The Hunter headclash

[MCG-Unit]

Reckless Contact, High Contact, High Impact. Has to be minimum 3 weeks, surely?
No plea deals here.....

No free kick to Clark, I think

Not too much remonstration from Saints players, innit?

It was not reckless. It was intentional. Severe, high with a 4+ week penalty. The moment he went passed the ball and left the ground changes it from reckless to intent.

Might be harder to prove Intent, that's why I went with Reckless

[bigcarl]

Reckless Contact, High Contact, High Impact. Has to be minimum 3 weeks, surely?
No plea deals here.....

No free kick to Clark, I think

Not too much remonstration from Saints players, innit?

It was not reckless. It was intentional. Severe, high with a 4+ week penalty. The moment he went passed the ball and left the ground changes it from reckless to intent.

Might be harder to prove Intent, that's why I went with Reckless

This is the problem. Intent is impossible to prove. Only one player knows and he is not telling. His record suggests he is not the malicious type, but that doesn’t mean he is not the reckless type.

By reckless, I mean trying to get to a contest that you cannot get to.

[CQ SAINT]

There's a few people trying to simplify things and the problem here is that it's not a simple issue

It has ramifications for the future of the game.

A player decides his action when he is approaching a contest. The AFL is trying to change player behaviour and ensure that there is a duty of care for the bloke who is second to a contest

If you have not viewed the side on vision and if you cannot clearly see that Clark has a 2 m advantage on Mackay then you shouldn't be commenting...imo

He broke his jaw. Might have happened without the 2m lead, who knows?
Put simply, Mackay was going harder.
No broken jaw, no argument.
Instead, we move to technique, reckless, severe impact, viewed from any angle.
To avoid it, will umpires have to interpret intent or do we stop the bump all together?

[Scollop]

There’s always grey areas. So tackles and swings of arms and especially bumps...will have to be scrutinised if a player is injured.

There has to be a duty of care from the bloke who is going to be second at a contest.

There has to be a duty of care from the bloke who decides to bump.

You are responsible for the consequences of your actions and the AFL is responsible for ensuring that players change their behaviour

There’s also the bigger issue of behaviour from the top that is copied at lower levels. The rule changes and suspensions will filter down to State level and suburban level footy and make it safer for junior sport too

[perfectionist]

When's the case being heard? Next year?

[SaintPav]

Have they changed the rules since they hung Long twice last year or do they just make it up as they go?

4 weeks.

[sunsaint]

I'm torn on this one
If there is no suspension i would not be overly surprised
Both players were entitled to go for the ball.
Some are clamming that Hunter had possession but the ball only bounced up to his hands the instant the collision occurred. And regardless possession means zilch so I'm not sure why some are even raising this as a point.
If outcome of injury is the only deciding factor, then ok, 1-2 weeks
The interesting thing then becomes what if Mackay got the injury, did Clark owe him a duty of care.

[R. Harvey 3 votes!]

Have they changed the rules since they hung Long twice last year or do they just make it up as they go?

4 weeks.

Yeah it’s perplexing!

You can guarantee if McKay gets off then the next player charged with the same thing will be a St. Kilda player who will then get 4 weeks

[saint64]

Its a no-brainer from my perspective. I have watched it numerous times now and Mackay launches himself off the ground and into Hunter's head. Six weeks.

[magnifisaint]

McKay busted his jaw. That's reckless.
4 weeks.
Next!

[CQ SAINT]

I thought initially it was ok. Then I saw another angle. Can't see much difference to Long's, which at the time I thought was ok. Under these new rules, Id have been rubbed out for life though, so what do I know.

[Gershwin]

Accidental. No intent to hurt. Not even reckless. Hunter unlucky. Move on.

[magnifisaint]

Accidental. No intent to hurt. Not even reckless. Hunter unlucky. Move on.

Nah just careless. 4 weeks.

Next!

[spert]

Accidental. No intent to hurt. Not even reckless. Hunter unlucky. Move on.

For a player going for the ball which was near ground level, McKay was pretty upright at the time he made contact, and he wasn't front-on to the ball, he rotated left

[shanegrambeau]

Accidental. No intent to hurt. Not even reckless. Hunter unlucky. Move on.

For a player going for the ball which was near ground level, McKay was pretty upright at the time he made contact, and he wasn't front-on to the ball, he rotated left

Yep, rotated and his shoulder height was calibrated not fit a pick up of the ball, but braced for impact. The twist is an excuse that will come up as they often curl around a dead ball when multiple players are competing to grab it off the turf.

The Adelaie coach said it was the pivotal point in the game, the moment Adelaide switched on!

For the Adelaide coache’s comments alone, three weeks. For the broken jaw, four. Total seven weeks’

[Banger9798]

Have they changed the rules since they hung Long twice last year or do they just make it up as they go?

4 weeks.

Yeah it’s perplexing!

You can guarantee if McKay gets off then the next player charged with the same thing will be a St. Kilda player who will then get 4 weeks

If it was Ben Long on Selwood, he'd get 4-6 weeks and the media would be calling for 8-10

[saynta]

Gawd, that ape.look alike Dunstan talks some crap.

The f****** crow's feet were off the ground at the point of impact and.the ball was.clearly in Hunter's hands if you look at the stills.

f****** guilty as sin of a negligent act and that's being kind.

[desertsaint]

a life term seems fair, but he plays for adelaide, not us, so who knows? between nothing and four weeks.

[Wayne42]

Mckay = Not Guilty

result just in.

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2021/06/17/ ... ckay-case/

[CURLY]

Will be cleared.

[saynta]

Unfucking believably.

If Long broke Dusty Martin's jam in identical circumstances, he would have got 10 weeks.

[saynta]

Now that moron.Brown is sprouting s***. Make you sick.

[bangaulegend]

I don't like to say I told you so but I told you so

[Gershwin]

Unfucking believably.

If Long broke Dusty Martin's jam in identical circumstances, he would have got 10 weeks.

Stop being a sook. Fair decision.

[saynta]

First time I have liked King's view on anything. He is correct. The others are all f****** living in.the 20th
Century if not the middle ages.