AFL Finals Week 1

[tigerpie]

Surely he didn't get wine for someone suffering from concussion who had been knocked out a few days ago?
"I know I killed a heap of your brain cells, here, kill some more!"

You're taking the piss, right?

[Wedgie]

Surely he didn't get wine for someone suffering from concussion who had been knocked out a few days ago?
"I know I killed a heap of your brain cells, here, kill some more!"

You're taking the piss, right?

Yeah mate. Is my humour really that hard to get even after 50,000 posts?
Did laugh at the AFL blog of the case tonight to:
"Maynard's evidence has concluded. He takes a sip of water. His hair is immaculately gelled."

[Wedgie]

It's not sounding good for Maynard on the AFL blog.

Woods (AFL): The AFL's position is that Maynard's conduct was unreasonable in the circumstances.

Woods (AFL): This type of contact isn't common. Leaping forward in the air with force to an opponent running in the opposite direction holds a key risk of badly injuring their opponent. It's a dangerous action to undertake & it breaches the duty of care owed to the other player.

[Wedgie]

LOL, they must be taking the piss now:

Woods (AFL) says players should ask: Is the thing I'm about to do risking the safety of that other player? If the answer is yes, then you've got to be quick and think about a way to do it that's not going to unreasonably risk the safety of the other player.

[MW]

LOL, they must be taking the piss now:

Woods (AFL) says players should ask: Is the thing I'm about to do risking the safety of that other player? If the answer is yes, then you've got to be quick and think about a way to do it that's not going to unreasonably risk the safety of the other player.

This part is not unreasonable. You can't bump, tackle or spoil if you get them high. If you get them fair, play on, but if you choose to take the risk and get them high, you take the consequences. This is no different.

[Wedgie]

LOL, they must be taking the piss now:

Woods (AFL) says players should ask: Is the thing I'm about to do risking the safety of that other player? If the answer is yes, then you've got to be quick and think about a way to do it that's not going to unreasonably risk the safety of the other player.

This part is not unreasonable. You can't bump, tackle or spoil if you get them high. If you get them fair, play on, but if you choose to take the risk and get them high, you take the consequences. This is no different.

I agree with you but this clown is doing more harm than good to the AFL case. I'm imagining a player stopping, putting his hand on his chin and thinking "Hmmm, what should I do here, what is the consequence of what I might do, shall I do this, shall I do that, or shall I do something else"
Meanwhile the ball is 100 metres down the ground.

[Wedgie]

LOL, next update:

The biomechanist has arrived four minutes early. She is officially better than any medical professional I have ever visited.

Despite arriving early, the biomechanist has been put on hold. This would be deeply frustrating for the biomechanist, unless the hold music is good in the Tribunal-verse.

[Wedgie]

Wish I'd gone to uni:

Biomechanist: Once airbone, Maynard had no opportunity to avoid the collision.

[mots02]

Wish I'd gone to uni:

Biomechanist: Once airbone, Maynard had no opportunity to avoid the collision.

This is a moment where we need @psyber to weigh in.

[mots02]

Have just discovered that Cheetah's can change direction in mid air!

Do they need to call in a zoologist to rule out the chance that Maynard could infact be a Cheetah?!

[Wedgie]

This AFL rep has almost completely stuffed an airtight case up. He won't be popular in AFL house.

[DOC]

It is quite obvious.

Given Maynard was in the air, Brayshaw having already kicked the ball had a duty of care to "catch" Maynard.

[Wedgie]

The AFL are in big trouble here, their case and arguments were awful.

[Jimmy_041]

It is quite obvious.

Given Maynard was in the air, Brayshaw having already kicked the ball had a duty of care to "catch" Maynard.

Brayshaw should get 3 for tunnelling

[Vamos]

LOL, next update:

The biomechanist has arrived four minutes early. She is officially better than any medical professional I have ever visited.

Despite arriving early, the biomechanist has been put on hold. This would be deeply frustrating for the biomechanist, unless the hold music is good in the Tribunal-verse.

Time to call in the big gun

5d503aa8-be95-48b4-be46-aede33fe0947_text.gif (861.5 KiB) Viewed 1444 times

[Jimmy_041]

As I saw on Thursday night, Brayshaw deliberately veered into Maynard's path to milk a free
He should get games for tunnelling

6:19PM: BRAYSHAW VEERED INTO MAYNARD’S PATH

Collingwood has pointed to still images from behind the goals to show that Maynard was not on track to hit Brayshaw until the Demon veered into his path.

One of the Magpie arguments has been that Maynard was not in line with Brayshaw when he left the ground and it was Brayshaw, who stepped to the right after kicking, that contributed to contact.

In his evidence, Maynard said he didn’t expect to collect Brayshaw and he moved his arms to the right to smother the ball because he was on a different track to the Melbourne player.

“May I suggest a collision is not inevitable, it is not even likely,” Ihle said.

One of the AFL’s leading arguments was that Maynard was careless in jumping because he was sure to clean up Brayshaw.

[tigerpie]

I'll take a not guilty thanks Jimmie.

[Wedgie]

He's been cleared, the AFL guy really stuffed that up!

[tigerpie]

Well, pile on now haters.

[mighty_tiger_79]

Common sense

Now there will be an appeal