AFL and Concussion - Angus Brayshaw retirement

[MD Jazz]

I'm not a fan but SPP pretty unlucky I reckon that Brayshaw retired this week.
As he approached the contest the tackle was swung in his direction. I get you're not allowed to bump but it's not as if he lined the guy up.
He literally changes his mind to brace 3 steps away from contact. Arguably to protect himself from getting hurt.
The collateral damage to Keane is quite a bit of bad luck.
It's going to cost him a month but geezus the expectations on players now is getting ridiculous.
Tough game to play.

Yeh, this is the challenge. Are you in trouble now on a football field if you brace for contact and the other player is knocked out?

I think this year, Lynch would be suspended for what he did to Keith. He didn't play the ball nor did he "protect" Keith.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Yeh, this is the challenge. Are you in trouble now on a football field if you brace for contact and the other player is knocked out?

I think this year, Lynch would be suspended for what he did to Keith. He didn't play the ball nor did he "protect" Keith.

So you don't brace & you crack 3 ribs.
I'm taking the suspension.

 

[Jason King]

With Maynard, hypothetically if you jumped in the air for a smother and you were about to land on a teammate would you still turn to protect yourself ie a bump?

 

[MD Jazz]

With Maynard, hypothetically if you jumped in the air for a smother and you were about to land on a teammate would you still turn to protect yourself ie a bump?

Not sure why you would be smothering a teammate's kick?

 

[MD Jazz]

So you don't brace & you crack 3 ribs.
I'm taking the suspension.

Yeh, it's going to be a difficult year for contact.

Given the AFL's long history of thoughtful and pro-active management and guidance in this area I'm sure it will be well handled.

 

[Jason King]

Not sure why you would be smothering a teammate's kick?

I mean let's just say a Collingwood player was about to tackle Brayshaw. I know it's far fetched but i am struggling to see what Maynard could have done differently apart from the way he braced for impact.

If he had put his arms out to make the impact / contact lesser?

 

[MD Jazz]

I mean let's just say a Collingwood player was about to tackle Brayshaw. I know it's far fetched but i am struggling to see what Maynard could have done differently apart from the way he braced for impact.

If he had put his arms out to make the impact / contact lesser?

Yeh, that's the part I struggle with. Maynard braced at the last moment. If you watch the side-on he barely misses the ball and just before contact turns side-on to protect himself. Unfortunately Brayshaw was exposed to the full brunt. Below is what the treibunal said.

He said Maynard had insufficient time to make a decision that would have led to a better outcome. “It’s asking a lot of a player to decide in a fraction of a second which of various ways to land, in a high speed collision, and which of those ways of landing might result in which type of reportable offence.”

“We find that Mr Maynard was not careless in either his decision to smother or the way in which his body formed after the smother.”

Gleeson said Maynard could not have decided to bump Brayshaw in such a short time period, which meant the AFL’s alternative argument was also dismissed.

Hopefully the AFL is looking at every incident over trhe last decade that has resulted in concussion to see where they occur and how they can legislate to either reduce or eliminate (probably impossible) them.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Yeh, that's the part I struggle with. Maynard braced at the last moment. If you watch the side-on he barely misses the ball and just before contact turns side-on to protect himself. Unfortunately Brayshaw was exposed to the full brunt. Below is what the treibunal said.

He said Maynard had insufficient time to make a decision that would have led to a better outcome. “It’s asking a lot of a player to decide in a fraction of a second which of various ways to land, in a high speed collision, and which of those ways of landing might result in which type of reportable offence.”

“We find that Mr Maynard was not careless in either his decision to smother or the way in which his body formed after the smother.”

Gleeson said Maynard could not have decided to bump Brayshaw in such a short time period, which meant the AFL’s alternative argument was also dismissed.

Hopefully the AFL is looking at every incident over trhe last decade that has resulted in concussion to see where they occur and how they can legislate to either reduce or eliminate (probably impossible) them.

I guess what they're trying to get to is stop players having a reckless attack on the ball & think about how they approach a contest before they do so in case you injure the opposition player.
These current crop of players are still conditioned largely to win the ball first at all costs.
In a generation though the way players approach the footy & contests will be very different.
Winning the ball will be a secondary consideration.

 

[Aegean Tiger]

I guess what they're trying to get to is stop players having a reckless attack on the ball & think about how they approach a contest before they do so in case you injure the opposition player.
These current crop of players are still conditioned largely to win the ball first at all costs.
In a generation though the way players approach the footy & contests will be very different.
Winning the ball will be a secondary consideration.

Agreed. We are in the midst of generational change and the AFL and their predilection for negotiated outcomes is playing catch-up.

Maynard is an old school footballer who is hard wired to hurt the oppo. Make em earn it was the old war cry.

However, the old school footballer is dead and the game has forever changed.

 

[Tigers of Old]

SPP got 4 weeks.

 

[spook]

Finally someone says what I've been saying for years

WATCH | “Make the change”: King and Cornes discuss Hayward/Wilmot collision

Who is in the wrong for this collision?

www.sen.com.au

 

[eZyT]

Finally someone says what I've been saying for years

WATCH | “Make the change”: King and Cornes discuss Hayward/Wilmot collision

Who is in the wrong for this collision?

www.sen.com.au

its very tricky;

wilmotts action is smart; he braces for and bumps Hayward in the head primarily, then goes for the ball. kind of concurren, but I think its a 1-2 decision in his mind but motivated out of self-preservation, not intent to hurt.

how do you protect Hayward? penalise him for going for the ball? 'play-on' and log it in an archive to defend against legal action if his brain goes mushy?

its really hard and I dont have the answer.

but what I do have is an understanding of how the answer comes about;

strategically, consistently, informed by experts, in consultation with clubs, communicated to all stakeholders including members and fans, and regulated effectively.

is AFL are capable of that?

zero chance

a heap of under qualified, overpaid, bozo's who clearly aren't there on merit, who learned bullying entitled leadership at boys grammar , foster an organisational corporate stonewall response system, and are answerable only to Kerry stokes and Rupert Murdoch

 

[Redford]

Finally someone says what I've been saying for years

WATCH | “Make the change”: King and Cornes discuss Hayward/Wilmot collision

Who is in the wrong for this collision?

www.sen.com.au

Will this incite another giant, oblivious circle-jerk within the AFL, praising the robust flavour of each other's spunk ? Sure hope so.

Very excited.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Finally someone says what I've been saying for years

WATCH | “Make the change”: King and Cornes discuss Hayward/Wilmot collision

Who is in the wrong for this collision?

www.sen.com.au

Absolutely correct. Cotchin/Shiel anyone?

 

[eZyT]

SPP got 4 weeks.

a broken clock is correct twice a day

 

[eZyT]

Absolutely correct. Cotchin/Shiel anyone?

pretty identical.

 

[artball]

terrible 'method' from Hayward... reminds me of Keith v Lynch in the stupidity stakes
Wilmot does everything right, if Hayward does the same, all is sweet ..

'do not lead with the head'

it's play on ...

 

[eZyT]

Will this incite another giant, oblivious circle-jerk within the AFL, praising the robust flavour of each other's spunk ? Sure hope so.

Very excited.

it all plays out in their cringey emoji'y what's-app groups and on the golf course and at barbecues in Sorrento, where manicured wives
desperately try to dull the pain of living with a total *smile*, and the fear of being accosted in the toilet by hubby's best mate stupidly waving a little zip lock bag, with brimming buckets of sav blanc

power-preserving entitlement, racism, misogyny, greed and insecurity, with complete disregard for the product.

 

[eZyT]

terrible 'method' from Hayward... reminds me of Keith v Lynch in the stupidity stakes
Wilmot does everything right, if Hayward does the same, all is sweet ..

'do not lead with the head'

it's play on ...

yes,

but the AFL would *smile* that interpretation up somehow.

they'll message that,

then suspend wilmott the next week, then ban Hayward the next week,

then order Cyril Rioli invite Clarko fishing,

and announce ticketek get the rights to the MCG for 1001 years

and ask Eddie McGuire to do the welcome to country for dreamtime

while a replica Shane Tuck brain does a lap of honour in the back of a hilux

 

[artball]

yes,

but the AFL would *smile* that interpretation up somehow.

they'll message that,

then suspend wilmott the next week, then ban Hayward the next week,

then order Cyril Rioli invite Clarko fishing,

then give ticketek the rights on the MCG for 1000 years

Redford above mentioned 'Circle-Jerking'

i had a conversation yesterday with someone about something completely unrelated to the AFL ...

and the over-riding take was 'there's nothing like bureaucracy' ... or 'too many cooks'...