So when is the appeal date?

Apparently it’s next week. If overturned we should get a weeks suspension credit. To be used at our own discretion

Memo … topic …What did he do wrong?

He thinks at all times he is going to win the ball.

His eyes are on the ball.

He keeps his line.

The BOUNCING ball pops up.

It was a nano second. 0.025/second reaction time.

HE KEEPS HIS FEET (not off the ground)

His arms are outstretched to take the footy.

There was no bump.

It was contact.

It was not careless.

Clear minds must recognise of this

The reasonable player goes to win the footy and nothing here suggests May ever thought or could have thought differently

He comes off his player to win the footy

MELBOURNE MUST APPEAL.

MELBOURNE MUST WIN THE APPEAL

Brereton got it right ( for once) when he said you reflexly clench your fists when intending to bump . May’s hands were open at the time of the clash.in an intent to grab the ball.

35 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Memo … topic …What did he do wrong?

He thinks at all times he is going to win the ball.

His eyes are on the ball.

He keeps his line.

The BOUNCING ball pops up.

It was a nano second. 0.025/second reaction time.

HE KEEPS HIS FEET (not off the ground)

His arms are outstretched to take the footy.

There was no bump.

It was contact.

It was not careless.

Clear minds must recognise of this

The reasonable player goes to win the footy and nothing here suggests May ever thought or could have thought differently

He comes off his player to win the footy

MELBOURNE MUST APPEAL.

MELBOURNE MUST WIN THE APPEAL

Win the appeal...THEN START ASKING QUESTIONS

Gleeson wants May to foresee where and how the ball will bounce. It’s always been hard to predict. NO BUMP. Not careless. EYES ON THE BALL. No jump. KEEPS HIS LINE. May did everything like he thought he’d win the ball. Everything!

50 minutes ago, The Panglossian said:

Brereton got it right ( for once) when he said you reflexly clench your fists when intending to bump . May’s hands were open at the time of the clash.in an intent to grab the ball.

Did Maynard have clenched fists when he slaughtered Gus?

Bet the flucc he did.

He should have just elbowed him in the back of the head, that's only 1 week

5 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Gleeson wants May to foresee where and how the ball will bounce. It’s always been hard to predict. NO BUMP. Not careless. EYES ON THE BALL. No jump. KEEPS HIS LINE. May did everything like he thought he’d win the ball. Everything!

Gleeson is a nong

No doubt he has a brain being a KC but he’s a nong

11 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

Gleeson is a nong

No doubt he has a brain being a KC but he’s a nong

Now you are being too polite

What did he do wrong?

The facts

1. He thinks at all times he is going to win the ball.

2. His eyes are on the ball.

3. He keeps his line.

4. The BOUNCING ball pops up (the bounce is not consistent but it’s reasonable to assume it runs on)

5. It was a nano second. 0.025/second reaction time.

6. HE KEEPS HIS FEET (not off the ground)

7. His arms are outstretched to take the footy.

8. There was no bump.

9. It was contact. His body is lowered not raised to head level

10. It was not careless.

Clear minds must recognise of this

The reasonable player goes to win the footy and nothing here suggests May ever thought or could have thought differently

He comes off his player to win the footy

It’s a decision making in 0.05/second

MELBOURNE MUST APPEAL.

MELBOURNE MUST WIN THE APPEAL

Just watched it in slow mo from every angle.

If that's the benchmark for three weeks then we are realistically looking at not a few players being rubbed out for nine to twelve on a regular basis.

Absolutely ridiculous.

What gives AFL.

Why the inconsistency?

That's a fine or week at worse.

Nup. It's a fine. And there certainly wasn't intent.

Were it so the bloke would have been knocked out.

Appeal starts at 5pm.

Follow it here:

Fox Sports

LIVE: Dees’ last-ditch bid to free star after polarising...

LIVE: Dees’ last-ditch bid to free star after polarising bump in AFL’s most complex case

No doubt upheld just to kick us in the plums one more time.

It’s been less than 24 hours since I’ve been outraged. Time for more outrage.

Just now, Jaded No More said:

It’s been less than 24 hours since I’ve been outraged. Time for more outrage.

No Adrian Anderson but the new guys is a Saints fan...

6 minutes ago, Mickey said:

No Adrian Anderson but the new guys is a Saints fan...

Least they know how to win ...

Rush KC is a much better bet than Anderson, who has lost most of the appeals he has run.

I love this new lawyer. He sounds like a Saints fan who’s had enough of the AFL bullying the little guy.

Is he available to play FF?

4 minutes ago, Flower Magic said:

Rush KC is a much better bet than Anderson, who has lost most of the appeals he has run.

I like his style, going in hard:

“Rush (Dees): To say the player is negligent because a ball may or may not bounce in a particular way is... I won't use the word I was going to say. It's totally unreasonable.”

Apparently we argued randomly the ball bounce didn't pop up for Milne in the grand final against Collingwood.

I like it.

I hate Collingwood and its completely unexpected

31 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

It’s been less than 24 hours since I’ve been outraged. Time for more outrage.

I'm a ragaholic, I just can't live without ragahol.

If he doesn’t get off, games gone