Murphy Pleads GUILTY!!!!

[bergsone]

Agree to disagree with you magic,maybe i played in a different era Head over the ball fair enough report I will take back the soft in some instants but when you say choose to bump,its an instinct to bump taught as kids.Was T West reported?way too inconstant for my liking ,but do you agree they always look worse in slo mo

[Mr Magic]

Agree to disagree with you magic,maybe i played in a different era Head over the ball fair enough report I will take back the soft in some instants but when you say choose to bump,its an instinct to bump taught as kids.Was T West reported?way too inconstant for my liking ,but do you agree they always look worse in slo mo

I'm sure they do always look worse in slo-mo. Because we get to see what actually happened.

I just wonder where it became fashionable to bump a player rather than tackle them in a contested ball situation. It certainly wasn't when I finshed playing 30 years ago.

Somehow this idea of it being 'manly' or 'hard' to bump an unsuspecting opponent has become prevalent. Why? What was 'manly' about Gia's bump on Kosi or Whelan's bump on Ball last year? Both caused severe head trauma to the player who was bumped , neither of whom expected to be bumped/taken out. And yet 'popular opinion' was that neither player intended to cause the damage so therefore it was ok. How can it be accepted that a bump causes the damage that those 2 did and they be deemed ok?

I know it's a 'hobby horse' of mine but I just cannot accept that in a game where the rule makers have decreed that all players have a 'duty of care' to their opponents when they bump that anybody could argue against a penalty for the 'bump' hitting the opponents head.
That the umpires at the time failed to pay a free kick or make a report is of no consequence. They make many mistakes re free kicks on the day.


Surely the 'manly', 'hard' or 'courageous' thing is to actually go and get the footy and not be a 'sniper' waiting for an opportunity to 'pot' some poor unsuspecting bloke with a bump?

[Duggie]

When you compare Murphy's case with the one involving Kozzi and the Dog who hit him last year there is further evidence of inconsistency by the Tribunal. Yes I know the big story in that one was that Kozzi should have seen it coming, however Murphy's opponent did not finish up in hospital.

[rodgerfox]

Surely the 'manly', 'hard' or 'courageous' thing is to actually go and get the footy and not be a 'sniper' waiting for an opportunity to 'pot' some poor unsuspecting bloke with a bump?

But it's not 'manly', 'hard' or 'courageous' if there is no chance you can get hurt doing it.

That's what makes our great (or did) is that you can get seriously hurt within the rules.

[Mr Magic]

Surely the 'manly', 'hard' or 'courageous' thing is to actually go and get the footy and not be a 'sniper' waiting for an opportunity to 'pot' some poor unsuspecting bloke with a bump?

But it's not 'manly', 'hard' or 'courageous' if there is no chance you can get hurt doing it.

That's what makes our great (or did) is that you can get seriously hurt within the rules.

And Murphy's bump connected with his opponent's head which is 'outside the rules' as they are currently.

[Mr Magic]

[quote="rodgerfox

But it's not 'manly', 'hard' or 'courageous' if there is no chance you can get hurt doing it.

Like Goose and his Tiger opponent who collided at the TD?
Like Fiora taking that mark last year?
Like Roo taking that mark against the Swans in 2004?
Like Max taking that mark against the Bulldogs in the pre-season comp when Grant knocked him out?
And countless number of 'manly', hard' and 'courageous' acts performed week in and week out by lots of footballewrs that don't require the 'deliberate picking off' of unsuspecting opponents whose eyes are on the footy.

Rodgefox, was Hocking's 'taking out' of Harves at Geelong an act of a 'manly', 'hard' or 'courageous' player?
Is that the type of act that made our game 'great'?