Bye bye Maynard

[CURLY]

Just watched the replay he should get off

Dont see how he can.

[SaintPav]

Just watched the replay he should get off

A replay of Judge Judy is irrelevant.

[The_Dud]

I don't get it. If he was a Saints player you'd all be arguing that it was incidental contact and that he shouldn't be sighted. Put your biases aside.

There has been a lot said in this thread, I don’t know which way it will go, but this is the only post that is 100% accurate.

Some lack the simple ability to put their biases aside.

[Saint 58]

So a MIMIMUM chance of success front on smother quickly turns into a bump WITH the shoulder as he TURNS in mid air to hit him in the HEAD ... & some of you think he shouldn't get cited !!???

[markp]

If he was a Saints player you'd all be arguing that it was incidental contact and that he shouldn't be sighted

Yep and that would be biased.

Some are biased against changing the rules and the culture to better protect players.

Maynard being rubbed out might ultimately help fkn carlton win the flag, or melb, or pa.... there's no particular bias, if it isn't St Kilda it's all pretty much vomit vs diarrhoea all the way down anyway.

Brayshaw was knocked unconscious and halfway into the shadow realm by a reckless and deliberate act. It also very likely cost melb the game.

Can't just be filed under 'shyte happens'.

[cwrcyn]

If you could get suspended for having an ugly head, a bad haircut and an IQ of 30, Maynard would get 10 weeks

[Scollop]

None of the posts, however, have picked-up on Brayshaw's lack of awareness of his surroundings prior to kicking the ball.

That’s not correct. That’s just your interpretation without any regard to the courage of Brayshaw who was focused on his execution of his kick to hit it’s target. If he was more interested in his ‘surroundings’ that would mean he would actually compromise his disposal accuracy to prioritise protecting himself. It’s what a few marshmallows do because they want bruise free footy and they release the footy prematurely or they miss the target altogether. Has Jack Billings ever had a collision injury or suffered a severe concussion in his AFL career?

Maynard, being a defender, had to play his role of trying to prevent the ball going past him. Imagine the abuse he would have copped had he just stood still. Smothering, or attempting to, is an integral part of the game.

It’s interesting that you bring up the argument about ‘surroundings’. Does Maynard need to dispose the ball? Does Maynard need to look away from the oncoming collision to focus his vision on a target 30 metres away?

Is lowering your shoulder to impact directly into the jaw or face of your opponent ‘an integral part of the game’?

Let me ask you a question? If Maynard lifted his knees to ‘protect himself’ and he connected with Brayshaw’s face, would people still be thinking he was just bracing for impact? He has just as much control of his knees as he does his shoulder.

Once Maynard is in the air, it is up to him to try and avoid connecting with Brayshaw’s face or head. He is responsible. It’s his shoulder and his arms connected to his body and connected to his brain (he plays this way - it’s a reckless act worthy of suspension)

The point of Maynard’s shoulder bone connected flush with Brayshaw’s jaw and Brayshaw suffered concussion. Who is to blame? Brayshaw or Maynard?

The guys in the commentary box along with all the powerful media voices are doing all they can to get Maynard cleared.

I totally understand that collisions happen in footy, however just because a player states ‘he had no malice’ doesn’t mean that it’s true.

Again….context. How does a guy like Maynard play the game? Does he want to make sure his presence and his strength is felt by opponents early in a final? Does he usually tackle to hurt? Of course he does! He wanted to make sure that any physical contact he made with a Demons player was going to hurt that Demons player.

The problem unfortunately for both players is that a severe concussion to Brayshaw means that the perpetrator needs to be suspended.

[markp]

If you could get suspended for having an ugly head, a bad haircut and an IQ of 30, Maynard would get 10 weeks

Ease up...! We might struggle to field a team

[Yorkeys]

In days of yore a tough guy like Maynard would be sorted out by opposition hard men. He banks on being protected by the system he cynically uses to hurt opponents. Big price levied on retaliation. Didn't like Viney calling him out as the dog he is - should not be allowed in a high contact sport with his sadistic approach. However other sides would have his number now. All the blame the victim, bad luck spins won't change how Maynard's peers will see him from now on. I can see him getting a number of no malice hits next year. Hope they hurt.
Murphy and Maynard. What icons of the game, not.

[whiskers3614]

So a MIMIMUM chance of success front on smother quickly turns into a bump WITH the shoulder as he TURNS in mid air to hit him in the HEAD ... & some of you think he shouldn't get cited !!???

Props for correct spelling of CITED!

[desertsaint]

based on almost every similar citing the last two seasons he is gone two weeks. no doubt at all. chose his action, could have easily softened impact. player concussed.
i say almost as we've seen exceptions, and he plays for a very big club and it's finals, two of the three get out of jail cards. the other being a very big name player. so 66% chance he'll get off. but no way should he.

[magnifisaint]

Instead of turning his shoulder maybe he could have grabbed him in a bear hug.

[Big Max]

Reckon Michael Christian got it exactly right.

Straight to tribunal.

[meher baba]

Bye Bye Jack Martin too I reckon

[Banger9798]

Bye Bye Jack Martin too I reckon

Surely no argument about this one

Or was it "a football action" ? Whatever that means

[Teflon]

Initial intent is irrelevant.

He launched off the ground at full tilt and directly at Brayshaw, then tucked and turned his shoulder into his opponent, who in that moment was utterly helpless... and most significantly knocked the guy clean out.

He could've tried to fend off or reduce impact with his hands, or even to sort of catch and turn (like they do to avoid sling tackles now).

It was very ugly.

If duty of care applies to sliding and taking someone's legs out, or swinging a player in a tackle and them hitting their head, then it has to apply here.

But it likely won't, because the afl is all about expediency.


(Would Brayshaw playing have made an extra 8 point difference to the dees?)

How many would they give Caminiti if he did the same in a h&a game?


Should be at least 2-3 weeks.

Absolutely
I can not believe people can’t see he turns his shoulder
It’s blatant
He knew what he was doing
Brayshaw has no hope
“Bloody love the guy”
What a w@nker - thug, wanna be bad boy
Gets 3 for a rude head

[ace]

Reckon Michael Christian got it exactly right.

Straight to tribunal.

Well handpassed now the tribunal has to decide.

If the tribunal agrees with the MRO's assessment he will get at least 3 matches suspension.
If the tribunal disagrees and says no case to answer he plays in the prelim final.

The AFL needs to make it more clear.
If you concuss an opponent accidentally or not you get rubbed out.
Doesn't even matter if the cause is a kiss on lips.
Concuss and you are guilty.

[Annoyedsaint]

If you could get suspended for having an ugly head, a bad haircut and an IQ of 30, Maynard would get 10 weeks

10 weeks?

He’d get life.
An absolute disease.

[Annoyedsaint]

Reckon Michael Christian got it exactly right.

Straight to tribunal.

Well handpassed now the tribunal has to decide.

If the tribunal agrees with the MRO's assessment he will get at least 3 matches suspension.
If the tribunal disagrees and says no case to answer he plays in the prelim final.

The AFL needs to make it more clear.
If you concuss an opponent accidentally or not you get rubbed out.
Doesn't even matter if the cause is a kiss on lips.
Concuss and you are guilty.

I’m sorry, but this is a ridiculous assumption to make and implement.

[saynta]

Bye Bye Jack Martin too I reckon

yep

[Big Max]

Reckon Michael Christian got it exactly right.

Straight to tribunal.

Well handpassed now the tribunal has to decide.

If the tribunal agrees with the MRO's assessment he will get at least 3 matches suspension.
If the tribunal disagrees and says no case to answer he plays in the prelim final.

The AFL needs to make it more clear.
If you concuss an opponent accidentally or not you get rubbed out.
Doesn't even matter if the cause is a kiss on lips.
Concuss and you are guilty.

The AFL have made it clear.

Michael Christian ruled the front-on bump as rough conduct. It was assessed as careless conduct, severe impact and high contact.

That's quite clear.

[Scollop]

Reckon Michael Christian got it exactly right.

Straight to tribunal.

If it was up to that incompetent, biased, inconsistent fool, Maynard wouldn't have been sent to the tribunal and may have even been free to play.

The new AFL footy boss had direct input and Jon Ralph reckons there was disagreement between her and Christian. So as not to humiliate or embarrass the MRO too much they made it look like it was a joint decision.

"In a rare move, a release from the AFL confirmed that the executive general manager of football, Laura Kane, and match review officer Michael Christian laid the charge against Maynard."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-08/ ... /102834566

[SaintPav]

Strange process.

[Trev from the Bush]

Well, I've read every post on this thread. Most of them are swayed by anti-Magpie bias, which erases all traces of rationality. None of the posts, however, have picked-up on Brayshaw's lack of awareness of his surroundings prior to kicking the ball.

He was Gresham-like, his eyes firmly focused on the football and intent of bombing the ball into his foward line until he looked up and had an oh shyte moment just after he kicked.

Maynard, being a defender, had to play his role of trying to prevent the ball going past him. Imagine the abuse he would have copped had he just stood still. Smothering, or attempting to, is an integral part of the game. Without such defensive actions 92,000 people would have stayed home and played video games.

The incident was in the opening minutes of the game and Brayshaw clearly wasn't switched on. He didn't see Maynard until the last moment; too late to brace himself. This is evident by him resembling a rag doll before he even hit the ground.

I'm not blaming Brayshaw for the incident but these are mitigating circumstances that have been overlooked in all of the subsequent venting of spleens.

Stop being so logical Trev, there is no place for that on this forum.

Obviously.

[bobmurray]

Well, I've read every post on this thread. Most of them are swayed by anti-Magpie bias, which erases all traces of rationality. None of the posts, however, have picked-up on Brayshaw's lack of awareness of his surroundings prior to kicking the ball.

He was Gresham-like, his eyes firmly focused on the football and intent of bombing the ball into his foward line until he looked up and had an oh shyte moment just after he kicked.

Maynard, being a defender, had to play his role of trying to prevent the ball going past him. Imagine the abuse he would have copped had he just stood still. Smothering, or attempting to, is an integral part of the game. Without such defensive actions 92,000 people would have stayed home and played video games.

The incident was in the opening minutes of the game and Brayshaw clearly wasn't switched on. He didn't see Maynard until the last moment; too late to brace himself. This is evident by him resembling a rag doll before he even hit the ground.

I'm not blaming Brayshaw for the incident but these are mitigating circumstances that have been overlooked in all of the subsequent venting of spleens.

Stop being so logical Trev, there is no place for that on this forum.

Obviously.

Is it anti magpie bias or is it most people just don't like thugs playing football ?