touched on this in another thread...
shake-up required .. it's all getting a bit corporation-stale: evident in rules of control like STAND and 'Dissent'
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Lynch !!
- Thread starter Tigaman
- Start date
shake-up required .. it's all getting a bit corporation-stale: evident in rules of control like STAND and 'Dissent'
8 weeks at best after the bye best case scenario.
Then probably 6 weeks to get match fit.
If he has a screw put in, the recovery could be longer.
There are many all over social media suggesting there is a conspiracy against Richmond and I think that just makes people look biased and weakens the argument on this particular incident .
I am all for the club going 100% on this, not just for Tom but also for the game. If he gets suspended then appeal. I will be very disappointed if we don’t
What surprises me is the suggestion that Lynch would choose to bump.
The video looks like a bump, so I get Maso's point.
But why bump?
Its a marking contest.
Lynch runs in, jumps and bumps. While his opponent marks the ball.
It doesnt make sense.
At other points in a game a player might bump in order to shepherd, or clear space around a loose ball. But in a marking contest of 2v1 and youre the 1 surely you go for the mark?
So why didnt Lynch go for the mark?
He'd been outpositioned by his oppo, nudged offline. It happens to even the best.
And in the ensuing pack there is a collision.
Lynch doesnt bump, he attempts to be involved in a marking contest.
The idea he is deliberatly bumping and not contesting a mark is ludicrous
The video looks like a bump, so I get Maso's point.
But why bump?
Its a marking contest.
Lynch runs in, jumps and bumps. While his opponent marks the ball.
It doesnt make sense.
At other points in a game a player might bump in order to shepherd, or clear space around a loose ball. But in a marking contest of 2v1 and youre the 1 surely you go for the mark?
So why didnt Lynch go for the mark?
He'd been outpositioned by his oppo, nudged offline. It happens to even the best.
And in the ensuing pack there is a collision.
Lynch doesnt bump, he attempts to be involved in a marking contest.
The idea he is deliberatly bumping and not contesting a mark is ludicrous
Well big Tommy is going to be out for a while anyway so what do we do without our most important player ?
Obviously Jack comes back in , do we go small ? Do we play Dusty and Bolton deep for longer ? , no doubt Ryan continues to play with Nank out , I’d have like to have given Biggie a go Rucking while all the other rucks are out , but he’s out too . Bauer is one I’d like to see given a few games at AFL level , leads straight and hard which could help create some space in our forward line .
Great time for Dimma and co to get creative
Obviously Jack comes back in , do we go small ? Do we play Dusty and Bolton deep for longer ? , no doubt Ryan continues to play with Nank out , I’d have like to have given Biggie a go Rucking while all the other rucks are out , but he’s out too . Bauer is one I’d like to see given a few games at AFL level , leads straight and hard which could help create some space in our forward line .
Great time for Dimma and co to get creative
AFL 101. Judd elbows a bloke n splits his cheek open, nothing to see, Brownlow.
AFLHQ under Gilligan has become a bit like a 2.00 am Sat night chunder on the footpath. There's some peas n carrots n weird bits, some ham n pineapple or lamb n lettuce from the midnight munchies all mixed up in some sort of malodorous slime. Pointless trying try n work out exactly what's in it or who's responsible for the mess, just move along n try to avoid getting to close to the mess.
Someone should order a truck load of horse *smile* to be delivered to the doors of AFL HQ.
Tony Braxton-Hicks
There are no stupid ideas, just stupid people
MRO logic.
If someone stepped on his foot. Accidentally. It caused an injury. Suspension.
If someone stepped on his foot. Accidentally. It caused an injury. Suspension.
I keep coming back to the witherden incident. That was one week ago FFS !
I have seen a couple of genius journos analyse the difference and I know Keith got a concussion but none of that explains the difference between nothing and straight to the tribunal.
To me it is not corrupt, it is incompetent.
Fans scream for consistency and we get this?
What is also telling is that in neither case was even a free kick paid. To me that is because they were tough hard marking contests.
I have seen a couple of genius journos analyse the difference and I know Keith got a concussion but none of that explains the difference between nothing and straight to the tribunal.
To me it is not corrupt, it is incompetent.
Fans scream for consistency and we get this?
What is also telling is that in neither case was even a free kick paid. To me that is because they were tough hard marking contests.
Last edited:
I agree,
But its pointless. Its all AFL controlled, opaque and accountable to noone
The only recourse youde have to acheive any consistent outcome would be civil court,
Which is exactly why the concussion class action is going there and the hawks racism case is heading there.
Surely Andrew Dillon understands hes inheritting a huge bucket of conflated arse puss from the last 2 CEO's?
The HR consultancy who scoured the globe for talent probably only got 2 suitable people - V.putin and D.trump
And apparently A.dillon has the better CV
Bastards would all turn up with a shovel n barra to take home some free fertilizer.
There would be several old xavierians with landscaping businesses to choose from for sure.
Landscaper is the go-to career for troubled private schoolboys.
You only need a ute, a rake and a lawn-mower and its the perfect mobile cash business for selling coke to player agents all across Malvern
I fully expect he'll be suspended.
I spoke to a couple of my oppo supporting mates yesterday & without bias they said they saw Lynch's action as as reckless movement & probably deserved 1-2 weeks.
They couldn't see why it was sent straight to the tribunal though.
I'm bracing like Tom for a 3 week suspension.
I spoke to a couple of my oppo supporting mates yesterday & without bias they said they saw Lynch's action as as reckless movement & probably deserved 1-2 weeks.
They couldn't see why it was sent straight to the tribunal though.
I'm bracing like Tom for a 3 week suspension.
I disagree, but lets say your mates are right and AFL agree.
if your talking reckless movement,
jeremy cameron gets a month for off the ball front on contact to an umpire, surely?
I dont want to see Cameron suspended for an accident,
But how much more reckless can you get, than a 100kg bloke pretending hes an aeroplane and the umps the world trade centre, whilst laughing his head off yelling '*smile* yeah, Cumooooooonnnnnm
If thats not reckless movement, then i give up on the english language.
But the accident logic doesnt apply anymore.
lynch or broads intent wasnt to knock blokes out, as camerons intent wasnt to poleaxe an ump
But on the duty of care logic,
Cameron has to be accountable. Front on, high contact, to an ump, off the ball.
Did the ump have a concussion test?
Somehow, the AFL and its media, have managed to remove 'extrapolation' from the narrative entirely
Last edited:
