Comments on: Maxwell Gets Off! Are Clubs Again Pulling the AFL’s Strings?

By: Will a Buddy Ban be Good? | Expert AFL Tips, Games & DreamTeam reviews along with featured AFL articles.

Tue, 25 Aug 2009 02:55:52 +0000

[...] on in the year we had a very similar situation which saw Nick Maxwell get suspended and then get off. To me this is a very similar situation. This is a chance for the AFL, tribunal and the appeal [...]

By: Is The Bump/ Shirt Front Alive Again? | The A to F to L of Australian Football

Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:32:04 +0000

[...] all started when Nick Maxwell shirt fronted Pat McGinnity and then in the 3rd week Young and Motlop were reported for bumps/ rough conduct. They also [...]

By: Wrapup of NAB Round 1 week 3 | The A to F to L of Australian Football

Wrapup of NAB Round 1 week 3 | The A to F to L of Australian Football — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 01:33:35 +0000

[...] saw three new reports for rough conduct/ charging which all could be placed under the new ‘Maxwell Rule‘, it saw Port Powers coach Williams joking that a few teams may in touch with the legal team [...]

By: Football » Blog Archive » Maxwell Gets Off = Clubs Are Again Pulling the Strings of the Afl …

Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:43:57 +0000

[...] Now Collingwood and some AFL people were not happy with them debating if the bump is gone or not in todays game . Collingwood again appealed this and today at 9:30 est they met and the latest news is that Nick Maxwell got off … On Twitter today I joked that Eddie McGuire is the most important or influential man of todays AFL Football . Guess I was not wrong at all. Back in the 70’s and 80’s a worrying trend was evident in the then VFL where if your club …Page 2 [...]

By: Jermayn

Jermayn — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 02:45:45 +0000

At the end of the day, you do need to protect the person who has their head over the ball and going for it. Maxwell was not going for the ball but the man, I thought the AFL was trying to cut out this style of play? If the AFL was serious about this, they would make sure:

1) It was a free kick
2) Tribunal fairly judge (injuries should not determine penalty)
3) Appeals board backs up Tribunal.

So for me all three failed the system, fans, Maxwell and Pat McGinnity who is now lying in bed sucking food through a straw.

btw anyone think its cowardly that Maxwell has not even talked to McGinnity yet?

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:38:51 +0000

@aussierulesblog, i understand the rules and i feel that yes it should have been a free kick but no report, al of those scenarios posted can cause damage and pain to the opposition, it is incidental that they dont, as Jermayne said earlier, if mcginnity got strait up it wouldnt have seen the tribunal! I am loving the points though because my mind isnt totally made up!

By: aussierulesblog

aussierulesblog — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:16:18 +0000

@Michael: Shepherd my fat foot. In regard to the other scenarios you pose, in the post shown below on AussieRulesBlog this evening: If I tackle a player and my arm incidentally brushes his head, I'll be free-kicked for high contact. If I am standing my ground and an opponent slides toward me, resulting in his head making contact with my legs, I'm free-kicked for high contact. If I'm a defender trying to spoil a marking attempt and my arm brushes against my opponent's head, I'm free-kicked for high contact. But if I run full out at a bloke and lay my hip and shoulder right down his centre line and his head is struck during the collision resulting in a broken jaw, I'm off scott free! aussierulesblogs last blog post..How to avoid a free kick for high contact . . .

By: deano

deano — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 07:25:48 +0000

from the vision i have seen maxwell could have collected the ball and still made an ‘impact’on young mcginnity. maxwell was too over the top in trying to show that he is the new captain of collingwood. the fact that a young kid in his first game trying to honestly go at the ball will have to sit out close to half the season is a disgrace. 2-4 weeks was fair in my book.

By: Jermayn

Jermayn — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:56:14 +0000

@Michael – Difference between these imo is that McGinnity or Maxwell would have their eyes on the ball going for the smoother. Maxwell did NOT have his eyes on the ball but at the man when going for the shepard/ bump/ shirt front.

McGinnity’s injury was a result of Maxwell’s illegal actions (hitting him high, eyes of ball & out of play) and not a freak accident like you suggested.

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:47:49 +0000

Let me pose this then, i mcginnity was to try to smother the ball yet was kicked in the face, would this be considered negligent high contact?

A smother is part of the game much the same as a shepard

Or the other way round mcginnity goes for the smother and land on maxwells knee!

My point is at what stage does an incident which occurs as part of the game become illegal?