Rnd 22 Swans v Kangaroos Aug 20 Hobart

[dejavoodoo44]

They can classify it whatever they like, but if JPK or Hanners who play the game identical to Sloane, very hard and very fair got two weeks for that this board would be in meltdown. And rightly so, shocking decision...

As opposed to Hawthorn's 'dark personality triad' of Mitchell, Hodge and Lewis, who constantly commit not so random acts of violence, but rarely get suspended.

[Meg]

They can classify it whatever they like, but if JPK or Hanners who play the game identical to Sloane, very hard and very fair got two weeks for that this board would be in meltdown. And rightly so, shocking decision...

Not a case of "whatever they like" but classified according to the tribunal guidelines. I was watching the game and as soon as I saw it I expected it to be penalised.

Had it been a Swans player I would have (with sadness) expected exactly the same penalty. I agree this board might very well go into meltdown - that doesn't mean it would not be the correct decision under the current rules.

[Ludwig]

I thought the one Boomer Harvey got away with the previous week was worse than Sloane's. Boomer's was clearly intentional, as was the Lewis punch. The way the grading system works it seems fair to have the incident graded careless and medium impact, but for me, the intentional nature of the other 2 acts should engender at penalty equal to Sloane's.

[Meg]

I thought the one Boomer Harvey got away with the previous week was worse than Sloane's. Boomer's was clearly intentional, as was the Lewis punch. The way the grading system works it seems fair to have the incident graded careless and medium impact, but for me, the intentional nature of the other 2 acts should engender at penalty equal to Sloane's.

The grading system only comes into effect if the MRP first determines that an incident is a "classifiable offence". The Lewis hit was very glancing - Lycett simply got up and played on without even rubbing his jaw. If it had been a full-blooded punch which had hurt Lycett the MRP might very well have formed a different view.

[i'm-uninformed2]

This is the problem with a system measuring on outcome and injury, as opposed to action.

Sloane's action was clumsy and a bit late, but not going to break a jaw like Lewis if he connected properly.

I'm still stunned at how lightly Hodge got off last year for an action that was dangerous beyond belief when he almost snapped Wingard's neck on the behind post.

The AFL needs to think about what it wants to achieve, not what it wants to punish.

[Sandrevan]

Watching on TV it looked like North had the advantage for most of the game. I kept wondering why the ball spent so much time in our back half. Great defensive work by the Swans to keep them out. I'm not big on conspiracy theories wrt umpiring but it was very hard not to see Schmitts bias. During the 4th quarter I kept on thinking that Schmitt really wants North to win this one. It you look at the stats for the game the only one we won was the final score - where it really matters I suppose.
Despite Schmitts help North still couldn't win the game. If you can't kick straight you're not going to win.
Regarding umpiring in general I get the feeling that luck favours the brave. If umpires are told to minimize stoppages to keep the game moving then the team that takes on the game will find an advantage. I thought North took on the game more than the Swans and if they had kicked slightly better would have won easily. I don't see this as universal - just a general observation.
Who would have thought us Swans supporters would be barracking for Collingwood? I will be when they play the pees and poos next week. Collingwood beat GWS recently so why can't they beat hawthorn. Hawthorn in 5-8 - priceless!

[mcs]

Watching on TV it looked like North had the advantage for most of the game. I kept wondering why the ball spent so much time in our back half. Great defensive work by the Swans to keep them out. I'm not big on conspiracy theories wrt umpiring but it was very hard not to see Schmitts bias. During the 4th quarter I kept on thinking that Schmitt really wants North to win this one. It you look at the stats for the game the only one we won was the final score - where it really matters I suppose.
Despite Schmitts help North still couldn't win the game. If you can't kick straight you're not going to win.
Regarding umpiring in general I get the feeling that luck favours the brave. If umpires are told to minimize stoppages to keep the game moving then the team that takes on the game will find an advantage. I thought North took on the game more than the Swans and if they had kicked slightly better would have won easily. I don't see this as universal - just a general observation.
Who would have thought us Swans supporters would be barracking for Collingwood? I will be when they play the pees and poos next week. Collingwood beat GWS recently so why can't they beat hawthorn. Hawthorn in 5-8 - priceless!

We really struggled due to Buddy struggling to get into the game to get our forward structure working well - hence our transition broke down across the middle on many an occasion. While north had a lot of possession and dominated some play, they looked like the mid table team they are. Yes they would of won if they had of kicked straight, but I have little doubt that, barring some miracles for them, they'll be nothing but cannon fodder come finals time. I fancy GWS to absolutely smash them should they meet in Week 1 at Spotless.

[stevoswan]

This is the problem with a system measuring on outcome and injury, as opposed to action.

Sloane's action was clumsy and a bit late, but not going to break a jaw like Lewis if he connected properly.

I'm still stunned at how lightly Hodge got off last year for an action that was dangerous beyond belief when he almost snapped Wingard's neck on the behind post.

The AFL needs to think about what it wants to achieve, not what it wants to punish.

Spot on. Week in, week out we see incidents that can be summed up as a 'dirty act' where the perpetrator was just lucky the outcome wasn't drastic (Lewis, S. Mitchell, Hodge, Rioli), and they get a slap on the wrist or cleared......but it's STILL a dirty act!! On the other hand, we see incidents where the intent wasn't dirty but the outcome was bad (Sloan), and they get punished. It's very frustrating to know that there are former footy players on the MRP, FFS you would think they would know better!