Exactly. As I previously posted (# 3,789), the behind the goal visions - both from the front and back - show it was only Bradshaw going off his line, veering to the right (quite possibly trying to milk a down-field free kick) that caused the contact.
Yep, basically makes your brain think that was the speed of the incident
Nope, players will being punished for running full pelt at a player and shoulder charging in someone’s head.
It’s a risk reward players will have to weigh up similar to choosing to bump.
Are you suggesting Maynard chose to bump? Bracing for contact and choosing to bump are VASTLY different
What I’m suggesting is written down.
If you are suggesting Maynard chose to bump then we disagree completely.
Gender is irrelevant to me Maggie. She’s overstepped the mark IMO. From reports the match review officer, whose sole job it is decided no case, he’s the experienced one. Not her place or anyone in her position to intervene when it’s not their area of expertise.
He was playing the ball, he didn't run through him like you would in a bump. You're marking it as if it was one.
www.foxsports.com.au
This is what annoys me. Being so focussed on outcome based. Maynard’s total accident results in concussion so immediately viewed seriously, yet players non football acts, through blind luck don’t, get treated less. Simply because of luck. The action should be the ultimate grading, not the outcome.I just read the amendment from last year which I'll post below.
If it goes up as Careless Conduct High contact charge, then if I'm reading it right it could also be given 1 match ban as Medium impact.
However I thought any concussion is deemed severe impact by AFL house?
Can anyone confirm this?
Imo its not careless either as it was not a foreseeable outcome of a smother action.
"The Commission approved the following recommendations relating to the Match Review and Tribunal process to ensure the systems, guidelines and interpretations continue to evolve with the trends of the game.
The amendments are as follows:
1. Head high contact
Previously under the AFL & AFLW Regulations, “strong consideration” was required to be given to the potential to cause injury in certain circumstances. Regulations have therefore been amended as follows:
The potential to cause injury must be factored into the determination of Impact; and
Notwithstanding any other provision of the AFL / AFLW Regulations, any Careless or Intentional Forceful Front-On Conduct or Rough Conduct (High Bumps) where High Contact has been made and that has the potential to cause injury will usually be classified as either Medium, High or Severe Impact (i.e. not Low Impact) even though the extent of the actual physical impact may be low (e.g. the victim player has suffered no apparent injury). This reflects the approach that currently applies to the Impact determination for strikes.
The result of this change will be that, where there is Careless Conduct that is High Contact and has the potential to cause injury, a Medium Impact classification will usually apply, and a one match suspension will be the minimum sanction applied."
AFL cracks down on head-high contact among key 2022 Match Review changes
AFL cracks down on head-high contact among key 2022 Match Review changes
No, I’m suggesting the AFL will mark it that way from next season onwards.
Then you're arguing a hypothetical which likely won't happen and is pretty irrelevant to the current situation at hand with Bruzzy.
