MRO Thread

[The Adelaide Connection]

Re: MRO Thread

You might be right but I think it's a week underdone. The week the competition brings in an injury sub particularly because of concussion, a player is knocked out and will very likely miss a couple of weeks himself. The first suspension sets the benchmark for the balance of the season.

Yep, agree. The broken nose is a bit of icing on the optics cake too.

[divvydan]

Re: MRO Thread

Danger has plead guilty but is arguing for high impact and not severe. Seems like he's trying for 2 weeks instead of 3+.

[divvydan]

Re: MRO Thread

Tribunal keeps it as severe impact, 3 weeks for Danger.

[GVGjr]

Re: MRO Thread

Tribunal keeps it as severe impact, 3 weeks for Danger.

It's a tough but understandable penalty.
It also sets the benchmark going forward for the season.

[1eyedog]

Re: MRO Thread

Fantastic. No-one wants to see the best players rubbed out unless it's Dangerfield.

[jeemak]

Re: MRO Thread

Fantastic. No-one wants to see the best players rubbed out unless it's Dangerfield.

Fanboiz like EW not included.

[whythelongface]

Re: MRO Thread

You might be right but I think it's a week underdone. The week the competition brings in an injury sub particularly because of concussion, a player is knocked out and will very likely miss a couple of weeks himself. The first suspension sets the benchmark for the balance of the season.

Good call. Three weeks it is and rightly so. Need to start focusing on changing player behaviour. This certainly sets the precedent for the season. Would he have received the same penalty if his opponent had not of been knocked out and suffered an injury? Understand that this does increase the penalty, however the intent was there (even if the end result was unintentional) - if his opponent had of got up and walked away would he have even received a suspension?

[Hotdog60]

Re: MRO Thread

I don't mind a side on bump mainly when shepherding for your teammate with the ball.
But the front on stuff needs to stop.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: MRO Thread

I don't mind a side on bump mainly when shepherding for your teammate with the ball.
But the front on stuff needs to stop.

The other issue is when you see the full incident, Dangerfield has jumped into Kelly after the ball has gone. Absolutely no excuse for the bump.

[jeemak]

Re: MRO Thread

The front on bump is perfectly fine if you get low and the ball is still in play. Dangerfield decided to lift up, when he could have easily crouched and turned and taken the middle of the body.

[Happy Days]

Re: MRO Thread

Anyone else fully can’t believe he actually got 3 weeks? Like its the right decision I just can’t believe they would totally overlook the Dangerfield Rule like that.

[Topdog]

Re: MRO Thread

He plead guilty despite going to the media earlier and saying he did nothing wrong.

[comrade]

Re: MRO Thread

Anyone else fully can’t believe he actually got 3 weeks? Like its the right decision I just can’t believe they would totally overlook the Dangerfield Rule like that.

The AFL was backed into a corner with the injury sub and concussion protocol, plus all the coverage surrounding head trauma and CTE (Spud Frawley, Tuck etc). As much as they love protecting their stars, the optics would have just been too much for them to handle.

Danger is a tool though. Pleading guilty yet being quoted as saying he didn't see much wrong with it, his lawyer bringing Siri up to define the term 'severe'. Just a goose.

[azabob]

Re: MRO Thread

How is Dangerfield able to play in the VFL today?

[comrade]

Re: MRO Thread

How is Dangerfield able to play in the VFL today?

Not an official match so apparently got approval from AFL.