Gawndy the Great

This is bigger than the toppling of the Berlin Wall. Historians will write about this day.

Kellam “In the beginning…”

Serious question for a moment. Is there a possible appeal to an appeal?

Have you got his mobile? Inside word?

Sorry typo. 8.38

What does white smoke mean from the chimney? Upheld or overturned?

The AFL clearly unhappy that we are not taking this on the chin and threatening with a fine for Greens comments. Probably didn’t expect the uproar from the club.

I think it’s a good thing… there isn’t a majority. Do we need a majority to overturn ?

Great handle their bud.

7.38

But how could they make that big of error unless something was bought to their attention after it was too late. Perhaps it is why McRae was silent on the matter this arvo on Andy and Hazey SEN.

its a bit soft, but It’ll make a headline either way so just doing the team thing.

CTE is horrible - agreed. But the risks are known and accepted by all. In most cases the head can tolerate and recover from concussion if left to heal. If the AFL is serious about concussion then it needs to consider a minimum 1 month or even 2 month absence from footy following a concussion and that accumulated concussion incidents force players into early retirement. That is an alternative way to deal with it rather than tinker with the game rules too much. Now I’m not saying certain rules cannot be tightened up - all for penalising players for potential to cause injury for non football actions as opposed / in addition to actual outcome, but it still won’t prevent all concussions and hence to make the decisions for players who are more concussion prone or have more concussion incidents for them. In due time we will have better techniques and tools to assess the accumulated trauma , which can be used to greater effect when making those decisions as well.

Silly question - what is this infatuation with keeping eyes on the ball? And that when you take yours eyes off. Surely you cannot plead ignorance because you had eyes for the ball - because there is something called peripheral vision. Couldn’t you argue that eyes on the player is exercising a duty of care by trying to understand where the player is to minimise / avoid contact? I mean when you drive a car and run a red light - because your eyes were on the road - doesn’t really hold up in court when you are facing charges for manslaughter.

We need one well respected football authority - preferably a current or recently retired player or at least someone in the media to come out and say just this. Not many people in the footy world will have made this connection and without drawing the spotlight to it, will continue to happen.

Hence why I was spewing we don’t play em again.

He is protecting his team mate , but that last comment ‘he got what he deserved’ went overboard - spewing we don’t play them again this year.

We hack the Big screen video feed at the G, put up vision of Gil and all his goons, Gleeson, Christiansen and let it rip. I suggest we all make a worthwhile investment in a few long horns

Equally bewildering is why isn’t anybody asking why Carlton are continually being let off without any humorous undertones? It is beyond coincidence now.

I forgot about this case… it’s worse than the JVRs but still not worthy of suspension. This just raised my anger another level.

And it appears that we will also persist with Petty up forward until one of TMac / BBB can come into that spot. Sounds like JVR has secured the other tall forward option with Maxy for now.

you cannot make this [censored] up. at some point the afl clubs have to produce a vote of no confidence in this process..

its a dangerous fine line, if that is the case.. You could be 2mm away from a 2 week suspension on one hand or saving/kicking a goal on the other... ludicrous.

i wrote something to this effect last night as well. This whole charade i think is trying to remove the protection that a 'football action' provides players, which translates to everything you wrote above. The only issue is that its not (yet) in the rules of the game, so the appeal may be successful, but the AFL may use it to put all players on notice and initiate a rule change mid-season. Which is really really bizarre as they said this won happen again. With the Lynch and a in particular Fogarty incidents not so long ago, I really wonder why they waited for another incident to do this, because the action in all three incidents were basically indistinguishable , whilst the outcomes all varied.

The loss of JVR is beside the point. We have been in this position so many times and we are always the precedent case. I guarantee you we will see at least a dozen more of comparable cases before season end and there will not be a single charge laid - not a single one. It’s absurd to think that it’s nothing but a coincidence, but FMD - I’m going to finish my thoughts on the conspiracy thread.