Boomer suspended

[shaker]

Good to see Boomer get to play but the AFL's MRP must be fixed before next season just not consistent at all  :o

Every year lately it seems we are wishing for it, never seems to come about mate. :(

Maybe for cases like Boomer and Fyfe it should be free kick and fifty if the player who gets the high hit plays on end of story if he gets subbed out because of it the offender misses a week no way of having it reduced , if the player misses 4 because of it the offender gets 4 ?

[Holz]

Good to see Boomer get to play but the AFL's MRP must be fixed before next season just not consistent at all  :o

Every year lately it seems we are wishing for it, never seems to come about mate. :(

Maybe for cases like Boomer and Fyfe it should be free kick and fifty if the player who gets the high hit plays on end of story if he gets subbed out because of it the offender misses a week no way of having it reduced , if the player misses 4 because of it the offender gets 4 ?

you should be punished for the act not the result. The truth is Boomer went for a block got body contact that resulted in a head clash.

Dont think that act is worth a suspension no matter the result.

If anything, I have noticed alot of sliding in low by players than they actually get a free kick. Similary to the reporting in the week before in the North Essendon game. Those sliding in should get reported over boomer.

[Capper]

Watching the replay of the game last night there was a bit between Boomer and Jelwood and they clashed bodies several times even though they werent playing on each other.

I think Boomer saw a chance to block and did it, the problem was he left the ground as he in 4 foot 2.

Hurry up Friday and get here already!!

[SydneyRox]

Good to see Boomer get to play but the AFL's MRP must be fixed before next season just not consistent at all  :o

Every year lately it seems we are wishing for it, never seems to come about mate. :(

Maybe for cases like Boomer and Fyfe it should be free kick and fifty if the player who gets the high hit plays on end of story if he gets subbed out because of it the offender misses a week no way of having it reduced , if the player misses 4 because of it the offender gets 4 ?

you should be punished for the act not the result. The truth is Boomer went for a block got body contact that resulted in a head clash.

Dont think that act is worth a suspension no matter the result.

If anything, I have noticed alot of sliding in low by players than they actually get a free kick. Similary to the reporting in the week before in the North Essendon game. Those sliding in should get reported over boomer.

Yeah, the sliding worried me as well. Pretty sure Thomas was the main culprit as well.

Seems he hasnt learnt much after breaking Gary Rohans leg??!!

[Holz]

Good to see Boomer get to play but the AFL's MRP must be fixed before next season just not consistent at all  :o

Every year lately it seems we are wishing for it, never seems to come about mate. :(

Maybe for cases like Boomer and Fyfe it should be free kick and fifty if the player who gets the high hit plays on end of story if he gets subbed out because of it the offender misses a week no way of having it reduced , if the player misses 4 because of it the offender gets 4 ?

you should be punished for the act not the result. The truth is Boomer went for a block got body contact that resulted in a head clash.

Dont think that act is worth a suspension no matter the result.

If anything, I have noticed alot of sliding in low by players than they actually get a free kick. Similary to the reporting in the week before in the North Essendon game. Those sliding in should get reported over boomer.

Yeah, the sliding worried me as well. Pretty sure Thomas was the main culprit as well.

Seems he hasnt learnt much after breaking Gary Rohans leg??!!

Thats more the fault of the system than the player. You can see why players slide when you look at this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJ3W5JvnsS0

you get a free kick for that dangerous play when really you should get weeks.

[Mailman the 2nd]

While I'm glad that he's playing in the final on Friday, he honestly shouldn't have got off.

1. He goes for a bump off the ball, as soon as you do that you are completely liable, it shouldn't matter whether it was "accidental" head contact or whether Selwood's face is made of paper, it's Harvey's responsibility as a player to not make high contact.

2. Selwood has to go off the ground to get stitches above his eye, you don't get stitches for insignificant force.

IMO, it was worse than what Nathan Fyfe did, because Fyfe was actually attempting a legal bump, so the argument that it was incidental conduct actually has merit to it.

This whole system is just a joke. The tribunal and the MRP need to have several weeks worth of discussions in the offseason about being on the same page

[shaker]

The system is a joke one gets 2 weeks one gets off but changing the whole system will only raise other problems , for players that are going to go the bump fine if you make contact with the head free kick and fifty end of story , if the player is really hurt they must make it so the penalties are consistent if like Selwood no more need be done maybe something similar for sliding , there are always going to be accidental injuries but if they choose to bump off the ball make them pay on a scale of the injuries they cause