How is the Weid incident remotely the same??? In what reality is there any time in a football game where your elbow arm and or hip contacting the oppositions head gets you a free kick? Once again thats the part you keep refusing to address - Archer’s action earns him a free kick in almost every other incident. The AFL has encouraged players to attack the contest from the front because they changed the actual written rules to reward that attack when it results in contact below the knees. You know this you know you can’t find a single example of contact below the knees being suspended before this yet you still maintain Archer somehow should have known this would be the one exception to the rule.
Yep
Seriously dude, move on.
I’ve shown you an identical scenario from last year, and you are ranting about it being different. I don’t know how you think it is different, and I don’t care.
I haven’t addressed the forceful contact below the knees, because both players have simultaneously made mistakes. 1 player should not have gone to ground. The other should not have charged at him recklessly. They are not mutually exclusive.
I also don’t care if you agree with me. And I’m certainly not agreeing with you.
Move on.
Seriously dude, champ, mate, cobber take your own advice & move on if you want to.
If you think Weid’s impact with his tucked in arm & hip, entering the contest from the side is somehow “identical” to Archer’s below the knees front on impact, then you are well & truly cooked.
If you can finally admit that Cleary made a mistake, how can you possibly still maintain that Archer should be suspended for 3 weeks? Its just against logic. The ONLY reason he’s suspended is because of the outcome. If you are happy for that type of reactive retributive adjudicating then at least say that you don’t care about rules & precedent. Don’t try to say the rules justify it or that the AFL have been trying to change Archer’s actions because everything before this has encouraged Archer to do exactly what he did.
1 Like
Welcome to the ignore list, you’ll have great company there.
Why would you possibly imagine I would care? Bye Felicia.
Good and about time. Oh and Yze, it’s the AFL, of course they change rules mid-season, they do whatever the hell they feel like, especially Christian when it comes to Essendon.
RICHMOND forward Rhyan Mansell has copped a three-match suspension for a push on Liam O’Connell that resulted in the St Kilda defender being concussed.
O’Connell was shoved into the direction of Richmond spearhead Tom Lynch during the first quarter of the Saints’ 82-point demolition at Marvel Stadium on Saturday.
When attacking the ball, Lynch unintentionally collided with O’Connell, leaving the Irishman dazed and he was subbed out of the contest shortly after.
Players pushing opponents into dangerous positions has emerged as a trend this season, but the Match Review Officer had not suspended anyone for the act before this week.
The AFL recently issued a memo to clubs warning them of the dangers of recklessly pushing other players.
Tigers coach Adem Yze made sure to reference that incident when asked about Mansell’s push after Saturday’s loss.
“Based on previous incidents, I don’t think that has been an issue,” Yze said.
"So hopefully ours isn’t either.
"We had Sammy Lalor break his jaw, if it is a similar incident, so it’s pretty hard to change the rules during the season."
1 Like
Should really have always been a suspension given how dangerous it is (and I say this as someone who used to run their opponents into similar situations all the time).
2 Likes
Also, the meltdown from the Tigger supporters on Big Footy is hilarious.
Absolutely, it was really bad. If there are examples where this hasn’t been penalised in the past, then they are right to change the precedent.
Was watching fox footy where Jack Riewoldt was flying the flag for his club/I mean giving an unbiased media perspective… He asked how was he supposed to know there was oncoming traffic, given he wasn’t looking in the direction.
■■■■■■■ lol. He was very specifically positioning himself to be perfectly front and square of this exact traffic he didn’t know was coming, rather than make a play for the actual ball as you would hope he would if there was no said Richmond player doing so already.
There was one as recently as this pre-season lol.
Trigger a memo to go out to the clubs explicitly stating they would be cracking down on it.
Is it just me or is it happening a lot more than previously?
I don’t remember it being much of an issue in the past.
It’s the classic “make an example of it” suspension, and yeah it is a dog act FWIW
I just think it’s being highlighted more personally
I can remember a few years back where May knocked Martin out during a Lions vs GC game, I always felt that Ablett should have copped a suspension too - for pushing Martin right into May’s path. It looked absolutely deliberate.
The difference there is that May elected to perform a “non-footballing act”.
Would be a different case if May hadn’t overrun the ball and flushed Martin in the jaw.
We are challenging Hobbs’ staging fine
27 Likes
Tigers challenging
1 Like
Are we the only club that has players charged for staging?
Is there any video of this one?
1 Like
Happy that we’re challenging even though the cost of the appeal is probably 3 x the fine. Good to see us standing up for the players at last.
16 Likes