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

Some of the next gen like Daicos, Harley Reid, Butters, Rozee, both Ashcrofts, Ginnivan et al drop their knees to cause high contact. For all the talk of Reid as the new don't argue master, he performs this b!tch act in preference three times as often.

They do it because they're incentivised to. Get to the ball first, drop your knees, arch your back and headbutt your opponent's arm and we'll look after you. Classic *Dusty Moment*. :sarcasm

Yes.

Also a player goes to ground with the ball (error),

Then they glance up for the approaching oppo player, and headbutt them,

And get a too high free.

Thereby Rewarding falling over
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The fear of litigation re concussion is reshaping the game so quickly.
This generation of players that have grown up playing a certain way are being punished hard for things they would consider basic football actions.
The next gen of footballers will play the game very differently assuming there is one.
Baker should should mention this to the *smile* stick umpires, when he isn’t paid a free kick for a head high hit/tackle when it’s not called
”If you don’t pay head high contact, this vision will be used as evidence in my court case, that you (*smile* stick umpire) were complicit in me receiving head injuries and enticing the opposition to continue to inflict them on me by not paying free kicks. This only incentivsed them to continue doing it”
How many in the same boat? Vlaustin would have a fair case.

The club should compile all the high hits on our players that aren’t paid. Show them to the head of umpires department. Then let him know that if there is a case of one of our players suing the afl for concussion, those umpires and the umpires department will be named and sued as a respondent as well.
The club will have every one of these instances recorded and on file.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
75kg Jack Higgins gets 3 weeks for hanging off a 95kg Allir Allir as he tries to bust his way past him.

Thats a pretty big nail in the coffin for me.

Its not footy thats losing me, its AFL
its a fine for a Geelong player.

other than wave Allir past, I dont know what Higgins was suppose to do?

95kg bloke attempting to cannon past a 75kg bloke,

little bloke hangs off big bloke, big blokes momentum results in concussion.

The AFL might tick off 1/E=MC2?
Shame ezy shame. Twice you’ve posted players weights when the afl banned publication of them. Now those players will need counseling
:ROFLMAO:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
The game these days is just putrid . Main problem Rules committee who each season inject some insane rule sic Stand, to feather their ego. I cannot fathom out how the AFL honcho's get any satisfaction when the Ump calls out Stand a 100 times during a match. It will be interesting to see if Chairman Christian has got it right with Jack Higgins/Alir Alir incident. Maybe he is just passing the buck to the Appeals Board with the three game suspension knowing Saints would fly the Protest pennon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I cannot fathom out how the AFL honcho's get any satisfaction when the Ump calls out Stand a 100 times during a match.
you'd think the stupidity of it would reflect the stupidity on them... but hang on! they created it!

it's the worst rule / moment in professional sport in the world. it's primary school stuff..

it's embarrassing
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
It is but the media is captive and won’t call it out. The AFL has each club by the balls in a vice-like grip. So on it goes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
you'd think the stupidity of it would reflect the stupidity on them... but hang on! they created it!

it's the worst rule / moment in professional sport in the world. it's primary school stuff..

it's embarrassing
Let's not forget nominating a ruckman.
Giving a warning for 6 6 6.
ARC.
Not enough intent in trying to keep the ball in or take it out.
15 meters from 1 ump to the next.
Dragged it in.
Etc etc etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Let's not forget nominating a ruckman.
Giving a warning for 6 6 6.
ARC.
Not enough intent in trying to keep the ball in or take it out.
15 meters from 1 ump to the next.
Dragged it in.
Etc etc etc.

You forgot taking out of the knees (formerly 'getting the ball')

Which can be applied some quarters of some games,

Or all quarters of all games,

Some weeks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Let's not forget nominating a ruckman.
Giving a warning for 6 6 6.
ARC.
Not enough intent in trying to keep the ball in or take it out.
15 meters from 1 ump to the next.
Dragged it in.
Etc etc etc.
I'm blinded by the stupidity! ...yet they cannot see it...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Higgo's 3 weeks upheld. Dice rolled the wrong way for Jack......have to be a superstar.....
 
Last edited:
  • Angry
Reactions: 1 user
Higgo's 3 weeks upheld. Dice rolled the wrong way for Jack......have to be a superstar.....
Yer, but I have little problem with it. After the little rat walked out on RFC who really tried to look after him with his head surgeryn etc.,

Proved he definitely failed the 'good bloke' test! :rolleyes::giggle:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
HAMISH BRAYSHAW'S OPEN LETTER TO THE AFL ON BACKCHAT PODCAST
Dear AFL,
I normally swear on here and act like an idiot, however there will be no profanity or hyperbole in this letter. These are my honest and bewildered thoughts as a current player and lifetime fan of the greatest game in the world.
The tribunal and match review panel are single-handedly destroying the game. You are making it impossible to play in good spirit, you’re making it impossible to adjudicate and you’re not far off making it impossible to support.
Over the past 12 months, this is my interpretation of the rules of the game based on what I am hearing and seeing coming directly from the AFL;
Protect the head at all costs, obviously unless a head knock is as a result of a football act, but then it depends on how hard you get hit in that football act and if the player had any other alternatives, but also the player needs to take into account the potential to cause harm, but of course it shouldn’t depend on the outcome of the opponent, unless of course it does result in a concussion, but even then it depends on the intent, but of course a player is entitled to attack the ball with good technique, but it doesn’t matter if the opposition runs in head first like how every kid playing the game growing up gets taught not to do, but then of course it depends on the state of the game and the time of the year, it depends on whether or not we need to make an example out of someone, but then don’t forget if they have had a clean record in the past and do charity work, but then obviously that can only matter once and never again because from now on that doesn’t count, and it depends on the player, and the team they’re on, but really it all boils down to protecting the head because we’re seeing more players retire from concussion than ever before, but we will still let a guy play next week after punching someone in the face in the goal square because it wasn’t hard enough to hurt them.
I have grown up all my life surrounded by football. Playing football, watching football, my family has been engrossed in the AFL system for decades and I have absolutely no idea what is going on anymore.
My brother is never going to play football again in his whole life because of a jumping smother that turned into a bump that collided with his head. As much as it killed me to watch that, I can put my feelings for Angus aside and say that down to the nuts and bolts of it, Maynard was trying to smother the ball in a qualifying final so technically it was a football act.
You certainly didn’t care all for the outcome there and Brayden went on to win a premiership. That is precedence. That was as big a defining moment for the tribunal as I can remember, and you went with protecting the sanctity of the game over the protection of the player. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with that, but it is breaking me that you are constantly backflipping on that stance.
Peter Wright and Toby Green, 4 weeks and 1 week respectively for football acts with not a whole lot of difference. Jeremy Finlayson got less than Peter Wright for a homophobic slur which once again highlights that nobody at the AFL really knows what’s happening at the tribunal, you just make it up as you see fit.
Matt Crouch has been given a week for picking the ball up the way every single kid playing football is taught to do it. There is goal square footage of Jesse Hogan punching his defender in the face, and he has admitted to swinging with force to try and push his opponent. The AFL’s response “We are not clearly satisfied that was anything more than negligible.” He was swung a fist at a bloke's face and because it didn’t hurt you haven’t given him a week. Punish the action, not the outcome unless the outcome is they’re okay. Ask my little brother Andrew if an intentional swing to the face has the potential to cause harm. Incredible.
We’ve heard enough about Charlie Cameron being let off for being a nice guy but Tom Barrass can’t escape a week for the same thing. The get-out-of-jail-free card only appears once in the deck apparently.
This is my last point and I am going to swear so beep this out if you want. Tom Barrass is staying in Perth and missing one game for a dangerous tackle. I don’t think there was much more he could’ve done differently. Walters played the game out and isn’t concussed but sure, still give Barrass a week if that’s the stance, protect the head at all costs. I can’t physically watch the Melbourne Demons play football anymore because my brother’s brain is going to be f***ed for the rest of his life and you didn’t think that was enough for a week off.
AFL you are the greatest game in the world, but right now you’re a joke. Your systems for protecting the player and maintaining the integrity of the game are broken and desperately need to be fixed. Before they can be fixed you need to actually understand the criteria you want to govern the game by. It needs to be understandable for the public and it needs to be followed. You can’t pick and choose when to dismiss certain things and when to change your views on others. It has to change otherwise this game is going to turn into something unrecognisable and it’s going to happen very quickly.
Yours Sincerely,
Hamish Brayshaw
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
From a Richmond POV, I would add the inconsistent application of "potential to cause injury" that was trotted out when Marlion bumped that hawks player last year, who was not hit in the head, who got up and played the rest of the game and yet still Marlion got a week. Also the "manifestly inadequate" punishment that Bachar supposedly copped and required the CEO to intervene which I don't believe has happened before or since.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 5 users