Why not tonight,dam afl.
Ps tiges have no choice what's so ever,he must be named if he plays.
Ps tiges have no choice what's so ever,he must be named if he plays.
-
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.
Rhyan Mansell welcome to Tigerland
- Thread starter MB78
- Start date
Justin kositchke wouldnt have got to 20 games if he debuted in 2023
Perennially Subbed off or suspended
Why is it taking so long to resolve? Absolute joke to be Friday before you know if a bloke can be picked or not.
There has in addition to be a finding of careless conduct. ie a judgement based on an objective standard that the conduct that led to the collision was in some way unreasonable.
There was nothing (I can see) about Mansell behaviour that was unreasonable.
The AFL saying it was unreasonable doesn’t make it so.
15 minutes ago
Hello and welcome to the AFL Appeal Board! Today is Richmond and Rhyan Mansell. About to get underway
11 minutes ago
We are three minutes late. A great start.
9 minutes ago
We are now six minutes late. I was scheduled to attend a lunch at 1pm and am already gravely concerned.
6 minutes ago
We are now live
Richmond says "bumping cannot be interpreted so widely as to populate any form of contact between two players."
Hello and welcome to the AFL Appeal Board! Today is Richmond and Rhyan Mansell. About to get underway
11 minutes ago
We are three minutes late. A great start.
9 minutes ago
We are now six minutes late. I was scheduled to attend a lunch at 1pm and am already gravely concerned.
6 minutes ago
We are now live
Richmond says "bumping cannot be interpreted so widely as to populate any form of contact between two players."
10:28: Chair Murray Kellam has requested a two-minute break: "There's something I have to attend to."
10:25: Dann: "The Tribunal's decision places a highly unrealistic expectation on players contesting for the ball with a split second before the contest.
"This case, given how quickly it eventuates, it's totally unfair to draw a line where that contest for the ball magically comes to an end."
10:21: In submission, Dann has noted no reasonable Tribunal could have found that Mansell was not contesting for the ball.
"At some point did it stop being a contest for the ball?... He does all that he can, essentially in a foot race, to get to the ball first."
10:18: Dann and Tribunal Chair Murray Kellam are currently back and forth on the Tribunal's findings that concluded Mansell's actions were of a bump.
10:11: Dann: "This definition of bumping is so important, because of this direct pathway to guilt.
"...What is bumping? What is bracing for contact, and what is not?"
10:08: Dann: The Tribunal's verdict and un upheld charge would "promote the risk of injury and concussion and deny the fundamental entitlement to protect himself."
10:00: Dann: "'Unreasonable', what is that on a proper approach to the bumping issue? The question had to be answered and be considered; whether Rhayn Mansell doing no more than protecting himself and no more than bracing for contact."
Dann said the incident came in "extremely difficult circumstances, at high speed, at high momentum, with a lack of time, a lack of space, with no ability to avoid contact and no reasonable alternative."
9:55: Dann: "The Tribunal failed to consider the question of whether the player who does no more than take reasonable action to protect themselves and brace for an unavoidable collision can have been involved in the bumping of another player.
"That's the very question we're being asked to decide and consider."
9:53: Dann has questioned the Tribunal's assessment of Mansell's "split second" actions.
"The Tribunal misdirected themselves in focusing on the question of whether the contact between the two players came about some sort of 'reflexive' or 'involuntary' contact."
9:50: Dann: Mansell made a reasonable and understanding response to the pending collision. The conduct of the player was completely reasonable in all of the circumstances he faced.
9:47: Dann: "What is meant by bumping? There is no definition under the rules of the Tribunal."
9:44: Richmond Counsel Dermot Dann has commenced the hearing, highlighting the key arguments on behalf of Richmond from Tuesday's hearing. Those points include:
- The conditions of the match
- The unpredictable bounce of the ball
- Mansell contesting for the ball in a straight line
- Mansell thinking he would be first to the ball
- The small timeframe for Mansell to adjust his actions
10:25: Dann: "The Tribunal's decision places a highly unrealistic expectation on players contesting for the ball with a split second before the contest.
"This case, given how quickly it eventuates, it's totally unfair to draw a line where that contest for the ball magically comes to an end."
10:21: In submission, Dann has noted no reasonable Tribunal could have found that Mansell was not contesting for the ball.
"At some point did it stop being a contest for the ball?... He does all that he can, essentially in a foot race, to get to the ball first."
10:18: Dann and Tribunal Chair Murray Kellam are currently back and forth on the Tribunal's findings that concluded Mansell's actions were of a bump.
10:11: Dann: "This definition of bumping is so important, because of this direct pathway to guilt.
"...What is bumping? What is bracing for contact, and what is not?"
10:08: Dann: The Tribunal's verdict and un upheld charge would "promote the risk of injury and concussion and deny the fundamental entitlement to protect himself."
10:00: Dann: "'Unreasonable', what is that on a proper approach to the bumping issue? The question had to be answered and be considered; whether Rhayn Mansell doing no more than protecting himself and no more than bracing for contact."
Dann said the incident came in "extremely difficult circumstances, at high speed, at high momentum, with a lack of time, a lack of space, with no ability to avoid contact and no reasonable alternative."
9:55: Dann: "The Tribunal failed to consider the question of whether the player who does no more than take reasonable action to protect themselves and brace for an unavoidable collision can have been involved in the bumping of another player.
"That's the very question we're being asked to decide and consider."
9:53: Dann has questioned the Tribunal's assessment of Mansell's "split second" actions.
"The Tribunal misdirected themselves in focusing on the question of whether the contact between the two players came about some sort of 'reflexive' or 'involuntary' contact."
9:50: Dann: Mansell made a reasonable and understanding response to the pending collision. The conduct of the player was completely reasonable in all of the circumstances he faced.
9:47: Dann: "What is meant by bumping? There is no definition under the rules of the Tribunal."
9:44: Richmond Counsel Dermot Dann has commenced the hearing, highlighting the key arguments on behalf of Richmond from Tuesday's hearing. Those points include:
- The conditions of the match
- The unpredictable bounce of the ball
- Mansell contesting for the ball in a straight line
- Mansell thinking he would be first to the ball
- The small timeframe for Mansell to adjust his actions
Aside from the richmond advocate laying his *smile* on the bench and saying 'and finally, you can *smile* my *smile* you AFL *smile*, youre killing the game'
I dunno what more he can say
Although Id also be making explicit that they are giving marlion pickett a license to run in straight lines, without deviating, as if theres noone else after the ball. A violent equivelent of dancing like noone is watching. Someone could be killed
More needs to be brought up about the distance.
These guys were both running at high speed. High speeds in AFL are generally 33/34kmh. Lets just go with 30 to keep it rounded.
30kmh averages out to around about 8.33 metres per second.
They are saying he "made a decision to bump from around 1-2m away", which means if 1m away he had 0.12 seconds to make that decision and if 2m away 0.24 seconds to make that decision. How quickly could his brain have processed everything they are saying he should have been processing.
"should I tackle"
"should I slow down" etc
The only thing his brain can process at that point is "*smile*, protect myself", which is what he did.
I'm not sure body mechanics allows the body to do what the AFL are saying that his body should have been doing.
These guys were both running at high speed. High speeds in AFL are generally 33/34kmh. Lets just go with 30 to keep it rounded.
30kmh averages out to around about 8.33 metres per second.
They are saying he "made a decision to bump from around 1-2m away", which means if 1m away he had 0.12 seconds to make that decision and if 2m away 0.24 seconds to make that decision. How quickly could his brain have processed everything they are saying he should have been processing.
"should I tackle"
"should I slow down" etc
The only thing his brain can process at that point is "*smile*, protect myself", which is what he did.
I'm not sure body mechanics allows the body to do what the AFL are saying that his body should have been doing.
10:47: The Appeals Board is now deliberating. Verdict incoming.
Chair Murray Kellam: "I'm sure you'll have time for a coffee and a sandwich if you feel like it."
10:45: Dann: "We say for (Mansell) to be found to be involved in or guilty of rough conduct is highly troubling."
10:44: Hannon: "The question of whether there has been an error (by the Tribunal) should be resoundingly answered by the board as 'no'."
10:36: Hannon: "The meaning of a bump or bumping shouldn't be viewed narrowly, but broadly with the remedial purpose of affording the protection of players in their on-field workplace."
10:32: Hannon: "The Tribunal was well placed to decide" whether this was a bump. "Two very experienced former players (Talia Radan and David Neitz) who delivered and received countless bumps over their careers were part of the Jury."
10:29: We're back. Lisa Hannon (AFL) has begun her arguments.
Chair Murray Kellam: "I'm sure you'll have time for a coffee and a sandwich if you feel like it."
10:45: Dann: "We say for (Mansell) to be found to be involved in or guilty of rough conduct is highly troubling."
10:44: Hannon: "The question of whether there has been an error (by the Tribunal) should be resoundingly answered by the board as 'no'."
10:36: Hannon: "The meaning of a bump or bumping shouldn't be viewed narrowly, but broadly with the remedial purpose of affording the protection of players in their on-field workplace."
10:32: Hannon: "The Tribunal was well placed to decide" whether this was a bump. "Two very experienced former players (Talia Radan and David Neitz) who delivered and received countless bumps over their careers were part of the Jury."
10:29: We're back. Lisa Hannon (AFL) has begun her arguments.
Are the pies ready? give it 2 mins...okay everyone please lets wrap this up I have important business to attend to.
