Ouch!

either grab the app on your phone, or if you have a digital radio you should be able to tune into SEN radio. Under Fanatics there is a biased call for Carlton: Wayne Johnson, Andy Maher and Mark McClure doing commentary Melb: Russell Robertson, Tom Morris and Lily Mithen. None of the [censored] with Brian Taylor etc, it's a one eyed call where they scream at the umps like we do....

I think I'm gonna tune in to the SEN fanatic channel to listen to the MFC biased call. I can't stomach listening to Brian or any of the others after last week. Robbo, Tom Morris and Lily Mithen will be a better experience!

The emergencies train thru the Captains run too don't they? Even if Thommo is in, creative me says Hibbo isn't an automatic out,... I mean... could we have Hibbo and Thommo in defence, bring Rivers into the midfield and play Petracca up forward. Bringing in Jordon or Spargo for Gus. Then whichever doesn't come in on the emergency list with Grundy, Laurie, and Schache. Perhaps unlikely...

Possibly, but of the ones you mention Curnow and TDK are likely to play in the forward line. I'm curious as to why Hibberd goes out for Tomlinson, when ... they won't have height up forward as far as I can tell, the others are defenders (barring Cripps and Acres)

Why are we wanting to go taller in our defence? McKay can't play, Martin who is 'mid sized' is out, and Silvagni sounds like he's not fit. Other than the resting ruck who is up forward other than Curnow? I agree we play better when we can free up Lever. But Hibberd isn't too small for what we are up against I don't think. I'd be ok with bringing Spargo and Jordon in, Petracca forward more. TMac to chop out in the ruck. Feeling ok about this match against Carlton actually.

Sorry, been off for a few hours... collecting my thoughts. Seeing Eddie act the way he did, just makes me want the boys to get thru to the GF more than ever. What a smug pr*ck. I thought he/Maynard stutter stepped and launched slightly to the right, In the end, TBH, Woods didn't really seem to have a lot to put forward as an argument, except careless and tried to suggest he should not have launched forward. Glad the AFL will review this, and the duty of care statement, and if we are lucky there could be a new MRO next year.

Interesting that Stewie Lowe and Jason Johnson have been replaced by Darren Gaspar and Scott Stevens. Wonder how come that happened at such a late stage.

Nah... it's all good cos that was in his role in the media and 'commentary' on the night. We don't have conflicts of interest here Daisy! You are reading too much into it 😁

Now, 4pm I think.

He'll go for 12+ weeks if that's the angle their advocate takes.... i.e that would suggest they have nothing. Their fan base has bleated about that, but it won't form part of their case.

Actually as much as I'd like to string up Tom Browne (who I thought had given up AFL journalism) It was Tom Morris who reported this initially. So much complexity between the two teams on this incident. Corey as a former player, Peter Maynard the GM (or CEO) of the Casey Demons FC, as someone else mentioned Kate Hore is dating Brayden's brother too.... Then there is the whole aspect of Brayshaws/Frawleys etc....

Sounds remarkably like the current AFL media. Kane Cornes basically inferring that unless you've played the game you have no idea what you are talking about when you comment about this. Which made it nice to hear Gerard Whately's comments this morning where he pointed out Dermie's take on the matter.

He's not, but it makes it seem like Barrett HAS friends.

Just make sure we jump before impact... thats important, cos it means you aren't responsible for where you land....

One of the first stories to show up on news.com.au ‘Career ending’: Horror update on AFL star https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/dees-stars-insight-into-concussed-teammate-as-bump-debate-rages/news-story/e6165e830b0c3f5650e560feaad04963 I wonder if this shifts any in the media on the incident. The narrative about protecting the head up until now, has all been about CTE and concussion for people who have left the game, having an actual incident be directly responsible FOR someone retiring, and in their prime. That is another thing entirely I would think. Someone here mentioned James Brayshaw had changed his tune from the Thursday night to when he was on one of his other shows, no doubt he's received an update, but also would have read the room on the family take on things too.

I wouldn’t suggest anyone listen to Adam Ramanauskas view on the matter… he made comment on ABC sport this afternoon. seriously… https://ab.co/3ldkTLQ Adam reckons, Maynard was actually trying to protect Brayshaw with his action. And the tribunal should only be for when malice is involved…. Luckily Fly reckons there was only a “little” bit of Malice hey Adam?

Thought this was interesting

Similar to what Binman said a few pages ago in this thread filter out the white noise surrounding this and consider this. If you chose to <Insert ANY Football Act> and it results in head high contact (or forceful head contact with the ground) to the opposition player, ....... Tackle - You'll be suspended Bump - You'll be suspended Spoiling the ball - You'll very likely be suspended In fact the only scenario I can think of where it's not would be jumping for a mark. But that is a disputed ball contest where two or more players are going for the ball. This ball was not in dispute, therefore fairly sure the AFL would say 'Smothering the ball' and it resulting in head high contact would be very much in line with Bumps and Tackles.

This is where I am at. I've seen a lot of people run at the ball carrier and jump, the large majority don't hit the player on the way down. The last smother attempt gone wrong I can recall is a couple of years back with Mitch Duncan collecting Aaron Hall, https://www.afl.com.au/video/598079/hall-knocked-out-after-duncans-smother-attempt?videoId=598079&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1618731665001 Duncan escaped both a free AND suspension, but listen to the commentary... Given where we are at now with concussion, CTE etc, There was less 'footy act' talk then than Thursday night. Obviously the main difference is Duncan was spinning and had 'less' of an idea where he was going to end up. Maynard on the other hand knew exactly what was happening.

grrrrr

Joeboy, I hope you aren't riling me up by the Dangerfield duty of care [censored]. :) You CAN"T have a duty of care to yourself. Dangerfield at the time said that Maynard had a duty of care to protect himself and that's why he braced, now he is saying Brayshaw had a duty of care to protect himself FROM Maynard? Patrick Dangerfield is clueless, and a horrible actor in those AAMI ads to boot! Even @rollinson 65 as a retired lawyer will back this part up ;) https://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/Find-legal-information/Personal-rights-and-safety/Injury-loss-and-compensation/Negligence-duty-of-care-and-loss The law says we all have a duty of care to take reasonable care not to cause foreseeable harm to other people or their property.

100% correct. Tackles are a football act, but if the head hits the ground, or you don't exercise the duty of care TO THE OTHER player. You get a suspension. This is what infuriated me about Maynards comment, McRae's comment, and everyone in the media.... trying to play it down as if it's ok to do this. Also... if Maynard gets rubbed out, it's not going to stop people smothering the ball, it's not going to stop people jumping for marks, it WILL stop them from jumping up and collecting people in the head in the 'guise' of another action.

Correct it was a late hit, oh wait.... a 'late' pure football action gone wrong. Ooops my bad.

I wonder if he called Tom Morris prior to going to Brayshaws house to see if they could bring a camera down.

If you want to flip it around, Replace Brayshaw with one of the Daicos boys, and Maynard with Tom Sparrow. Collingwood and the whole AFL media would be baying for a public execution. To say otherwise is just bull and you know it.