Opinion Injury/Suspension Updates

[I am Cursed :(]

I'm a non owner and Sloan being out helps me in my cash grand final. Having said that - I think his week off is wrong. I think the cut on Ebert's head was unfortunate but it should have been no more than a free kick and a 50m penalty.

I think the AFL in general trigger happy with any contact to the head, particularly if someone comes off bleeding or concussed. There should be more focus on what their intent was, not what the outcome was.

 

[t.thomas6]

I'm a non owner and Sloan being out helps me in my cash grand final. Having said that - I think his week off is wrong. I think the cut on Ebert's head was unfortunate but it should have been no more than a free kick and a 50m penalty.

I think the AFL in general trigger happy with any contact to the head, particularly if someone comes off bleeding or concussed. There should be more focus on what their intent was, not what the outcome was.

I think he has a pretty strong case if he appeals it - especially if they refer to Mitchell and Boomer's incidents.

 

[I am Cursed :(]

I think he has a pretty strong case if he appeals it - especially if they refer to Mitchell and Boomer's incidents.

I think it's too big of a risk. If you watch the vision it looks like he takes his eyes off the ball and is looking at Ebert when he hits him. Obviously you can't know his intention but typically if you take your eye off the ball you are in trouble. FWIW I think his intention was to make him earn it, not necessarily to punch him in the face. Unfortunately, if you get someone high and you aren't purely going for the ball you cop weeks. Ebert spent 20 minutes off the ground getting his face stitched up. I think if there's any uncertainty they will err on the side of the player who got hit.

I think back to Hodgey last year striking Swallow. I think his intention was to hit him with the elbow to the chest, not the face. He got him in the face and got weeks.

I still don't think he should have been rubbed out, but now that he has been I think it's too risky to challenge it.

 

[t.thomas6]

I think it's too big of a risk. If you watch the vision it looks like he takes his eyes off the ball and is looking at Ebert when he hits him. Obviously you can't know his intention but typically if you take your eye off the ball you are in trouble. FWIW I think his intention was to make him earn it, not necessarily to punch him in the face. Unfortunately, if you get someone high and you aren't purely going for the ball you cop weeks. Ebert spent 20 minutes off the ground getting his face stitched up. I think if there's any uncertainty they will err on the side of the player who got hit.

I think back to Hodgey last year striking Swallow. I think his intention was to hit him with the elbow to the chest, not the face. He got him in the face and got weeks.

That's fair enough, but I don't think Mitchell and Boomer had eyes for the ball either and you can't base it on whether the player is opened up or not. Hitting Joel Selwood in the face would have a very different outcome to say a Luke Hodge - it's very subjective.

In saying that - in terms of what happened I believe the 1 week is correct, but both Mitchell and Boomer's decisions were wrong - both should have also got at least a week.

 

[Mr Young]

I wouldn't be risking an appeal with Sloane but it'll be frustrating if we can't roll West Coast at home without him and miss top 2.

 

[stephen]

Sloane accepted the 1-game suspension. Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 

[Matt]

Sloane accepted the 1-game suspension. Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

He shouldn't have been suspended but to risk missing the Crows first final makes it too risky to challenge

Patrick Keane
‏@AFL_PKeane

AFL advises Tribunal will not sit tonight after all players accepted rd22 MRP sanctions.
Heath Grundy $1000.
Rory Sloane 1 game.

 

[Lost In The Sky]

Gotta say the Sloane suspension is a complete joke, Should have been a fine at the most.

A bit torn here as I have him in my team... But as an Eagles fan I'm not too disappointed he will miss as it gives us a better shot at winning. Just have a feeling we will beat Adelaide on friday night.

 

[t.thomas6]

He shouldn't have been suspended but to risk missing the Crows first final makes it too risky to challenge

Patrick Keane
‏@AFL_PKeane

AFL advises Tribunal will not sit tonight after all players accepted rd22 MRP sanctions.
Heath Grundy $1000.
Rory Sloane 1 game.

#finalroundspanner

This week is going to be SO interesting

 

[Bomber18]

He shouldn't have been suspended but to risk missing the Crows first final makes it too risky to challenge

Patrick Keane
‏@AFL_PKeane

AFL advises Tribunal will not sit tonight after all players accepted rd22 MRP sanctions.
Heath Grundy $1000.
Rory Sloane 1 game.

These are my thoughts too.

From an SC perspective, I might have been saved by the threat of a Laird donut all those weeks back. Forced me to grab Docherty who has outscored Sloane. With no trades, I would've been massively handicapped by Sloane.

 

[I am Cursed :(]

Is anyone else nervous about Goldstein being rested with something like "soreness" or "managed" as the excuse? North are locked up in 8th spot so essentially they are playing for nothing. Scott has form too resting players going into finals. The only saving grace would be not wanting to mess with form given they are already stumbling to the finishing post.

0 trades here, would hurt a lot.

 

[Junior Wölf]

I don't think Sloane's suspension was worth it. Look at what Fyfe got away with last year. He had like 2-3 "strikes". Defenders trying to spoil the ball always get the forward around the head. It's a bit hard to change direction in the air (which Sloane was before the ball got to Ebert). I hope it doesn't cost him for the Brownlow.

 

[t.thomas6]

Is anyone else nervous about Goldstein being rested with something like "soreness" or "managed" as the excuse? North are locked up in 8th spot so essentially they are playing for nothing. Scott has form too resting players going into finals. The only saving grace would be not wanting to mess with form given they are already stumbling to the finishing post.

0 trades here, would hurt a lot.

Not really. If things fall the right way (i.e. North win and Dogs win), we could be playing a qualifying final in Melbourne against a team that's just travelled - massive consideration for the coaching staff. That and Goldy prefers to play than to rest. I'd be surprised if it happened with the post-Round 23 bye right around the corner

 

[I am Cursed :(]

Not really. If things fall the right way (i.e. North win and Dogs win), we could be playing a qualifying final in Melbourne against a team that's just travelled - massive consideration for the coaching staff. That and Goldy prefers to play than to rest. I'd be surprised if it happened with the post-Round 23 bye right around the corner

North are 3 wins behind the bulldogs. Even if North lose by 100 points and St Kilda win by 100 points they can't move from 8th spot, so this game is 100% irrelevant in terms of the ladder.

 

[Bomber18]

North are 3 wins behind the bulldogs. Even if North lose by 100 points and St Kilda win by 100 points they can't move from 8th spot, so this game is 100% irrelevant in terms of the ladder.

This is a misconception actually. If North beat Giants they could fall to 6th, if Doggies also beat Freo. Difference is a game in Melbourne vs Doggies or away final against GWS. I'm sure North would much rather play a game in Melbourne.

 

[jmack5]

North are 3 wins behind the bulldogs. Even if North lose by 100 points and St Kilda win by 100 points they can't move from 8th spot, so this game is 100% irrelevant in terms of the ladder.

North can't change their own position on the ladder, but they can change the position of others around them which could influence who they play in their elimination final. Assuming all of the favourites win and North can manage to knock off the giants, they then play the bulldogs in Melbourne for their elimination final.
If North lose to the giants however, they then play the giants away in the elimination final.

 

[Pearcey47]

North are 3 wins behind the bulldogs. Even if North lose by 100 points and St Kilda win by 100 points they can't move from 8th spot, so this game is 100% irrelevant in terms of the ladder.

As t.thomas just said - if North win and Bulldogs win then Bulldogs finish 5th, GWS 6th, hence 1st week of finals will see WB v NM at Etihad.
If North lose and Bulldogs win then GWS finish 5th and NM will have to play GWS in Sydney.

North are certainly not playing for nothing.

 

[Bomber18]

Good little summary of the MRP lotto

https://www.bigfooty.com/news/2016/08/the-sloane-suspension-vs-mitchell-lewis-harvey-in-gifs/

Message is clear. Let's punish the guy actually trying to go for the ball, but don't worry about hits to the face off the ball.

 

[t.thomas6]

North are 3 wins behind the bulldogs. Even if North lose by 100 points and St Kilda win by 100 points they can't move from 8th spot, so this game is 100% irrelevant in terms of the ladder.

This is a misconception actually. If North beat Giants they could fall to 6th, if Doggies also beat Freo. Difference is a game in Melbourne vs Doggies or away final against GWS. I'm sure North would much rather play a game in Melbourne.

You're correct here in terms of North's final position in the 8 IaC. I meant it in terms of how B18 put it

As a North supporter I want the first final to be in Melbourne

 

[Bomber18]

North can't change their own position on the ladder, but they can change the position of others around them which could influence who they play in their elimination final. Assuming all of the favourites win and North can manage to knock off the giants, they then play the bulldogs in Melbourne for their elimination final.
If North lose to the giants however, they then play the giants away in the elimination final.

As t.thomas just said - if North win and Bulldogs win then Bulldogs finish 5th, GWS 6th, hence 1st week of finals will see WB v NM at Etihad.
If North lose and Bulldogs win then GWS finish 5th and NM will have to play GWS in Sydney.

North are certainly not playing for nothing.

You're correct here in terms of North's final position in the 8 IaC. I meant it in terms of how B18 put it

As a North supporter I want the first final to be in Melbourne

I think we got the message across LOL.