Jump to content

Featured Replies

 
21 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

But of course he only got one. A joke.

Outcome based system.

 

not sure if anyone else noticed this but, one of the only disappointing things from yesterday was that no one went over to him after the hit and gave him some [censored] and a jumper punch maybe??

Don’t think Mills had any intent to hurt Spargs. he is a fair player

is Spargo confirmed concussed?

7 minutes ago, DubDee said:

is Spargo confirmed concussed?

Confirmed not concussed AFAIK. Crook shoulder might be his main concern.

 
8 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Don’t think Mills had any intent to hurt Spargs. he is a fair player

is Spargo confirmed concussed?

Mills has a history of this stuff. He definitely meant to hurt IMV.

37 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

A week is about right

How so, because Spargo miraculously is so short that Mills missed his head and therefore he avoided a concussion?

Mills turned his body and left the ground to make contact. If that’s Kosi doing it, it’s 3 weeks even if his opponent gets straight back up.

There is absolutely no doubt that again this broken system took into account Spargo’s lack of concussion. If he does get concussed that is 3 weeks.

This stupid outcome based system needs a total overhaul.


Just now, Jaded No More said:

How so, because Spargo miraculously is so short that Mills missed his head and therefore he avoided a concussion?

Mills turned his body and left the ground to make contact. If that’s Kosi doing it, it’s 3 weeks even if his opponent gets straight back up.

There is absolutely no doubt that again this broken system took into account Spargo’s lack of concussion. If he does get concussed that is 3 weeks.

This stupid outcome based system needs a total overhaul.

yep. It’s shambolic isn’t it.

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Outcome based system.

Kozzie got two for his legitimate bump on Baiey Smith, who continued to play the game.

2 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Kozzie got two for his legitimate bump on Baiey Smith, who continued to play the game.

Well generally it is except maybe where Kozzie is concerned.

Still can’t get over the 3 weeks for the Moore incident.

We win against Giants with him in.

I have heard a rumor that it was 3 weeks but reduced to one if he thought he was playing for Collingwood

7 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Kozzie got two for his legitimate bump on Baiey Smith, who continued to play the game.

That was utter rubbish...


30 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

How so, because Spargo miraculously is so short that Mills missed his head and therefore he avoided a concussion?

Mills turned his body and left the ground to make contact. If that’s Kosi doing it, it’s 3 weeks even if his opponent gets straight back up.

There is absolutely no doubt that again this broken system took into account Spargo’s lack of concussion. If he does get concussed that is 3 weeks.

This stupid outcome based system needs a total overhaul.

Agree entirely about the rubbish of outcome based suspension.

Mills had no chance to win/collect the ball, he just jumped to clean him up.

Pearce from Freo got three weeks for his impact on PAs Bryne-Jones, in a situation where he really couldn't do much. My thoughts watching that were that Pearce was leading out to take a mark looked down and realised he was late and going to collide and tried (unsuccessfully) to minimise impact by going past him not through him. But it is outcome based so he gets longer.

The latest example of the MRO system being the AFL's most embarrassing joke.

Why does the "potential to cause serious injury" thing get rolled out some times (e.g. Pickett on Smith in 2023) but not others?

Why not here? What Mills did was reckless and had clear potential to KO Spargo, even though it didn't.

Meanwhile Paul Curtis gets three weeks for a tackle that was almost done perfectly but still accidentally caused concussion, whilst Jackson Archer and now Alex Pearce get three weeks for largely unavoidable collisions.

Just a genuinely broken farce, the MRO.

I've got mixed feelings about the outcome based suspensions.

On the one hand if you are serious about looking after the player with the ball (avoiding concussion) then it would seem to me that incident based would be a better system.

On the other hand, and I will defer to the lawyers here...it appears the current system of outcome based suspensions follows our legal system. If you are convicted of attempted murder do you get the same sentence as for murder?

56 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

The latest example of the MRO system being the AFL's most embarrassing joke.

Why does the "potential to cause serious injury" thing get rolled out some times (e.g. Pickett on Smith in 2023) but not others?

Why not here? What Mills did was reckless and had clear potential to KO Spargo, even though it didn't.

Meanwhile Paul Curtis gets three weeks for a tackle that was almost done perfectly but still accidentally caused concussion, whilst Jackson Archer and now Alex Pearce get three weeks for largely unavoidable collisions.

Just a genuinely broken farce, the MRO.

It's just ridiculous. There was more scope to wipe out a player in Mills's action than several of the instances that have seen Kozzy get multiple weeks for. How hard is it to apply penalties consistently?

The one outcome which shows me their current system is a failure is the Viney concussion.

Bo Allan got a week suspension because at the time Viney wasn't declared to be concussed. He then had delayed symptoms later in the week, however as the AFL have already handed down the punishment they couldn't change it.

Outcome based systems don't work and it needs to be action based. With that Mills should have got a 2 week minimum suspension.


The MRO/Tribunal system is just one of many problems facing the AFL and I'm not sure there's sufficient talent at AFL House to fix all the problems. So, this is where Demonland can help. We could develop a better system and hand it over to the AFL. To get the ball rolling, I'd suggest that the system identify the difference between a football act and a non-football act. The Alex Pearce, Paul Curtis actions should be dealt with as football acts. The Liam Baker one (where he pushed his elbow into the neck of his opponent who is already lying prone on the ground) is a non-football act. Non-football acts should have much stiffer penalties than football acts.

13 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

This stupid outcome based system needs a total overhaul.

The general criminal law has its own version of outcome-based results. If you shove someone in the street and they stagger and recover their balance there will be different consequences for the pusher compared to if the pushed person falls over, hits their head and has a serious or fatal injury.

And I reckon that’s the way it should be, as outcomes do matter in terms of extent of penalty.

13 hours ago, Redleg said:

Still can’t get over the 3 weeks for the Moore incident.

Moore was concussed, iirc.

 
1 minute ago, Tim said:

The general criminal law has its own version of outcome-based results. If you shove someone in the street and they stagger and recover their balance there will be different consequences for the pusher compared to if the pushed person falls over, hits their head and has a serious or fatal injury.

And I reckon that’s the way it should be, as outcomes do matter in terms of extent of penalty.

Moore was concussed, iirc.

While it is true that the criminal law is to a large extent outcome based, there is no reason why the AFL has to follow that.

For a start almost every action on a footy field would land you in chokey if done in Swanson St. Furthermore, a criminal judge can find you guilty of manslaughter and still alter the penalty in light of the cirrcumstances (except in neolithic places which impose mandatory sentences).

Moore may well have been concussed, but if I bang my head with my tennis racquet trying to return a shot, I should not expect the person I'm playing against to be charged (to draw a weak analogy).

Edited by sue

Outcome based sanctions makes a mockery of the purported mission to eliminate this sort of conduct.

Running a red light is a strict liability offence. You don't get a lesser penalty just because you somehow manage not to injure/kill anyone. However, you get a different, greater offence if you do. This should be the same.

If the AFL is actually serious about this (beyond just trying to look like they are/selective about who they penalise - i.e. Kozzie's being penalised THREE weeks for Moore diving into him), then they will be a. consistent and b. give a penalty irrespective of the outcome. That is the only way to address this conduct.


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

  • PREVIEW: Gold Coast

    The Gold Coast Suns find themselves outside of the top eight for the first time since Round 1 with pressure is mounting on the entire organisation. Their coach Damien Hardwick expressed his frustration at his team’s condition last week by making a middle-finger gesture on television that earned him a fine for his troubles. He showed his desperation by claiming that Fox should pick up the tab.  There’s little doubt the Suns have shown improvement in 2025, and their position on the ladder is influenced to some extent by having played fewer games than their rivals for a playoff role at the end of the season, courtesy of the disruption caused by Cyclone Alfred in March.  However, they are following the same trajectory that hindered the club in past years whenever they appeared to be nearing their potential. As a consequence, that Hardwick gesture should be considered as more than a mere behavioral lapse. It’s a distress signal that does not bode well for the Queenslanders. While the Suns are eager to remain in contention with the top eight, Melbourne faces its own crisis, which is similarly deep-seated but in a much different way. After recovering from a disappointing start to the season and nearing a return to respectability among its peer clubs, the Demons have experienced a decline in status, driven by the fact that while their form has been reasonable (see their performance against the ladder leader in the Kings Birthday match), their conversion in front of goal is poor enough to rank last in the competition. Furthermore, their opponents find them exceptionally easy to score against. As a result, they have effectively eliminated themselves from the finals race and are again positioned to finish in the bottom half of the ladder.

    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 15

    As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

      • Haha
      • Like
    • 287 replies
  • REPORT: Port Adelaide

    Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

    • 3 replies
  • CASEY: Essendon

    Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Gold Coast

    The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

      • Haha
    • 372 replies
  • PODCAST: Port Adelaide

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 16th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Power.
    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/

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 33 replies