Macca

Torn achilles and that's season over from a few reports. And at 39, that might be it Next up is Zac Wilson or Joe Flacco

There are 2 big players involved here The might of Collingwood and how they are great for business and all the rest of it And the litigation and class actions re concessions and the huge payout that could eventuate So, a compromised solution might be reached (or maybe not) A one match suspension and a suspended sentence of another 2 or 3 matches? What is also interesting is Laura Kane and her experience on the legal side of things

I reckon the tribunal will give this thug a 4 or 5 game penalty. This in turn will make it almost impossible for Collingwood to argue the sentence down to 1 week Collingwood are going to have to get him off on appeal And then of course the AFL themselves can appeal

I disagree The act has to be punished as JVR is guilty and will have to wear a suspension So any suspendable act could be grounds for a sending off However, An elbow thrown compared to incidental high contact caused by a tackle or bump is different again What they could do are the do's & the dont's. A heiness act down to an elbow thrown or an obvious thrown punch ... off you go Other, more minor offences? Probably not sent off But that's only my view ... I'd bring the send off rule for red card offences only. Not the sin bin for 10 minutes

You'd have to play one short as it is in the NRL or in soccer (and rugby union) So it would be 17 on the field instead of 18 if a player is sent off in the case of the AFL (if the send off rule is introduced) But the league is often very slow on change Good examples are the Barry Hall & Gaff incidents. There's no question that both players would have been rightly sent off if that rule existed Maynard could easily have been sent off as he was reported by the umpire on the spot As would have JVR as well. In our sport not only can you not throw an elbow but you can't shirtfront and take out an unsuspecting and unprotected player

There are different rules in place and the goalkeeper has a bit more scope in terms of spoiling and taking a player out at the same time (or not being able to take a player out) Depends on the actual circumstances, where the ball is and the goalkeepers movement & motive

You're right, Gonzo And even if we do see a heinous act, they'll talk about it over summer and then won't act As previously stated, I'd bring in a red card as a deterrent along with a proper, well thought out plan on how the red card could be used For instance, the Long bump on Simmonds by today's standards would be an automatic red card along with the Wallis blow to Green's throat (Hardwick would go for his cowardly hold on Green as well). That brings the scum down to 15 on the field

Can't a player be sent off for the whole game in the NRL? (If the offence is bad enough) I'd favour just a straight red and no yellow (sin bin) in the AFL. And the offence would need to be blatant and red card worthy

Good luck with your magpie mates over there, pops They've got even less chance of understanding your dribble. But if you're a defence lawyer as you say, you'll get plenty of engagements Actually, you're perfectly suited there so you should take up residence and leave the good folk here to their own devices

In amongst chatter about welfare cheques gone astray, used dentures and potential burglary sites No thanks

Now you're borrowing my lines Plagiarism is an offence old boy. Even at your ripe old age you can be sued Is this you?

Well at least he's livened up an otherwise normal Monday evening at Demonland

One thing we do know is it will be $$$$'s related They'll do the maths on all outcomes and then design things to pan out their best way. They are a mini FIFA

Do not pass go! I got 2nd prize in a beauty contest! My prize? Out for dinner with rollinson (Macca's - his shout)

As soon as it happened, I thought the smother was bs and he just went straight at Gus' head with the right shoulder Put it this way, if he'd planned to take out Gus to maximum effect, he couldn't have done it any better And we're meant to believe it was an accident?

Go and have a bex and a lie down old fella. It's way past your bedtime You're getting yourself all worked up over subject matter that none of us here can make sense of It's just blah, blah, blah And dull and uninteresting At least you've toned your violent and aggressive language. That's a step in the right direction. You're doing well Think of me as your therapist. I'm here to help

Yes, Laura is a breath of fresh air And Christian putting his own job on the line is weird. What was he worried about? Is he that biased towards Collingwood and if so, how on earth can he hold such an important position for so long? Bizarre Caro mentioned that Gil & Dillon wanted the case to go straight to the tribunal as well

Red cards and yellow cards are in just about every other sport and those sports aren't unduly effected by the rulings Even if play continued whilst upstairs deliberates on a possible illegal act Here's a good example ... Does Michael Long slam into an unsuspecting Troy Simmonds if the order off rule was in operation? I say no The AFL needs to take a giant leap into the 21st Century in a number of areas (goal line technology is an antiquated system for starters)

And if the lame attempt at smothering was dismissed out of hand (as it should be) then Maynard would be up for not only high contact with a severe outcome but also, the careless action could be replaced with malicious intent 6 or 7+ weeks It will be interesting to see how hard Gleeson goes as he has gone hard before (if Gleeson is the prosecution officer in this case)

Edited for the benefit of others Such crude language coming from a so-called well educated lawyer. You're reducing yourself to name calling? And by the way, your pathetic attempts at humour just doesn't work How are you even still here? You may as well take the opportunity to say your goodbyes before you get turfed Old man who shouts at clouds gets banned from a fan site. Now that's funny

The league should have or could have brought in an order off rule decades ago ... even just as a fail-safe method If the QF had have been a GF, then we'd look back at the result being possibly decided by a violent act. And that's no way to win or lose a GF The 1973 GF was arguably decided by 4 blatant, violent acts. The bloodbath GF in 1945? There's been plenty of moments for change The 1989, 1990 & 2000 GF's?

For the benefit for those who have put you on ignore, I've edited your post accordingly Give it a rest old boy, you've made the same point at least 20 times whilst not adding anything new Most would be skimming past your diatribe now. And why do you speak in such a violent way? What are you so angry about? Are you ok? You don't make any sense and you have no support. None

Where's he gone? Nanna nap?

Much anticipated game tomorrow Bills @ Jets Storylines everywhere and a tremendous QB match-up (Rodgers vs Allen)

Yep, I saw it exactly the same way right from the outset And what makes the narrative even more confusing is that those advocating the whole footy act bs are often quite cynical and a fair bit street-smart The ex-players should be seeing through the whole charade But again, they also (in my view) fall into the redneck view ... "What are they turning the game into" (with the usual, lame reference to netball) So that's what we're up against, EH