Changes for the Prelim Final v Fremantle

[BillyRayCypress]

The main contact was on his body and to me it looked like he knocked the wind out of him.

Ted didn't raise his arm before or during contact nor did he leave the ground. Without being biased, it may be deemed late but not like the Buddy or the hit by Chapman on Friday night. Chapman's hit nearly gave the Dockers player whiplash.

I think it will be based on how they classify it and Ted's record.

Another point is that both Buddy and Chapman's hits were immediately reported whereas this wasn't. Franklins shoulder made contact to the head because he was so much taller than Mal.

[Rob2120]

Teddy will only get a reprimand with an early plea. The contact will get adjudged as low impact since he could continue playing and reckless since it was a legitimate bump. The Buddy bump was also low impact.

[sharp9]

I thought the Richards bump was a good Shepard within 5 metres of the ball, while Frankin and Chapman were late shots on the ball carrier. That's a big difference!

Sorry, are you nuts? It's not a "GOOD" bump if you put the point of your shoulder into someone's jaw. Chapman was not late, either. Buddy was and was very lucky to only get a week. Should have been Reckless not Negligent.

If Teddy or Chapman get rated "low" rather then "medium" impact then they might get off with good behaviour. High contact and Negligent is a given.

- - - Updated - - -

Teddy should be ok. I think it's inconclusive that he actually hit him in the head.

Er....no.

- - - Updated - - -

but the game has definitely become soft if a good hard shepherd, a legal and legitimate tactic, costs you playing in a PF.

IT'S NOT LEGAL TO BUMP IN THE HEAD....WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?????

- - - Updated - - -

Teddy will only get a reprimand with an early plea. The contact will get adjudged as low impact since he could continue playing and reckless since it was a legitimate bump. The Buddy bump was also low impact.

Sorry, wrong there, Buddy bump medium....reprimand if rated low....same for Chapman unless he has carry over points.

[Triple B]

IT'S NOT LEGAL TO BUMP IN THE HEAD....WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?????

We people aren't as convinced as you that Teddy got him in the head, but feel free to shout at people and call them 'nuts'. You make a compelling case..

[ernie koala]

Running past the ball is irrelevant in shepherding situations.

It's almost a requirement, is it not?

Your right...but...The relevance of running past the ball is that it shows intent.

If it is deemed that he hit him in the head, then due to intent it would most likely be graded as reckless. Which even with low impact is 2 weeks...down to 1 with an early plea.

I think his best hope is that the contact is either deemed not sufficient to warrant a sanction. Or that he is deemed to have hit him in the upper body and not the head.

I have my fingers crossed but after looking again at the footage, I reckon he's in trouble .

[Bloodthirsty]

I just commented about this in the wrong thread, but the gist of it is this: It is entirely possible that the MRP will judge based on how it LOOKED. It was not the same as Buddy's or Chapman's, but thanks to the talented and wonderful team at Channel 7, they put all 3 freeze frames of the bumps next to each other and said "yep, they certainly look the same". So the ignorant of the football public will be baying for blood, and the MRP might give it to them. Expect the MRP to suddenly have an epic epiphany with a newfound 'consistency', which will ironically be totally inconsistent. The MRP will suddenly care about how their decision looks to the public.

[On-Baller]

Unfortunately the media have already decided Richards cant get off, the fact he ran a few steps to lay the bump doesnt help as even if his intentions were harmless it seemed to slip high.

Out :Richards,Tippett,Mitchell
In:LRT,Towers,Lamb

I know once again people will say you cant debut someone in a final but Towers has earnt his chance and being mature age i believe he will be more than up for it. And for those that week in and week out say you have to go like for like sorry but your wrong, players already in the team can be shuffled you see.

[sharp9]

Your right...but...The relevance of running past the ball is that it shows intent.

If it is deemed that he hit him in the head, then due to intent it would most likely be graded as reckless. Which even with low impact is 2 weeks...down to 1 with an early plea.

Sorry but this is just not true....the grading between Reckless and Negligent is to do with whether a player makes an action in which he should reasonably expect to make high contact...or whether it was a normal bump with accidental high contact. Buddy was late (for example) which is the same as running past the ball in terms of intent. In all of these examples there is no contest that the AIM of the contact was a bump. The "running past the player" argument is only when someone tries to argue they were playing the ball.

- - - Updated - - -

We people aren't as convinced as you that Teddy got him in the head, but feel free to shout at people and call them 'nuts'. You make a compelling case..

Yes I do (make a compelling case)....sometimes people need to be shouted at to wake them up. There are still fans out there who do not understand that bumping in the head is illegal and that contact hard enough to be considered "low impact" rather than just a free kick WILL result in suspension or points. My shouting was a considered option to draw attention. Seems to have worked ;-)

The replay is very clear that there was contact to the head. If you can watch that not see head contact the I think epithet "nuts" is a) Fair and b) Mild enough to be well within the bounds of banter between people barracking for the same team

A possibly valid argument might be "There was so much body contact that I'm hoping the head contact part of it will be considered not hard enough to constitute a report." But even if the contact is deemed "Low" rather than "Medium" it would still only be a reprimand for Teddy. Traditionalists and Hawkers were all screaming that Malceski's hit was only Low not Medium....so we'll see if Leigh Mathews et al go after Teddy in the way hey DID NOT go after Buddy.

[wolftone57]

We people aren't as convinced as you that Teddy got him in the head, but feel free to shout at people and call them 'nuts'. You make a compelling case..

Shouting aside you might like to get a pair of glasses. I have looked at the incident and the top Teddy's shoulder clearly hits Casboult's jaw. It wasn't deliberate just an accident but they are hot on any head high hits this year. If they are playing the same rules as during the H & A games he will get a week. If they play by finals rules he will get a reprimand.

LRT was VERY good in the NEAFL GF. So was Deano.

In; Benny if fit if not Lambchop, LRT or Xav, Deano or Timbo.

BJ was ok but I don't think did enough to be considered. Pity Robbo & Lloydy are not on the Seniors list as they were smoking hot today. So was Tony A.

[BillyRayCypress]

Pity Robbo & Lloydy are not on the Seniors list as they were smoking hot today. So was Tony A.

They were playing Belconnen and hardly any comparison to Fremantle.

Triple B has a pair of Elton John Rocket Man glasses so I trust what he says.

[wolftone57]

They were playing Belconnen and hardly any comparison to Fremantle.

Triple B has a pair of Elton John Rocket Man glasses so I trust what he says.

Sorry BillyRay but I have seen the incident in slo mo on quite a few occasions now. I watched AFL Game Day and they looked at the Teddy incident and Chappy's incident. They seemed to think there wasn't much difference except the Port player was hurt for a while. they seemed to think because both players basically got up and carried on then there is little to answer for in a finals situation. But the vision did show that both players hit high. In slow motion it is really obvious.

[Captain]

Sorry BillyRay but I have seen the incident in slo mo on quite a few occasions now. I watched AFL Game Day and they looked at the Teddy incident and Chappy's incident. They seemed to think there wasn't much difference except the Port player was hurt for a while. they seemed to think because both players basically got up and carried on then there is little to answer for in a finals situation. But the vision did show that both players hit high. In slow motion it is really obvious.

Maybe you have special powers and also see things that others don't?

Watching the bump on slow motion is like watching a goal review. Too hard to definitively tell.

[Rob-bloods]

On Richards interestingly Channel 7 had him in trouble the 3AW team saw no problem Saturday night. At most a week and off with a guilty plea.

[dimelb]

The Age has an article titled "Cats sweat on Chapman", but it covers Ted as well. There is a box in the print edition that didn't make it into the online edition. It reads as follows:
REPORTS' PREDICTIONS
Reported: Paul Chapman (Geel) rough conduct to Robbie Gray (PA). Reckless, low impact, hihi contact. 225 points (2 matches); 168.75 points with guity plea (1 match)
Ted Richards (Syd) rough conduct to Levi Casboult (Carl). Negligent, low impact, high contact. 125 points (1 match); 93.75 with guilty plea (reprimand).
That's how I saw it. Chapman left the ground, Ted didn't; seems to make a difference with the panel.

[Doctor]

The Age has an article titled "Cats sweat on Chapman", but it covers Ted as well. There is a box in the print edition that didn't make it into the online edition. It reads as follows:
REPORTS' PREDICTIONS
Reported: Paul Chapman (Geel) rough conduct to Robbie Gray (PA). Reckless, low impact, hihi contact. 225 points (2 matches); 168.75 points with guity plea (1 match)
Ted Richards (Syd) rough conduct to Levi Casboult (Carl). Negligent, low impact, high contact. 125 points (1 match); 93.75 with guilty plea (reprimand).
That's how I saw it. Chapman left the ground, Ted didn't; seems to make a difference with the panel.

I saw them the same way. If he's not graded that way I'd imagine that the Swans will contest the grading and then accept the reprimand if they are successful in getting the grading changed.