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

Hmm. A so so penalty I guess. Sign of the times. Like SSP.
Plenty have got less over the last few years, even when the afl says “the head is sacrosanct”.
Maybe they didn’t know what that word meant then.
Maybe the new CEO is actually going to be fair dinkum about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
the Stewart hit on Prestia was as bad as Websters.

he doesn't leave the ground as high, but he runs further past the ball.

its more off the ball, and impact identical.

only 18 months or so ago?

I think Webster will get twice the penalty.

It should serve to highlight how much has changed,

and you'd hope Stewart would get 8 if he did the same this year?
And Danger!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Webster gets 7 weeks. 1/3 of the season. They probably won't play him against lolnorf one week later on R8.
This prob was part of the AFL decision to reduce from 8. 2024 is about amplifying the theatrics.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
Well, they've set the precedent. Anyone running a book on how long it takes for them to ignore the precedent?

DS

short term (<R12) 1/20

medium term (>rd 12) evens

long term (2025) 20/1

AFL: consistently inconsistent

think they got Webster penalty bang on though - 8 weeks with a week off for genuine contrition.

though if Simpkin misses the year, or retires, its inadequate.

I thought Ross Lyon handled it very well 'there is no defence' from the outset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
it's a interesting junction we're at isn't it?

how do players react? play scared? be 'careful' ?

compulsory helmets? didn't help Brayshaw tho...

can o worms
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The AFL have known about concussion for how long? It's been a can of worms for years, they have just refused to find the opener.

IMO this isn't a watershed moment, that was the easiest deliberation ever. It was an old-fashioned H&S which has been outlawed for years. It was always going to be 6+ weeks and back pats all round.

The complication will come when we have the next knockout in a marking contest or ground ball where one player chooses to protect himself and the other is knocked out. How does the AFL administer that?

Oh, and the bump isn't dead. Just don't leave your feet & bump in the head. The Lefau bump on Lever is the prototype - stay low and drill through the body. I imagine we will see a lot less bumps though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
The AFL maybe intentially avoiding the classification of intentional to avoid future litigation
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
How can they be so inconsistent with adjudicating this stuff again.

So Hewett and Neale are wrestling, Hewett hits Neale high (in the throat), Neale retaliates by punching Hewett in the stomach.

Hewett - CARELESS conduct, low impact, high contact
Neale - INTENTIONAL conduct, low impact, body contact

Both get $2,500 fines. How is that right, how can Neales be regarded as intentional but Hewetts isn't? Its so contrived, but yet again, like the incidents with Grimes and the 50's yesterday, you get this sort of stuff where the incidents are basically the same time, same act, but treated differently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
How can they be so inconsistent with adjudicating this stuff again.

So Hewett and Neale are wrestling, Hewett hits Neale high (in the throat), Neale retaliates by punching Hewett in the stomach.

Hewett - CARELESS conduct, low impact, high contact
Neale - INTENTIONAL conduct, low impact, body contact

Both get $2,500 fines. How is that right, how can Neales be regarded as intentional but Hewetts isn't? Its so contrived, but yet again, like the incidents with Grimes and the 50's yesterday, you get this sort of stuff where the incidents are basically the same time, same act, but treated differently.
It’s the AFL MRP inconsistency is second nature to them
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user