If Vlastuin was staging he must have done a good job for the umpires to give him a 50. However, the MRP seem to have a different rule book when it comes to a Richmond player. Maybe Nick was at fault for not giving the bomber a free run at the ball?
-
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.
Nick Vlastuin
- Thread starter Hungry
- Start date
It looks bad in slow motion, but life doesn’t happen in slow motion. At normal speed, which is how everyone involved saw it, then the reaction and the subsequent penalty were warranted. This has happened purely because of media influence.
I'll bet you it's not. How do we find out? Players taunt each other all the time. That's one hell of a novel the umpires have to write each game.
For $500 it's hardly worth it. Did Ward get fined for his 3 backflips and somersault that almost resulted in him breaking his own neck? That's the sort of staging they need to act on.
You might but they're not. He wasn't smacked in the chops anyway. I've watched 6 games this weekend and only 2 Tigers get done for staging. I see dives and head shakes everywhere. if it's not obvious let them go. $500 is not going to change anything if the AFL is serious about it which clearly they're not.
Sorry but you seem to be trying to put 2 actions together in order to make some random speculation from you seem true. You have NO IDEA whatsoever what Vlastuin said to Bellchambers. There is zero chance they will turn the fine around, so if Vlastuin challenges it then he will pay more. Thats why they won't challenge not because of some ridiculous conspiracy theory with less merit than the man on the grassy knoll.
Well I disagree. For $500 you're not going to bother. Attack on his character? It's a reflection on the system not him. I've seen the video and it is no better or worse than 100 other cases you see in a round. It's ridiculous. 18 teams, 2 Tigers get done for it. Please? What are the chances? It's Clayton's AFL at its best.
exactly right.He knew there was possibly going to be contact from a big guy, they were going opposite directions. He was low down on his knees so instinctively as a protection to the head as he feels
Contact, he throws it back to protect the head. He had the mark anyway so he wasn’t trying to milk a free.
An absolute farce. Was Bellchambers trying to hit the ball? Did he get a fine?? No, he got 50
Metres for the late contact. Wtf is going on
Id be very interested to know if any other defenders in the league apart from Rance ,Grimes & Vlastuin have been charged for staging..
Compared to the Woodcock flop a couple of weeks ago these were nothing.
Compared to the Woodcock flop a couple of weeks ago these were nothing.
When we’re talking staging let’s not forget Cryin Miers.
Hurley was worse when Lynch pushed his chest. He threw his head back as if he had been punched half a second afterwards... No fine. Absolutely no consistency. (Three umpires and no report.)
The Cats diving in last years PF was a pandemic! No charges.
I'd be both surprised and disappointed if the club doesn't appeal this charge.
It's not about the sum of money; it's about righting a wrong.
Irrespective of whether Vlastuin accentuated the contact, he was clipped high after the mark was taken. For that, he was justifiably awarded a 50. There can be no dispute about the late, high contact.
So if the umpire wasn't sucked in or fooled, what is the charge intended to penalise?
In effect, all Vlastuin did was make sure the umpire was aware of the contact. Bit like the characters who throw their arms out when they reckon they've spotted a deliberate out of bounds.
Any properly functioning judiciary will chuck this out at the first opportunity.
It's not about the sum of money; it's about righting a wrong.
Irrespective of whether Vlastuin accentuated the contact, he was clipped high after the mark was taken. For that, he was justifiably awarded a 50. There can be no dispute about the late, high contact.
So if the umpire wasn't sucked in or fooled, what is the charge intended to penalise?
In effect, all Vlastuin did was make sure the umpire was aware of the contact. Bit like the characters who throw their arms out when they reckon they've spotted a deliberate out of bounds.
Any properly functioning judiciary will chuck this out at the first opportunity.
Not worth challenging, but, let's face it, Bell-Chambers struck Vlastuin after he had marked the ball.
There is only one player who could be reported for that incident, and it is not Vlastuin. Not that I reckon Bell-Chambers should be reported, then again, it was higher contact and likely more forceful than Lynch's supposed indiscretion.
The AFL has become a f***ing joke.
DS
There is only one player who could be reported for that incident, and it is not Vlastuin. Not that I reckon Bell-Chambers should be reported, then again, it was higher contact and likely more forceful than Lynch's supposed indiscretion.
The AFL has become a f***ing joke.
DS
