AFL Round 18

[Vamos]

Calm down Ace, clearly taking the piss. Nothing in either incident.

[woodublieve12]

Calm down Ace, clearly taking the piss. Nothing in either incident.

Nah I am cool mate. Genuinely thought you were being seriously hence why I laughed.

Zero malice in either.

[Eagles2014]

Heeney suspension stands

will no doubt be appealed again

all for show!

Predicted how this would play out, all going to plan. Will now do the final appeal and will get off. Was so predictable.

[Booney]

I'm lost here, people can't see the difference between Heeney and Zerk-Thatcher?

This is the rule :

In addition, the guidelines for the grading of striking have been strengthened to increase the onus on players to not commit a strike even when seeking to fend and push their opponent. In instances where a player intends to forcefully push or fend an opposition player off the ball (including to gain separation for the purpose of contesting the ball) and the effect is that the player “strikes” their opponent, the strike will usually be graded as Intentional rather than Careless.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1074844/ame ... -afl-rules

Heeney is clearly looking to push off his opponent, Zerk-Thatcher is not.

As for the Rankine one, great way to waste $10k and 45 minutes.

[tigerpie]

Crows may as well of donated $10k to the AFL.
No chance they're going to reduce it.

Heeney, like Gaff, was a little unlucky that his opponents head just happened to be where where his swinging hand was.
But according to the "guidelines" he's gone for one.

[woodublieve12]

I'm lost here, people can't see the difference between Heeney and Zerk-Thatcher?

This is the rule :

In addition, the guidelines for the grading of striking have been strengthened to increase the onus on players to not commit a strike even when seeking to fend and push their opponent. In instances where a player intends to forcefully push or fend an opposition player off the ball (including to gain separation for the purpose of contesting the ball) and the effect is that the player “strikes” their opponent, the strike will usually be graded as Intentional rather than Careless.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1074844/ame ... -afl-rules

Heeney is clearly looking to push off his opponent, Zerk-Thatcher is not.

As for the Rankine one, great way to waste $10k and 45 minutes.

Same action, except one is an defensive act and the other is forward act. Just because Zerk-Thatcher is a defender he gets off, other end of the ground he gets a game.
Heeney was clearly trying to swipe the defenders arm away.
Neither were intentional.

[Eagles2014]

Crows may as well of donated $10k to the AFL.
No chance they're going to reduce it.

Heeney, like Gaff, was a little unlucky that his opponents head just happened to be where where his swinging hand was.
But according to the "guidelines" he's gone for one.

Comparing the Heeney one to the Gaff one is ridiculous, they are nothing alike.

One was accidental and the other was a king hit.

Heeney will get off at the last appeal process and rightly so.

[tigerpie]

Crows may as well of donated $10k to the AFL.
No chance they're going to reduce it.

Heeney, like Gaff, was a little unlucky that his opponents head just happened to be where where his swinging hand was.
But according to the "guidelines" he's gone for one.

Comparing the Heeney one to the Gaff one is ridiculous, they are nothing alike.

One was accidental and the other was a king hit.

Heeney will get off at the last appeal process and rightly so.

The only comparison I made was that the outcome wasn't intentional.
Gaffs was meant to be a punch to the chest...brayshaws head dropped so got him in the jaw.
Heeney similar in that he never meant to hit him in the head.

[Booney]

I'm lost here, people can't see the difference between Heeney and Zerk-Thatcher?

This is the rule :

In addition, the guidelines for the grading of striking have been strengthened to increase the onus on players to not commit a strike even when seeking to fend and push their opponent. In instances where a player intends to forcefully push or fend an opposition player off the ball (including to gain separation for the purpose of contesting the ball) and the effect is that the player “strikes” their opponent, the strike will usually be graded as Intentional rather than Careless.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1074844/ame ... -afl-rules

Heeney is clearly looking to push off his opponent, Zerk-Thatcher is not.

As for the Rankine one, great way to waste $10k and 45 minutes.

Same action, except one is an defensive act and the other is forward act. Just because Zerk-Thatcher is a defender he gets off, other end of the ground he gets a game.
Heeney was clearly trying to swipe the defenders arm away.
Neither were intentional.

Heeney was according to the rule I posted above.

It's exactly why Heeney got one ( and failed in his attempt to have it thrown out ) and BZK didn't. The rule is quite clear.

[MW]

They are now punishing the act based on the outcome only.

Heeney act to swing the arm back was 'intentional'. if he misses, or gets him in the chest, no case. If he gets him in the head and no blood, probably a fine. If he draws blood, 1 week. If he concusses him, 3-4 weeks.

Same as Rankine, if that bump just got him in the chest, its a free kick and nothing else. Because of the head clash and concussion its 4 weeks.

The players intention on the area of contact is now irrelevant, its the intention of the act.

[dedja]

They are now punishing the act based on the outcome only.

Heeney act to swing the arm back was 'intentional'. if he misses, or gets him in the chest, no case. If he gets him in the head and no blood, probably a fine. If he draws blood, 1 week. If he concusses him, 3-4 weeks.

Same as Rankine, if that bump just got him in the chest, its a free kick and nothing else. Because of the head clash and concussion its 4 weeks.

The players intention on the area of contact is now irrelevant, its the intention of the act.

The players intention on the area of contact is now irrelevant, its the result of the act.

[MW]

They are now punishing the act based on the outcome only.

Heeney act to swing the arm back was 'intentional'. if he misses, or gets him in the chest, no case. If he gets him in the head and no blood, probably a fine. If he draws blood, 1 week. If he concusses him, 3-4 weeks.

Same as Rankine, if that bump just got him in the chest, its a free kick and nothing else. Because of the head clash and concussion its 4 weeks.

The players intention on the area of contact is now irrelevant, its the intention of the act.

The players intention on the area of contact is now irrelevant, its the result of the act.

Its both

[Bum Crack]

Ok, who will win in round 18 or am I looking at the wrong page?

[Booney]

They are now punishing the act based on the outcome only.

Heeney act to swing the arm back was 'intentional'. if he misses, or gets him in the chest, no case. If he gets him in the head and no blood, probably a fine. If he draws blood, 1 week. If he concusses him, 3-4 weeks.

Same as Rankine, if that bump just got him in the chest, its a free kick and nothing else. Because of the head clash and concussion its 4 weeks.

The players intention on the area of contact is now irrelevant, its the intention of the act.

Correct. They are actually trying to differentiate "football acts" from non-football acts and I think most would agree Rankines was not and now Heeney's is deemed not to be.

They also have made it clear any such incident the onus is on the player who elected to do that action, bump, lash out etc.

[Booney]

via Tom Morris

How about this from Jeremy McGovern...

The airlines wouldn't allow him to fly home due to a punctured lung & broken rib, so he drove to Adelaide overnight, where his wife met him having flown in from Perth.

Together they are now driving across the Nullarbor in a bid to be back in time for a possible Adam Simpson farewell game.

McGovern & Simpson remain close and he wouldn't be driving from Melbourne to Perth (4ish days in the car) if not to pay tribute to Simpson.

[Lightning McQueen]

Heeney, like Gaff, was a little unlucky that his opponents head just happened to be where where his swinging hand was.

[mots02]

Heeney, like Gaff, was a little unlucky that his opponents head just happened to be where where his swinging hand was.

I'm staying out of this one

[Booney]

[Armchair expert]

Who else is jumped for the jumper clash on Friday night?

[stan]

via Tom Morris

How about this from Jeremy McGovern...

The airlines wouldn't allow him to fly home due to a punctured lung & broken rib, so he drove to Adelaide overnight, where his wife met him having flown in from Perth.

Together they are now driving across the Nullarbor in a bid to be back in time for a possible Adam Simpson farewell game.

McGovern & Simpson remain close and he wouldn't be driving from Melbourne to Perth (4ish days in the car) if not to pay tribute to Simpson.

Turns out he won't coach this weekend, he was offered the farewell game to coach but it wasn't confirmed as per the debacle at the presser or what I read as :wild scenes" lol.

A few things. Probably good to have that sorted before you have the presser.

Also a good thing to have sorted before your players drive across the country to get home.

Regardless, Simpson gets a Mil $$$ payout now and we start looking for a new coach.