Ouch!

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.

No, Pickett's attempt at a smother was a pure football action. Almost identical, but amazingly didnt attempt to knock Hoskin-Elliott into next week. Maynard shuffled before he jumped, and changed his angle at the last minute to line up Brayshaw. He had intent to make contact with the player. How many of these 'pure football actions' have you seen in the last 5-10 years where people attempt to smother the ball, and knock out the player kicking it?

You can use SEN to sync audio somehow to your TV ... haven't used it, but it keeps popping up as an option.

Agree its gonna be his season, or he gets off, there is no 1 or 2 week action here. Collingwood will not be trying to get this downgraded, it won't help him. My take on the footage is that he moves into his path directly, he shuffle steps and changes angle before he launches. If he had stayed the path. The other part is, a pure accident can still result in a suspension. It's what bemuses me with the whole 'It was a footy act' Yep it was right until you drive your shoulder into his head. Followed by the people saying what else could he do when he was already off the ground.

Garry Lyon had an interesting take …. Said that an action such as this could set a precedent where anyone can essentially jump into any player and hit them high,citing a footy action, and they have no control over their actions. hadnt though that far,but it’s potentially true.

His mum might not let Gus come out and play with us anymore! 😢

Just me or does this feel like there is no intensity? Players have space to move… nothing like last night.

Chook, watch it again. Maynard at the last moment moves to the right after a small shuffle step. Bradshaw doesn’t deviate his direction, he leans left as the shoulder comes right at him. Not sure how you see it as the opposite? The angle brings him right into Brayshaws path.

I would not be surprised if Laura Kaine does this for all decisions for finals…. Makes sense that all tribunal decisions get announced through her, but also allows her to make a commonsense ruling to override where Christian can’t make a call.

hope that you are right!

TBH Lazyie. I want this referred to the tribunal. I don't have a preconceived idea of what the suspension should be or shouldn't be, but I don't think Christian has the tools to assess it correctly with the framework that the AFL has put down. Ultimately it's High, and Severe contact. The intent is the only debateable aspect here.

Agreed, but Van Rooyen is going to get a week or two unfortunately. He looked at McStay, went past the ball and lifted the elbow, It wasn't a heavy hit. Not sure that we can deny that either. But agree with your assessment on Swannie :D

He didn't bump DrDrake he had a duty of care to protect himself.... didn't you listen to Dangerfield!! Shame!

So my interpretation (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/utterly-disrespectful-collingwood-chant-sparks-outrage/news-story/c3f29d6adbc38d608b3d11347dbef6ca) around 50 seconds or so into the video you get the behind the goals vision... he stutter steps and slightly changes course to the right before jumping of the ground. It's not huge change but still enough of a change to make Brayshaw not be aware of it.

pretty sure it's his season

Couple of things Layzie, Correct you won't eliminate contact completely, but we expect contact in a contested ball situation. Brayshaw was disposing of the ball, and had Maynard launch at him, and he did change his line just before he jumped and he knew he was going to make contact with the player. No one is saying you shouldnt' be able to jump up and smother the ball? (his apparent footy act) but jumping at a player knowing you are going to hit him high at speed? Not sure about that

Yup Just watching the front on video footage again, Maynard at the last second changes the direction he is running ever so slightly before jumping off the ground. If he had continued on that original line he wouldn't have made contact like he did to Brayshaw.

Do you seriously believe that he knew he wouldn't make contact with Brayshaw at top speed and by jumping that it wasn't going to be a hard hit? C'mon really? Brayshaw didn't deviate, and didn't even see him coming (and he was facing him) Maynard didn't just jump up to spoil as if he's manning the mark, he jumped into Brayshaw.

I see the actions of Maynard and the way we stuffed up our opportunities to win the game as two completely different things Macca. Whilst I do believe that this action caused a big disruption to the way we wanted to play the game, but it wasn't the reason we lost. Maynard did not have to make contact with the player. He chose to run directly at Brayshaw, jump into him and ultimately braced for contact. Brayshaw had no opportunity and was exposed due to what Maynard did. This contact was 100% caused by Maynard and jumping at speed and making high contact was entirely on him. To say he wasn't responsible for his actions because it's "a footy act" is wrong.

its the term you use when you can't find the words to justify the action.