MRP | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

MRP

  • Thread starter Thread starter acatman
  • Start date Start date
That’s what makes all the good bloke / he plays the right way BS so annoying.

He knew what he was doing.

And personally I like seeing players that are hard at it and that play on the edge, however when that crosses the line (someone ending up out cold), you pay the price for doing so.

This result is truly shambolic and a symptom of a dysfunctional AFL judicial system that presents more like a backyard operation.

And how is it appropriate for there to be PR spin being disseminated by team members through the media during the lead up to the hearing?
It’s impossible to say definitively what was the AFL’s preferred outcome to this case. However, it does not hurt business to have a full compliment of Magpies to play through the finals season. I can hear those turnstiles ticking over now!

The usual AFL attack dogs were on display with their attempts at downplaying the hit, and with some success it seems. It just goes to show how compromised the media is when it comes to broadcasting and writing about AFL football.

But the facts are these – Brayshaw was poleaxed into the next day by Maynard and may not play football again.

Maynard not only went on to finish the game (and is now free to play for the rest of the final series, while Collingwood are still in it), he was also involved in several other incidents during that game.

The AFL makes many mistakes while protecting its product, and this is another glaring example. Isolating the Maynard hit on Brayshaw and not bringing up other moments during the same game when Maynard used his shoulders and head to intimidate opposition players was a huge mistake.

This behaviour by Maynard was not a one-off occasion, and his hit on Brayshaw should have been put into the context of how Maynard likes to throw his weight around during a game.

An opportunity was lost to tell the footballing world there are consequences to be had for knocking out a player with a head high hit. Perhaps that was the real intention behind the AFL, in the hope that come the next game people would have forgotten, like all the other AFL blunders and incompetence we have witnessed in 2023, and that the AFL was simply seen to be concerned.

Maynard walking away free to play in the PF asks the question, “Just how concerned about players welfare is the AFL?”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
It’s impossible to say definitively what was the AFL’s preferred outcome to this case. However, it does not hurt business to have a full compliment of Magpies to play through the finals season. I can hear those turnstiles ticking over now!

The usual AFL attack dogs were on display with their attempts at downplaying the hit, and with some success it seems. It just goes to show how compromised the media is when it comes to broadcasting and writing about AFL football.

But the facts are these – Brayshaw was poleaxed into the next day by Maynard and may not play football again.

Maynard not only went on to finish the game (and is now free to play for the rest of the final series, while Collingwood are still in it), he was also involved in several other incidents during that game.

The AFL makes many mistakes while protecting its product, and this is another glaring example. Isolating the Maynard hit on Brayshaw and not bringing up other moments during the same game when Maynard used his shoulders and head to intimidate opposition players was a huge mistake.

This behaviour by Maynard was not a one-off occasion, and his hit on Brayshaw should have been put into the context of how Maynard likes to throw his weight around during a game.

An opportunity was lost to tell the footballing world there are consequences to be had for knocking out a player with a head high hit. Perhaps that was the real intention behind the AFL, in the hope that come the next game people would have forgotten, like all the other AFL blunders and incompetence we have witnessed in 2023, and that the AFL was simply seen to be concerned.

Maynard walking away free to play in the PF asks the question, “Just how concerned about players welfare is the AFL?”
Agree on all points
 
Are you suggesting then that guys going for a mark that knee someone in the back or head are also reckless and unduly rough and should be suspended ? They’re football actions. They’ve caused endless more injuries than anyone has smothering.

Think carefully here ToOts !
Yeh, many more concussions over the years from knees to the head than this "freak" occurence. Every player who leds knee first and jumps onto an opoponents back risks kneeing them in the head every time. They know that is one possible outcome of their action. Much more likely to occur than in the case of attempted smothers.

I think the front on vision that shows Brayshaw move into Maynards path after disposing of the ball saved him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Suspect the AFL insurers would be worried Be surprised ifnext year premiums do not sky rocket. IMO if the AFL do not appeal sends a clear message they still do not take this issue serious
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The way Whately spoke this morning made me feel the AFL won’t contest.

No way!

“THE AFL has opted against appealing the Tribunal's decision in the Brayden Maynard case, meaning the Collingwood defender is in the clear to play in the Magpies' preliminary final.

On Tuesday night, Maynard had his rough conduct charge for his collision with Angus Brayshaw dismissed at the Tribunal.

In giving his verdict, chairman Jeff Gleeson said Maynard was "not careless in either his decision to smother or the way in which his body formed after the smother".
 
Eddie hasnt got a humble bone in his body.

A great day for The Collingwood Football Club! , toasted HURRAY with Sav blanc

With Angus Brayshaw's laying in an MRI.

The flowers and the bottle seemed to work a treat.

give BruzzyGreatBloke man-of-the-year!

Yay.
Didn’t broad make an apology to the guy he drove into the turf. Made no difference in his case. AFL very selective as to who is a nice guy and who isn’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
No way!

“THE AFL has opted against appealing the Tribunal's decision in the Brayden Maynard case, meaning the Collingwood defender is in the clear to play in the Magpies' preliminary final.

On Tuesday night, Maynard had his rough conduct charge for his collision with Angus Brayshaw dismissed at the Tribunal.

In giving his verdict, chairman Jeff Gleeson said Maynard was "not careless in either his decision to smother or the way in which his body formed after the smother".
He wasn't careless in his decision to smother and the likelihood of giving away a free kick because of the probability of high contact, didn't make the action careless.

It should be argued however that he WAS CARELESS in his decision to brace by turning his shoulder into Brayshaw, (which caused his shoulder to contact Brayshaws head). He had other options. He had his arms in the air. He could have chosen to do nothing and take the collision on the chest or he could have chosen to push his arms out towards Brayshaws' chest and break the momentum of his contact in that way. Each would have delivered a far better result.

Trying to do either of these things would have helped his opponent escape what is a very serious injury, but he didn't try, choosing instead to take a much more dangerous course.

The decision not to appeal is a poor one.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
wow a hot topic

have gone thru the last 8/9 pages of the thread

1st order of business - a pat on the back to all posting , not all agreeing but all being grown up about it and bringing up lots of different angles to the discussion

2nd order of business - there's plenty of talk about consistency of penalties being handed out , my take is its about maturity with the need to protect the players head and with the way we re interrupt the rules with respect to protecting the players head

In the coming weeks nothing will be achieved in this space , it has become way to political, being finals time , Collingwood being involved , the number of former players in the media coming out in support of Maynard

If I was prosecuting I would have liked to have put two questions to Maynard

"would you run and jump at a brick wall with that level of force ?"

the answer would have to be no otherwise it would be a very brief playing career

"so why did you run like that at a human being ?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Didn’t broad make an apology to the guy he drove into the turf. Made no difference in his case. AFL very selective as to who is a nice guy and who isn’t.

Yeah BruzzyGreatBloke has set a precedent with the flowers and booze.

Although if a richmond player came bearing gifts,

The media would report it as smack, porn and a pox soaked blanket
 
Well that agenda driving *smile* would know.
Yeh, you get the sense he got the word. He got access to the bio-mechanist pretty easily to sell the message that it was unavoidable and just one of those things. AFL approved message.
 
Yeh, many more concussions over the years from knees to the head than this "freak" occurence. Every player who leds knee first and jumps onto an opoponents back risks kneeing them in the head every time. They know that is one possible outcome of their action. Much more likely to occur than in the case of attempted smothers.

I think the front on vision that shows Brayshaw move into Maynards path after disposing of the ball saved him.
yep you can clearly see it:

maynard-f000445-gif.20460


If this was Vlaustin doing it we wouldnt be calling for his head would we? would we?
 
the momentum whatshisname got when leaving his man and charging towards Brayshaw was always going to end badly

there's the careless nature of what he did; he was a bull at a gate

the white collar mafia of the AFL are transparently boring
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
wow a hot topic

have gone thru the last 8/9 pages of the thread

1st order of business - a pat on the back to all posting , not all agreeing but all being grown up about it and bringing up lots of different angles to the discussion

2nd order of business - there's plenty of talk about consistency of penalties being handed out , my take is its about maturity with the need to protect the players head and with the way we re interrupt the rules with respect to protecting the players head

In the coming weeks nothing will be achieved in this space , it has become way to political, being finals time , Collingwood being involved , the number of former players in the media coming out in support of Maynard

If I was prosecuting I would have liked to have put two questions to Maynard

"would you run and jump at a brick wall with that level of force ?"

the answer would have to be no otherwise it would be a very brief playing career

"so why did you run like that at a human being ?"
Put another way in a legal sense. possible Civil Court Action. The fact that Maynard (more in control of the situation) took decisive action to protect himself would ON BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES a wide open Brayshaw have not suffered injury. I would not like to be running the Maynard case. The AFL action IMO is sad. It clearly sends the message that they still do not take these injuries seriously
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The Pies certainly made sure Maynard's flowers and wine made the news, just like last time one of their guys was in front of the tribunal and they repeatedly mentioned how they wouldnt mention the wine/home visit/donation their player has tried to use to show remorse.

On the other hand I reckon certainly with Broad, we said nothing while the case went to the tribunal, and some social media said he showed no remorse, then after a while the truth came out that Broad did. legitimately, not for show, not to try to reduce his sentence, but because he actually cares. I think Mansell was similar.

What simpleton takes wine around to bloke who he has knocked out and would have concussion symptoms? And Mcguire your a *smile* dog, you couldn't keep your fat mouth shut again. Disgraceful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Furore from Melbourne FC and anti concussion activists. The AholeFL is scaaaaaared!!!! Hiding in their corners.

Friendship between Angus and Brainard could deteriorate like Carey and Stevens.
 
The cynic in me says I won’t be surprised if the AFL does not appeal. They’ve got their perfect outcome: faux outrage, straight to the tribunal, we care. But happy they failed because that would open up a Pandora’s box of problems where injuries from other non player attacking actions are concerned eg from marking contests, ruck contests etc. They’re not ready or capable of dealing with that undoubted extension that would come if Maynard was found guilty.

“We reluctantly accept the Tribunal’s decision.”
Brilliant example of disingenuous corporate behaviour to manufacture an opposite outcome that nobody suspects you of seeking.

Credit to them, they’re experts.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users