ziebell and hayes incidents nothing alike imhfo.....

[stinger]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/eddie-m ... 6454497448

[SainterK]

I agree completely.

Lenny was contesting a mark, feet firmly planted on the ground.

Ziebell left the ground to contest what effectively was a handball receive, I mean, the whistle was never going to blow once he took possession...

People can talk about intent at the ball sure, but the actual incidents were worlds apart.

[Beno88]

Agreed. They are nothing alike.

Hayes stayed on his feet. Ziebell jumped.

Hayes accelerated at the ball with no player in his line of sight. Ziebell accelerated directly at the player.

Contact between Hayes and Hunt was head to head. Contact between Ziebell and Joseph was shoulder/elbow to head.

Hayes was approaching a ball moving towards him. Ziebell was approaching a ball already falling into his opponent's hands.

Hunt suffered no concussion and played out the game. Joseph suffered severe concussion and did not take any further part in the game.

Ziebell was suspended for 3 matches for the same thing just 12 matches earlier, had carry over points and did not make an early plea.

It's chalk and cheese. I saw both incidents up close live and when the Ziebell incident happened I immediately thought he's was in trouble, when the Hayes one happened I thought it was 50, just a bit too late.

[bigcarl]

Special rules for special players.

In this case Lenny being a special player has worked for us.

[Dis Believer]

Special rules for special players.

In this case Lenny being a special player has worked for us.

Don't think it has anything to do with Lenny being special. The thing for me is that Lenny went in with his arms curled into position to take a chest mark. At the last split second he realises he isn't going to get it, and braces for contact as best he can. The difference IMO was that Lenny's intent was the ball, Zeibell's intent was the contest with the opposition player.

[stinger]

Special rules for special players.

In this case Lenny being a special player has worked for us.

Don't think it has anything to do with Lenny being special. The thing for me is that Lenny went in with his arms curled into position to take a chest mark. At the last split second he realises he isn't going to get it, and braces for contact as best he can. The difference IMO was that Lenny's intent was the ball, Zeibell's intent was the contest with the opposition player.

and obviously the decision of the tribunal supports our views......eddy and his mate are both wankers....

[Life Long Saint]

Contact between Hayes and Hunt was head to head. Contact between Ziebell and Joseph was shoulder/elbow to head.

This is the only bit that matters. If Hayes collected Hunt in the head with any other part of his body, he'd be in loads of strife.

Hunt suffered no concussion and played out the game. Joseph suffered severe concussion and did not take any further part in the game.

That is only a consideration if a reportable offence occurred. That goes to the severity of the impact (High, Medium or Low).

[Maklom]

Also Hayes was running the right way towards a chest mark, Ziebell was running the wrong way and had no eyes on the ball.

Don't mind these guys having a go at the MRP cos they got a lot of clout but couldn't they pick a better example? sheesh

[perfectionist]

...Hayes stayed on his feet. Ziebell jumped.

Hayes accelerated at the ball with no player in his line of sight. Ziebell accelerated directly at the player.

Contact between Hayes and Hunt was head to head. Contact between Ziebell and Joseph was shoulder/elbow to head.

Hayes was approaching a ball moving towards him. Ziebell was approaching a ball already falling into his opponent's hands.

Hunt suffered no concussion and played out the game. Joseph suffered severe concussion and did not take any further part in the game.

Ziebell was suspended for 3 matches for the same thing just 12 matches earlier, had carry over points and did not make an early plea.

It's chalk and cheese. I saw both incidents up close live and when the Ziebell incident happened I immediately thought he's was in trouble, when the Hayes one happened I thought it was 50, just a bit too late.

Fair summary.

[maverick]

It wasn't a fifty IMO, he hadn't marked the ball yet.
For me it was only a high contact free kick.

[bigred]

Is it just me or do North whine even more than we do?

[saintkellerm]

Yeah because of their whiney coach, it filters down to the players.

[The Jeff]

It wasn't a fifty IMO, he hadn't marked the ball yet.
For me it was only a high contact free kick.

Agreed. I recall yelling at my TV that a free kick was fair enough for high contact as the mark wasn't completed. The '50' was BS

[Saint_Ash]

It wasn't a fifty IMO, he hadn't marked the ball yet.
For me it was only a high contact free kick.

Agreed. I recall yelling at my TV that a free kick was fair enough for high contact as the mark wasn't completed. The '50' was BS

I was at the ground and haven't seen a replay but it looked late to me.

Also, there are a few on here suggesting it was a free kick for high contact but there are others saying there was no high contact so thats why it wasn't a report. Amazing how different people view things differently.
To me, there was high contact but that contact was made through a head clash. Does that mean its not reportable because contact was made with the head??