https://www.afl.com.au/news/1371236/i-dont-understand-what-we-want-may-to-do-cripps-on-hit-that-concussed-blues-teammate

At least 4 weeks. Not because the action deserves it, but because it is Steven May and Melbourne FC. Just watch, mark my words. And if the club don't challenge with lawyers, weak as p...

2 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

But the MRO DID make a ruling: Careless, HIgh, Severe Impact. Onus is on the club to prove otherwise.

The MRO has to grade incidents, and you can't argue with the high or severe impact grading, those are very clear cut.

They graded it Careless, because as I noted last week with the Xerri case, there is nothing below careless, it's either careless, or intentional which is much worse (4+ weeks and straight to tribunal)

The argument here is that May wasn't careless, and contact was accidental. The MRO is too scared to make that call, and so they are sending it to the tribunal to argue.

We will hopefully get a decent lawyer that will show that May had about 1 second to realise that he wasn't going to win the ball, and that only happened as a result of the bounce of the ball deviating from it's original course. May's eyes were firmly on the ball the entire time, in the split second that he sees his opponent in the periphery, you can actually see him tuck his elbow in and brace for contact, and not elect to bump. He actually flinches, which means he didn't see it coming.

The argument from us should be that he had the right to go for the ball, and he would have taken possession first had the ball not bounced the way it did, and he had not enough time to stop himself with the momentum from hitting his opponent. Unfortunately the height difference meant there was a head injury, but May never changes direction, never leaves the ground, and never raises an arm, which are all the things we are wanting to stamp out. He didn't elect to bump, he clashed with an opponent at full speed trying to win the ball.

But of course we will get that absolute [censored] Adrian Anderson to represent us with a limp wet lettuce leaf defense and May will get 4 weeks because he's not a 'good guy' like [censored] Maynard. Nothing surer.

Just saw this is being heard on Wednesday, plenty more juice to squeeze out of this one for the afl media then.

Microwave dinners again for everyone here tomorrow night following the hearing via Zeets.

He will get off, at worst by appeal.

5 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

The MRO has to grade incidents, and you can't argue with the high or severe impact grading, those are very clear cut.

They graded it Careless, because as I noted last week with the Xerri case, there is nothing below careless, it's either careless, or intentional which is much worse (4+ weeks and straight to tribunal

I said it was graded as Careless. I know how the grading works and the rules around MRO and Tribunal referrals.

I also noted in an earlier post the May contact was accidental.

The post you quoted was about the inconsistent treatment of May vis a vis Pierce and Xerri who were also graded Careless, HIgh and Severe Impact but WERE NOT referred directly to the Tribunal. They went to the Tribunal to challenge the MRO ruling. It is rare for the Tribunal to increase the 3 weeks.

But for the same ruling the MRO ALSO referred May directly to the Tribunal which invites a higher than 3 week suspension.

This is inconsistent and unfair.

Edited Monday at 07:192 days by Lucifers Hero

20 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

The post you quoted was about the inconsistent treatment of May vis a vis Pierce and Xerri who were also graded Careless, HIgh and Severe Impact but WERE NOT referred directly to the Tribunal. They went to the Tribunal to challenge the MRO ruling. It is rare for the Tribunal to increase the 3 weeks.

But for the same ruling the MRO ALSO referred May directly to the Tribunal which invites a higher than 3 week suspension.

This is inconsistent and unfair.

I think that it was referred directly to the tribunal for the same grading is a good thing. It means they aren’t confident a careless grading will hold up at appeal. Otherwise they’d have slapped him with 3 weeks and got on with it.

On the grading of careless it can’t be more than 3 weeks, unless we are so bad at representing ourselves that we argue he intentionally hit the other guy 😂

The AFL will need grounds to ask for more than 3 weeks, and according to their own metrics that only applies if the action was intentional.

Edited Monday at 07:252 days by Jaded No More

8 hours ago, Superunknown said:

ability to Mount a defense than Adrian Anderson ever has

A defence by Maginot Line Anderson 😂🙄😩

Having watched the replay of this incident a few times now, it's absolutely clear that:

May ran straight at the ball with his arms outstretched to scoop it. He didn't brace until after contact, he didn't shape to bump or indeed bump.

Evans on the other hand ran slightly to the left of the ball and reached into May's path to grab the ball. He then tried to spin away from May

No case to answer from May

Just now, jnrmac said:

Having watched the replay of this incident a few times now, it's absolutely clear that:

May ran straight at the ball with his arms outstretched to scoop it. He didn't brace until after contact, he didn't shape to bump or indeed bump.

Evans on the other hand ran slightly to the left of the ball and reached into May's path to grab the ball. He then tried to spin away from May

No case to answer from May

No case in terms of logic etc.

He'll be hanged drawn and quartered none the less.

Surely we have a work experience kid available to argue May's case instead of relying on that dingbat Anderson again. His success rate must be running at about 3% over the past few years.

Funny, even Chris Scott is now also defending May and his actions saying that’s exactly how they coach the Geelong boys.

This should be thrown out at the tribunal but I’m expecting weeks.

Hopefully there’s uproar.

Let's look at this objectively.

Current players saying they don't know what else May should have done.

Past players saying the same thing, although there are a couple who think there should be a suspension.

Article today saying it is the most important case in 10 years.

General feel that May should get off.

AFL happy with and only ask for 3 weeks to say they have protected the head.

Melbourne will present their defence tonight, completely stuff it up as usual...May gets deregistered.

There is no way he gets off, to many AFL mouthpieces in the media want him out, so thats what will happen.

I personally dont know what else he was supposed to do, if he pulls up as many say he should have, the media then go and attack him for not going for the ball, cant win either way.

I wouldnt be surprised if Saturday night was his last game this season. Game is stuffed if he gets outed.

25 minutes ago, Deestinga2 said:

There is no way he gets off, to many AFL mouthpieces in the media want him out, so thats what will happen.

I personally dont know what else he was supposed to do, if he pulls up as many say he should have, the media then go and attack him for not going for the ball, cant win either way.

I wouldnt be surprised if Saturday night was his last game this season. Game is stuffed if he gets outed.

Game is already stuffed. This could just makes it totally stuffed.

In protest I would suggest at the game at the one minute mark (in reference to his jumper) that we all stand and turn our backs for a minute per week he cops. However I’m sure the media will interpret it wrong and call for Goodwin to be sacked as it indicates he has lost support of the fans

The notion that May deserves a suspension simply because he has form, is totally untrue.

Can anyone remember the last time he was suspended?

21 hours ago, Redleg said:

I think that fractured eye socket was caused by a Tom Hawkins elbow to the face, which of course was deemed accidental.

May said he lost vision in the eye for a while.

Has Moore been cited for the knees into the back of Treacy?

Has Maynard been cited for pushing Murphy Reid into the dugout?

No and no.

They are Collingwood players.

Not even a fine for the wonderful untouchable Collingwood captain.

Fox Sports

‘That’s a suspension’: Pies skipper ‘lucky’ to escape san...

‘That’s a suspension’: Pies skipper ‘lucky’ to escape sanction for ‘non-football act’

4 hours ago, Brownie said:

No and no.

They are Collingwood players.

Not even a fine for the wonderful untouchable Collingwood captain.

Fox Sports

‘That’s a suspension’: Pies skipper ‘lucky’ to escape san...

‘That’s a suspension’: Pies skipper ‘lucky’ to escape sanction for ‘non-football act’

Seriously how many times can he stick his knee with all his weight into people - multiple multiples not even including the petracca incident. That is disgraceful from Moore - obviously deliberate- after Petracca he knows just dangerous his knees are. This should be absolutely called out. Michael Christian is a [censored] cheating [censored] when it comes to his beloved Collingwood

Here’s hoping May’s suspension won’t affect our premiership tilt 🤪

In somewhat of a win, we’ve hired Adrian Anderson.

9 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

In somewhat of a win, we’ve hired Adrian Anderson.

Please tell me you’re [censored] joking

When’s the tribunal?

Just now, Bleasey as that said:

When’s the tribunal?

Wasn’t it meant to be tonight?