News Injuries & Suspensions

Joined
13 Jun 2022
Messages
5,228
Likes
17,245
AFL Club
St Kilda
People are crazy if they think Day will get off. I don't agree he should've been suspended but I'm pretty confident the AFL won't be backing down from this.
I don't see why it's a 'dangerous tackle' really, I was freeze-framing through it, Day wasn't trying to hurt him, it was just a case of see guy with the ball, get guy with the ball.
He wasn't even looking at him whilst tackling him, he just wanted to bring him to ground and it all happened in a split second. there was no deliberate slinging around 180 degrees or whatever....no deliberate pinning or chicken winging of the arm, It was instantaneous.
Close wasn't even hurt, it just looked bad, that doesn't make it bad.
I think he should get off, or at least get a week reduced.
 
Joined
24 Feb 2015
Messages
6,697
Likes
30,160
AFL Club
Sydney
I don't see why it's a 'dangerous tackle' really, I was freeze-framing through it, Day wasn't trying to hurt him, it was just a case of see guy with the ball, get guy with the ball.
He wasn't even looking at him whilst tackling him, he just wanted to bring him to ground and it all happened in a split second. there was no deliberate slinging around 180 degrees or whatever....no deliberate pinning or chicken winging of the arm, It was instantaneous.
Close wasn't even hurt, it just looked bad, that doesn't make it bad.
I think he should get off, or at least get a week reduced.
Was it Meek or Reeves that had that falcon, ball hit him squarely in the forehead. I'm pretty sure next season the guy who kicked it will be suspended for a week as it was reckless, high and medium impact - head is sacred. AFL don't care about anything that may resemble logic in these things.
 
Joined
13 Jun 2022
Messages
5,228
Likes
17,245
AFL Club
St Kilda
Was it Meek or Reeves that had that falcon, ball hit him squarely in the forehead. I'm pretty sure next season the guy who kicked it will be suspended for a week as it was reckless, high and medium impact - head is sacred. AFL don't care about anything that may resemble logic in these things.
Hopefully their high priced Lawyer can talk some sense and freeze-frame through the footage, there's a difference between deliberately dangerous and accidental, either way, the guy wasn't even hurt so what's the big deal?
 
Joined
7 Mar 2014
Messages
314
Likes
977
AFL Club
Collingwood
Hopefully their high priced Lawyer can talk some sense and freeze-frame through the footage, there's a difference between deliberately dangerous and accidental, either way, the guy wasn't even hurt so what's the big deal?
The problem lies with the tackle , this time no one got hurt next time some one will get hurt , thats what they are trying to eliminate from tackles like that ever happening easier said than done .
I think it should be 1 week only .
 
Joined
13 Jun 2022
Messages
5,228
Likes
17,245
AFL Club
St Kilda
The problem lies with the tackle , this time no one got hurt next time some one will get hurt , thats what they are trying to eliminate from tackles like that ever happening easier said than done .
I think it should be 1 week only .
What was the problem with the tackle though?...is he supposed to not tackle the guy in case it turns out to be dangerous? It's not like he had time to think what kind of tackle he was gonna do, he just tackled him cause he was there in front of him.
 
Joined
24 Feb 2015
Messages
6,697
Likes
30,160
AFL Club
Sydney
I think half the problem was probably with the medical report submitted by Geelong. I mean Close had another 12 or more disposals and kicked 2 goals after the tackle didn’t he but I wouldn’t put it pass Geelong stretching the truth a little
 
Joined
15 Mar 2019
Messages
15,033
Likes
57,912
AFL Club
Hawthorn
They were just delaying subbing him off with injury because the Cats love a late out










... I'll get me coat
I know you are making a joke, but they actually did that in a way with Bews. Significant head clash in the 2nd quarter, not even properly tested for concussion and comes back on after 6 mins (it is meant to be a mandatory 15 mins), then gets subbed at half time with concussion symptoms. Yet the AFL still rely on the Cats' medical report as a key factor in rubbing out a player, when their medical staff can't even follow standard protocols...

https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/geel...lowed-defender-jed-bews-to-play-on-c-10311202

When even BT realises he probably shouldn't have come back on when he did, it says a bit about the quality of their medical staff. They were happy to let Close play on, and he actually played much better after that tackle than he did in the first half, so can't have been too bad.
 
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
4,890
Likes
11,150
AFL Club
West Coast
I don't see why it's a 'dangerous tackle' really, I was freeze-framing through it, Day wasn't trying to hurt him, it was just a case of see guy with the ball, get guy with the ball.
He wasn't even looking at him whilst tackling him, he just wanted to bring him to ground and it all happened in a split second. there was no deliberate slinging around 180 degrees or whatever....no deliberate pinning or chicken winging of the arm, It was instantaneous.
Close wasn't even hurt, it just looked bad, that doesn't make it bad.
I think he should get off, or at least get a week reduced.
Was it Meek or Reeves that had that falcon, ball hit him squarely in the forehead. I'm pretty sure next season the guy who kicked it will be suspended for a week as it was reckless, high and medium impact - head is sacred. AFL don't care about anything that may resemble logic in these things.
Hopefully their high priced Lawyer can talk some sense and freeze-frame through the footage, there's a difference between deliberately dangerous and accidental, either way, the guy wasn't even hurt so what's the big deal?
The problem lies with the tackle , this time no one got hurt next time some one will get hurt , thats what they are trying to eliminate from tackles like that ever happening easier said than done .
I think it should be 1 week only .
What was the problem with the tackle though?...is he supposed to not tackle the guy in case it turns out to be dangerous? It's not like he had time to think what kind of tackle he was gonna do, he just tackled him cause he was there in front of him.
I think half the problem was probably with the medical report submitted by Geelong. I mean Close had another 12 or more disposals and kicked 2 goals after the tackle didn’t he but I wouldn’t put it pass Geelong stretching the truth a little
Issue is arms pinned. Doesn't need a 2nd action, sling or anything else.

Where they can fight it is two fold.

Impact not high, Close played on, so should be low or medium impact. That at least gets it to one game suspension.

Then they could argue it was the angle of the bodies, Day and Close leaning over which took them to the ground, the action wasn't dangerous, the circumstances created the issue. Is it the camera angle, did Close land on his shoulder first would be another angle. Days legs get caught under Close, did this cause Close to go shoulder/head first into ground. Only the last milliseconds make it look bad where Close body takes a nose dive, hard for Day to create that being under him, more likely leg contact cause the motion.
 

THCLT

BBL|05 Winner
Joined
13 Sep 2014
Messages
18,592
Likes
118,242
AFL Club
North Melb.
Hopefully Day's hearing is before Rohan and we get a decision before the Crows v Blues game!
Will Day trial will be 3.30pm AEST - Honeyball

Prioritised for SuperCoach apparently - no source given
Hopefully this will eventuate to allow you and others to make an informed decision on your trades.
 
Joined
24 Feb 2015
Messages
6,697
Likes
30,160
AFL Club
Sydney
If the challenge fails, does Day’s suspension go to 3 weeks, is that a possibility? That wold really hurt me. I’m content somewhat with 2 weeks holding, comfortable with one week, ecstatic if he doesn’t miss but not sure I can hold if 3-weeks this early.

Such a shame, was happy with the trade in watching his role the previous weeks. Natural midfielder.
 
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
4,890
Likes
11,150
AFL Club
West Coast
If the challenge fails, does Day’s suspension go to 3 weeks, is that a possibility? That wold really hurt me. I’m content somewhat with 2 weeks holding, comfortable with one week, ecstatic if he doesn’t miss but not sure I can hold if 3-weeks this early.

Such a shame, was happy with the trade in watching his role the previous weeks. Natural midfielder.
I don't think that penalty applies any more. The tribunal can exact a harder punishment if prosecution is pushing for it, doubt it does in this case. think this is a one week or let off (maybe not even a fine).
 
Top