monoccular

But will it be in time to save Max from his weekly dozen deliberate hits to the back of his head? I am no expert but I believe that at least in some junior leagues headers are not allowed. It does seem logical that repeated hits to the head from a 450 gram projectile (and gets heavier when wet) And don't start me on boxing and that vile MMA / cage fighting 😠

May - held us together Spargo - red hot go Smith - best marking forward Umpire 22. - repeatedly crucifies Melbourne

Not if his Achilles is stuffed

Check his Sportsbet account. Every time.

I would hope that, even with a win and even with a flag our forward coaching / planning / set up would be under severe scrutiny. PS and will our footwear / podiatrics come under scrutiny too. TMc Frit Petty all forwards with (probably) similar foot problems.

To answer your question Goody - Genius or insane? YES - POSSIBLY BOTH.

EJ was a complete thug, and wouldn’t last a season if the current MRO and tribunal system were in place when he played. Like Matthews, Dyer and even Ditteritch. In any competently run organization (as opposed to an old boys’ club) this would be firmly entrenched in the rules, and enforced. But then in the AFL …….. There are already rules in place that have hs players suspended for leaping off the ground causing contact to the head, with serious injury thrown in for extra penalty. They just chose not to apply them in this case vice captain of a big club Colonwood , finals, lots of money on Magpies etc etc

I understand that Max has had a toe injury for some time - may have been aggravated by 😎🇺🇸stomping it, but apparently trained freely. Remember though, it is only OK if it involves a smother, and an opponent carelessly running into the spoilers shoulder. Hard to say really - sometimes I think Max's centre bounce dominance is a bit of a poisoned chalice. The Blues can wear their beige pyjama top for all I care, but not the navy blue (that, incidentally, didn't seem to clash back in the days of black and white TV, or even before that. Frankly, the first half of last week I am sure that our guys were mentally shaken to the boots by the assault on their mate Angus. Some looked almost in tears and shockingly pale. Hopefully they will all have had a chance to chat with Gus, regroup and will want desperately to "do it for Gus", this week and the next two. Don't want to be a spoiler, but last week we kept Colonwood to 9 goals, total being the magic 60 points, but didn't manage to win. 17 - I suspect that this is what is happening. Hibbo's Achilles is a week to week proposition, and he would be needed fully fit if we are to come up agains the Bears. Needs a lot of rest in between, and I am sure he will be on a modified training regimen. Tell Gil - he will immediately become a friend.

Howes was looking close to selection, though I doubt he would fit the Melksham role. More like wing / HBF, or even HFF, which wasn't Melk's spot.

Not puzzling in the slightest. Gill's wet dream is a Collingwood Carlton GF as his farewell (which farewell cannot come soon enough).

Hasn't that already been stated in previous tribunal statements? Obviously this weeks kangaroo court didnt look at precedents - for obvious reasons. And has it been raised that (I understand) that Gleeson is a Collingwood member, or at least supporter. IF true he should have been required to recuse himself over conflict of interest. Doesn't the AFL have that obvious requirement in their tribunal set up???

I suspect he is in the long line that has already formed. I mentioned somewhere earlier that I had heard that there is already a huge class action targeting close to a billion dollars. I hope if the AFL goes bankrupt that Gil and his henchmen are happy with this week's work.

I was at the preseason match v Richmond at Casey and yes it did seem to work quite well. Maybe we will see it miraculously work again with big wins over the next three weeks 🤞

Surely they have just come out and said it is OK to KO an opponent if you are (a) from a big club and (b) favourites for the flag.

Covid aside, I haven’t missed a GF since the early 2000s but sure as hell, Collingwood or not, if the Dees aren’t there I am not going to promote this disgusting hypocritical organisation’s “big day” by attending. Maybe cutting off my nose to spite my face but I feel absolutely ill that Gil’s buys club has countenanced this travesty. The AFL need to come out and announce “the head is now a valid target” for a “big club player” in an important time of year. Maynard 2023, Cripps 2022. Pack of lying hypocrites.

Thanks AFL - absolutely p155weak. I was enthused about this finals series but you can GAGF. Zero integrity - corruption rules. Gill wants a Collingwood v Carlton GF as his farewell, and he will stop at nothing to see that happen.

Head high contact occurred - severe impact / outcome - and reckless / careless - none of this can be disputed, yet the bastard will likely get off, or a one match to "not deny him the opportunity to play in a GF". This is the AFL's biggest concussion test yet - anything under 3-4 is abdication.

If it was Gill I am sure it was optics - that is how he always works. Haven't seen enough of the other two to comment, though Laura looks promising, and thankfully is not a member of the 'old boys club' At least an artificial intelligence bot would have some intelligence, even if artificial. MC has none.

I don't know it for a fact, but IF Brundy asks to move on due to lack of opportunity, then why would any sane mature wannabe first ruck want to come to MFC? Yes, maybe an up and comer wanting to look ahead a year or three, or a genuine forward / 2nd ruck. Are there any of these available?

sacrificed is way too nice a way of putting it. IF, emphasis on IF, it is true that he did not support a sanction then he should not be sacrificed as you put it, he should be well and truly run out of all things pertaining to AFL.. It would be a bloody disgrace, but on par with many AFL 'decisions'. see above

Angus was actually no longer the ball carrier - he had kicked it and it went over Maynard's head well before contact was made, forcefully, high, with devastating consequences.

There is no requirement to prove malice or intent - reckless which it was, though the AFL have softened their language to careless, with high comtact and high outcome = 4+ weeks, minimum.

I am speculating just which of dozens of apt descriptions of Barrett is the word that was censored. 🤔 If he is not it would suggest that suggestions of deep corruption in the AFL may not be far off the mark. Do it Gil - make one last positive contribution. And nobody is suggesting that anyone is suspended when they trip over their feet - but there are rules against brutal assault and if they are not enforced, the game is stuffed That would mean 4+ minimal, even if "just" deemed careless. Next they will be saying that Angus head butted poor Maynard.

Yes. A definite line in the sand moment. Will they crumble under Collingwood and media pressure? Wouldn’t put it past them. “Poor guy is remorseful and could miss a premiership”. For this reason alone I hope that whoever meets them in the preliminary final beats the hell out of them, and wipes the smug “premierships a cakewalk” smirk off their faces. However is there any higher grading available ? There used to be an infraction known as a charge - is this still there? This was a brutal assault, after the play, and deserves whatever maximum is available for said infraction.

Seriously!!! IF that is true, it confirms Christians ineptitude and or incompetence and or bias and he should go immediately. I did say when the incident happened that Christian would be compromised and may well let it go.