Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'the maynard rule'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Demonland
    • Melbourne Demons
    • Trade, Draft & Free Agency
    • AFLW Melbourne Demons
    • Training Reports
    • Match Previews, Reports, Articles and Special Features
    • Fantasy Footy
    • Other Sports
    • General Discussion
    • Forum Help

Product Groups

  • Converted Subscriptions
  • Merchandise

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Favourite Player(s)

Found 1 result

  1. Footage on the AFL app if you missed it. Gut and heart says he has to go. We've got a duty of care to protect the head and he did get him. Ironically it was close to the Maynard rule, jumping to smother and then caught him high. There are actually some technical aspects to it: Will they charge him under the specific rule for smother that they brought in? Or regular old high bump? Or rough conduct (they then don't need to prove it's a bump). First look he almost pokes the elbow out but then tucks it in. Does that make it worse? Or is it actually evidence of him trying to tuck in to avoid elbow to the head. Also, one mitigating factor for Kosi is that he had open jazz hands not clenched fists when the contact happened. The tribunal has used clenched fists and tense muscles as a proxy for bracing and bumping, as opposed to open hands, which they claim demonstrates a you didn't expect the contact and tried to show a duty of care to the played in an accidental situation. Bizarre but they've written that multiple times in their official adjudications. One to watch.
×
×
  • Create New...