Dangerfield cleared

[SaintPelican66]

He punched the ball and .035 of a second later had impact.
Had no time to drop his arm at all.

Whether he is a protected species or saints supporters are biased or have a persecution complex is irrelevant, in this instance he was going for the ball.

I agree he was going for the ball however he made no effort to withdraw his elbow. At the very least it should have been graded as reckless, high impact and high contact and a 3 week sanction. Double sanction for a GF = 6 game ban. But of course the AFL are gutless amateurs and let him off. Disgraceful and goes against society values.

[Devilhead]

He punched the ball and .035 of a second later had impact.
Had no time to drop his arm at all.

Whether he is a protected species or saints supporters are biased or have a persecution complex is irrelevant, in this instance he was going for the ball.

But he had time to bend his arm ??

Are you suggesting the hit was intentional?
I believe it was accidental in the process of going for the ball.

No - not intentional but if he had time to bend his arm then he had time to drop his arm to shirtfront him
Suspension warranted clearly (times 2 for a GF)
Any “non star” of the game would be cited, suspended

You’re joking surely. Slo mo makes what is a complete accident actually look deliberate. So Danger should have lowered his arm in a split second and allowed himself to be ironed out by Vlaustin who was charging straight at him? Get real. He basically kept his arm up as a reflex response to protect himself as any person would if they had someone in their face and a split second to react.

It was an unfortunate collision but I would have been more worried for our game if he was suspended than anything else that happened this year

Sorry Moods if that was Long he would have got 4 weeks

Rules for some - different rules for others

Geelong losing may have factored in as well

[SaintDippa]

Danger getting off. Lifted his forearm, Vlastuin KOed. Laughable. But.... Why aren't we talking about the Cotchin 'tackle' on Ablett three seconds later. What the hell was that! A legs first dive that contacted Ablett around the knee that could have broken his leg. #9 again.
https://www-sportingnews-com.cdn.amppro ... qlnu6jvk0v

[Moods]

Danger getting off. Lifted his forearm, Vlastuin KOed. Laughable. But.... Why aren't we talking about the Cotchin 'tackle' on Ablett three seconds later. What the hell was that! A legs first dive that contacted Ablett around the knee that could have broken his leg. #9 again.
https://www-sportingnews-com.cdn.amppro ... qlnu6jvk0v

We're not talking about Cotchin because his was a perfectly legitimate tackle. We start outlawing that type of tackle we may as well ban tackling as well as the bump. Ablett had a pre existing bung shoulder. 99% of AFL footballer's shoulders would have withstood that tackle no worries. THe tackle didn't get near his leg until the very end.

And Danger didn't lift his elbow. His arm was already in that position. You know why? Because his fist had just contacted the ball. He merely bent the elbow for self protection as almost simultaneously a richmond player was about to crash into him. I would love you blokes to stop looking at slo mo's and watch it in real time. Then tell me that Danger had any other alternative which didn't result in him being flattened himself? I simply can't see any myself. We are now crucifying the guy who is actually going for the ball and the victim is the guy who is trying to lay out the ball player????

[Joffa Burns]

He punched the ball and .035 of a second later had impact.
Had no time to drop his arm at all.

Whether he is a protected species or saints supporters are biased or have a persecution complex is irrelevant, in this instance he was going for the ball.

But he had time to bend his arm ??

Are you suggesting the hit was intentional?
I believe it was accidental in the process of going for the ball.

No - not intentional but if he had time to bend his arm then he had time to drop his arm to shirtfront him
Suspension warranted clearly (times 2 for a GF)
Any “non star” of the game would be cited, suspended

You’re joking surely. Slo mo makes what is a complete accident actually look deliberate. So Danger should have lowered his arm in a split second and allowed himself to be ironed out by Vlaustin who was charging straight at him? Get real. He basically kept his arm up as a reflex response to protect himself as any person would if they had someone in their face and a split second to react.

It was an unfortunate collision but I would have been more worried for our game if he was suspended than anything else that happened this year

Sorry Moods if that was Long he would have got 4 weeks

Rules for some - different rules for others

Geelong losing may have factored in as well

I respect your opinion but I believe it to be speculative.

I was at the Gabba and Long was charging off the back off the square consistently looking for body contact with the Bulldogs mids and guess what, I love it and so do the coaches as they sit him in that position.

His family were sitting in the stands about bay 64 and they appeared to love it more than me

The Bulldogs finally woke up to it sometime in the 3rd 1/4 and Longs opponent was trying to make contact and block his charge at the unsuspecting Bulldog mids.

I didn't feel there was much in Longs incident but felt he'd be suspended as the difference with Long and Dangerfield in my opinion is Long goes for the man and not the ball, Dangerfield (again IMO) was clearly going for the ball then braced as best he could in the allotted time.

Longy just needs to get in a little lower and make sure he doesn't connect with the head.
Hopefully he doesn't change his style of play as he can really hit for such a small wiry guy.

[Moods]

The other thing is players are usually fairly perceptive as to what is outside the rules or considered dangerous. Not one Richmond player remonstrated with Danger afterwards. The ball wasn't that close to either goal, wasn't a crucial time of the game and definitely emotions would have been heightened as it was the beginning of a GF. Still no-one remonstrated. That's because the players knew it was just an unfortunate incident, just as the Cotchin tackle was. All part of the game.

As for Long (which seems to be what everyone is upset about) I too believed that decision was garbage by the afl. Not because Long's actions were lawful though, but because he caused no injury to the player concerned and my view is that if you choose to bump you are only guilty if you cause injury. Therefore Danger and Long are apples and oranges, Danger caused injury but his actions were lawful in that he had no alternative but to protect himself. Long's was unlawful but he caused no injury. They both should have got off.

[Yorkeys]

The divided opinion could suggest that at least a charge should be laid and defended. Can a future defence of an MRO charge be that Michael Christian misunderstood intent and with a sworn affidavit that you didn't mean to hurt you would have to get off, unless MC can prove he reads minds. Or is it policy to give benefit of the doubt on a discretionary basis, considering image, sponsors, club size.... Waving stuff like that through, and Lynch's elbow to Paton's head does the game no good. These guys need to know they cannot be reckless with impunity if AFL is serious about reasonable level of safety. MRO has too much discretion without proven good judgement.

[SaintDippa]

Wish I knew how to repost comments.
@Moods. Don't want to flame, but you can't allow that type of two legged sissor tackle. I'll stand by my viewing that Ablett was lucky that Cotchin didn't brake his leg.

[saynta]

Reckless/Intentional; severe impact; head injury = 2 matches every day of the week; discounted by Brownlow medal winner and AFL poster boy status. Nothing to see here, no time for an AA in peak mental and physical condition to adjust, you see. Is every bloody Australian institution corrupt? Maybe not the Salvos, firefighters and para medics. It is a farce, but sadly so predictable. Hocking and Gil could do a great public service by moving on. Its a pity the footy public can't appeal to an independent judge of the event. So here we are again having to rely on the Kama bus - which can be quite balanced in its outcomes. I am sure Ben L is well aware that life was not meant to be fair.

Well, the salvos have engaged in a bit of kiddie fiddling in the past

[saynta]

He punched the ball and .035 of a second later had impact.
Had no time to drop his arm at all.

I knew he would be cleared - but if he had kept his fist going in the direction of the ball it would have been a glancing blow - instead he 'cocked' and made sure the hit was felt!

Disagree SD, can't see what else he could have done in that situation with the time he had to react/brace.
IMO the intent was to go for the ball and the clash was a consequence of that action.

I can see where you are coming from but he had time to c**k his elbow maybe to defend himself, maybe to cause damage, who know, but the pansie got off . End of story.

He was given the benefit of the doubt. The problem is the majority of the posters on here think that if his colours had been red and black to go with the white, he wouldn't have received that benefit.

[bigcarl]

Different rules for decorated players like Dangerfield. I’ve no doubt Ben Long would have had the book thrown at him for similar. Maybe a month’s holiday.

But Ben has a reputation and form now that is going to be hard to shake. We need him out there, so he’s going to have to modify how he plays.

[saynta]

Different rules for decorated players like Dangerfield. I’ve no doubt Ben Long would have had the book thrown at him for similar. Maybe a month’s holiday.

But Ben has a reputation and form now that is going to be hard to shake. We need him out there, so he’s going to have to modify how he plays.

Dangerfield also has a reputation, for getting off.