Paddy goes *WHACK* D’oh!

[chook23]

It isn't that hard to accept that Paddy was unlucky.

True

But the suspension should be 1 week

Was it High impact

[samoht]

I agree with the onus being on the bumper - but this was an unusual instance.

What about the Richmond player who buried Higgins's head into the turf and caused him to miss 2 weeks?

There are other ways to concuss players other than the sling tackle and the bump - recklessly burying/slamming someone's head in the turf is okay, apparently?

[prwilkinson]

2 weeks... sigh...

[ace]

It isn't that hard to accept that Paddy was unlucky.

True

But the suspension should be 1 week

Was it High impact

High contact but high impact is absurd.

[remboy]

Day has the neck of a bobble head. You could pat him on the back and concuss him!

The vibe says this must go to the High Court.

Get Denis Denuto onto it. Then again, he might miss the rest of the season.

[Mr Magic]

St Kilda officially appealing the decision of MRO

[CQ SAINT]

So it will hopefully go back to 1 week but I'm not sure the impact, (resulting in concussion) will be any less severe. You can't undo concussions through appeal.

[samoht]

Can a "bumper" by definition be passive/stationary?

If you are going to bump, you bump using your own force/momentum.'

There was none used in Ryder's case.

Ryder didn't deliver the bump, he received it and braced for it.

[The_Dud]

I'd be very surprised if it wasn't reduced to 1 week.

[Ghost Like]

I'd be very surprised if it wasn't reduced to 1 week.

So would I but nothing much surprises me anymore with the AFL.

[SaintWiki]

St Kilda will challenge the two-game AFL ban handed down to star veteran Paddy Ryder.



https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/st-kil ... -c-6421471
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/afl/a ... k-Day.html

[saynta]

https://www.saints.com.au/news/1102152/ ... r-sanction

[Sainter_Dad]

St Kilda will challenge the two-game AFL ban handed down to star veteran Paddy Ryder.



https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/st-kil ... -c-6421471
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/afl/a ... k-Day.html

In that image Day has his head bent forward indicating 3 things

- He contributed to the amount of head high contact
- He contributed to the force of said contact
But more importantly

- He was NOT watching where he was running

[Sainternist]

Thank goodness the club has found the fortitude to challenge it. The 2 week is heavy handed AF!

Will Day looks like a crash test dummy in that freeze frame showing the point of impact lol

[Killa]

Look at the player's legs.

The Hawthorn player has both feet off the ground, so in a running motion.

Ryder's both feet are on the ground, his left leg buckled by absorbing the impact of the player running into him.

Ryder is not the aggressor.

He has absorbed the impact of someone running into him.

The Charge needs to be thrown out.

Incidental contact in the passage of the game.

The "crashing into" referred to on the AFL Website was the Hawthorn player, after disposal and with momentum running into a stationary Ryder.

The photograph tells the story.

[kosifantutti]

I would be arguing that he had no choice and the collision was caused by Day changing direction.

[Sainter_Dad]

I would be arguing that he had no choice and the collision was caused by Day changing direction.

LOL - I 100% agree with you

- however -

you fight the battles that you think you can win

[Sainter_Dad]

The Tim English bump has been allowed to be introduced as evidence - things are looking positive

[Harvey]

Can a "bumper" by definition be passive/stationary?
If you are going to bump, you bump using your own force/momentum.'
There was none used in Ryder's case.
Ryder didn't deliver the bump, he received it and braced for it.

In that image Day has his head bent forward indicating 3 things
- He contributed to the amount of head high contact
- He contributed to the force of said contact
- But more importantly, he was NOT watching where he was running

C'mon guys... Quit the victim blaming. Watch the incident in real time - not the ultra slow motion footage of the 1/100th seconds before impact.
Day was wide open after he'd just kicked the ball to a team-mate. Ryder came at him from several metres away and bumped him.





Ridiculous to claim Ryder was "stationary" and Day "ran into him" . Footy doesn't work like that. Ryder put himself into that position.
Will Day had his head down over the ball as he kicked the ball and the collision occurred before he'd even taken ONE extra step.

Day kicked the ball with his right foot;. His right foot was back on the ground and he'd lifted his left foot and... BAM!

Ryder had actually closed the distance really quickly with two big steps, and pulled up at the last sec when he realised he was late. He didn't run through Day like he was Byron Pickett otherwise Day would be in hospital and Paddy would be suspended for 6 weeks. It wasn't a savage shirtfront, but he has run at Day, turned side-on, planted his foot, braced for the impact and caused the collision. He leaned into it. It's still a bump, even though he was stationary at the exact moment of impact.

I'm not dirty about it and advocating for Ryder's suspension. That's not my go. I don't care. Let's hope the Tribunal Chooklotto makes a typically hair-brained inconsistent ruling and they allow Paddy to play - because I don't think he meant any real harm. He's an agile big fella who got there a split second late and the smaller, shorter guy came off second best.

But let's not kid ourselves either that this was Day's fault and Paddy "didn't do nuthin"

[MC Gusto]

The afl says English bump shouldn’t be allowed for evidence because he wasn’t charged

Wtf

You think we’ll put up someone who was charged with 2 weeks

These guys are nuts

[SaintPav]

Ridiculous.

[bigcarl]

Can a "bumper" by definition be passive/stationary?

If you are going to bump, you bump using your own force/momentum.'

There was none used in Ryder's case.

Ryder didn't deliver the bump, he received it and braced for it.

Good points. Sort of like running your car into a parked one. Who is to blame?

[Sainter_Dad]

Can a "bumper" by definition be passive/stationary?

If you are going to bump, you bump using your own force/momentum.'

There was none used in Ryder's case.

Ryder didn't deliver the bump, he received it and braced for it.

Good points. Sort of like running your car into a parked one. Who is to blame?

I think that depends on whether the parked car was legally parked - AFL arguing that Paddy was not legally parked

[kosifantutti]

2 weeks stands.

I should have been there.

[Sainter_Dad]

Paddy Ryder's two-match ban stands. He'll miss rounds five and six. Reasons to follow.

What f@rking reasons??????

......

We want to make a statement about the bump - and it is only St Kilda
We don't want the Saints to beat up our Love Children (Suns then Giants)
We wanted to ban English but he is a Western Bulldog
We want to let Liam Ryan jump into packs backside first - it is good for the game