48 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

AFL website;

"Nash tried to make a physical impact on the contest when Miers had the ball, but his arm stayed high and collected his opponent in the head.

The incident, which left the Geelong dynamo staggering from the field, has been graded careless, severe impact and high contact."

Nash did not put his body into the contest. He can be seen doing a cute little 'oh my, a football' dance right after smashing Miers.

Miers did not have possession of the ball.

Nash's arm did not 'stay high', It was swung to go high.

Miers did not 'stagger from the field', he was immediately knocked out and into the highest-alarm 'fencer pose', and after regaining consciousness was assisted from field by two trainers.

Aside from that, a very accurate summary.

I'm also curious about the definitional boundaries of 'I intentionally smashed him, but was careless in that it resulted in him being smashed'.

Isn’t Nash 198cm tall? His arm was always going to connect high on Miers or any other player less than 193 cm tall. What was he trying to do as his arm swings like a windmill, it could really only end one way? I suppose the careless/intentional rating will always be challenged so the MRO goes for the defensible rating. Should get 4 to 5.

It was deliberate! "Careless", is a short step and a negligent act by the MRP.

Edited April 22, 2025Apr 22 by redandbluemakepurple

Did anyone see the alleged striking offence cited by the MRO against Kozzie on Worner? What time and which quarter?

It does seem that bloody useless and non-impartial Christian has a special look at whatever Kozzie does.

Can someone please explain to me how brayshaw gets punched in the jaw and the player gets 1 week but young Archer from North goes for the ball and gets 3???

52 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Can someone please explain to me how brayshaw gets punched in the jaw and the player gets 1 week but young Archer from North goes for the ball and gets 3???

There’s zero consistency and it’s been that way for a while now unfortunately. I honestly try not to pay attention to the tribunal cause it makes my blood boil. It doesn’t make sense to me how they seem to pick and choose when a player gets off and one doesn’t.

Why doesn't the Club request/order Christian Umpires boss,to appear before the AFL, and (Neitz) over bias accusations against members of MFC?

Media defending Curtis. Chin got weeks for the same thing in 2022.

18 hours ago, biggestred said:

Can someone please explain to me how brayshaw gets punched in the jaw and the player gets 1 week but young Archer from North goes for the ball and gets 3???

The explanation is that Michael Christian is of very low IQ and doesn’t have a clue.

2 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

Media defending Curtis. Chin got weeks for the same thing in 2022.

Should have just punched him in the jaw when the ball was out of play, that's only 1 week

I’m still reeling that Nash got just 1 week more than Archer

Accidental and intentional seems to have little baring on the outcome

it’s an embarrassment

Will McGovern get cited for his bump on Watson?

16 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

Media defending Curtis. Chin got weeks for the same thing in 2022.

By the laws of the game, if you pin any arm(s) and it results in a players head hitting the turf, it’s a dangerous tackle and should be a week(s) depending on other variables.

I don’t remember the chin one, but I wouldnt like it if Curtis gets weeks. It doesn’t look right. But by the laws, he should though, haha

Did anyone else see Tom Greens bump on the WB player? Looks very similar to Kozzys on Moore last year.

But for TG, no case to answer, wonder why?????

5 minutes ago, Deestinga2 said:

Did anyone else see Tom Greens bump on the WB player? Looks very similar to Kozzys on Moore last year.

But for TG, no case to answer, wonder why?????

I wonder what the case would have been if the player was concussed. That's seemingly saved him here?

Saw lots of social media/former players defend TG. Assume Pickett's past form didn't help here.

Still annoyed at that suspension, didnt help our poor start.

24 minutes ago, Deestinga2 said:

Did anyone else see Tom Greens bump on the WB player? Looks very similar to Kozzys on Moore last year.

But for TG, no case to answer, wonder why?????

Toby would have got time as would Koz...

The other Green.

Similar but lucky there was no concussion.

Kozzies no saint, he was suspended the first three rounds, and I believe he has been fined the other three.

Rough play, striking, and assailing the umpire.

12 minutes ago, bluey said:

Kozzies no saint, he was suspended the first three rounds, and I believe he has been fined the other three.

Rough play, striking, and assailing the umpire.

He's no saint for sure - but 'assailing'?. The suspension at the end of 2024 was wrong and either motivated by his previous record or the effect on the MRO's favourite team. Probably both.

No fine for Corey Warner?

2 weeks and/or OAM, F C Karma, jumped up and bit Darcy Moore on the arrrrse. Intentional, high impact, low contact.

Edited April 28, 2025Apr 28 by redandbluemakepurple

Does anyone have the deets/footage on Chandlers suspension re the run down tackle from a few years back. It seems the footy industry has collectively forgotten about this all together.

26 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

Does anyone have the deets/footage on Chandlers suspension re the run down tackle from a few years back. It seems the footy industry has collectively forgotten about this all together.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/762950/young-demon-suspended-over-tackle-that-left-him-shattered/amp?webview=true

12 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

https://www.afl.com.au/news/762950/young-demon-suspended-over-tackle-that-left-him-shattered/amp?webview=true

I remember this - was a great tackle. He let him go and still got some. Again it’s a footy act that is judged on the outcome. Annoying how everyone is coming to Curtis’s defence.

57 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

I remember this - was a great tackle. He let him go and still got some. Again it’s a footy act that is judged on the outcome. Annoying how everyone is coming to Curtis’s defence.

Slightly different as Chandler takes him part side on and slams him into the turf. Curtis is completely from behind. Very hard for Curtis to change anything when the player immediately falls to his knees propelling them both forward.

If Nick Daicos or Scott Pendlebury were the culprit, what would the verdict have been?

It’s always the smaller clubs once a newish rule comes in that are made the scapegoat