Maynard incident > Maynard rule > Brayshaw retirement

[LaurieHolden]

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1030791/afl-daily-listen-the-questions-that-will-define-brayden-maynards-finals-hopes
And the controvosy is generated by click bait hungry media

I haven't bought a paper media article since the Liberals sold the media to two megalomaniacs and I never will.

What exactly is click bait hungry media? Without a counterbalance, is that your only argument that's this is what is fueling this? Is there no opposing opinion on the matter?

People need to get over this notion of click bait media, I see just as much click bait commentary. Flagrant emotional tirades of what people think, as opposed to offering any considered opinion.
Doing so is as sound a reasoning as trying to debunk or confirm UFO theory. Tabloid style media is guaranteed to not change and hasn't done since the first tabloid stone tablet...
Media simply has more reach to the masses than it ever has and as a result more chances to land a bite.

You have the choice though of what you read and absorb in order to proffer considered opinion. Reacting to this tabloid or online social content won't change a thing if you continue to get lured in by the byline. My observation is people get frustrated when their tunnel vision of insight gets challenged.

Maybe I need to move my comments to the VPT, but I'll move on from here all the same.

[PyreneesPie]

He also labelled JDG as "unemployable" which was disgraceful character assassination.

When did he say that?

On AFL 360 after the Bali incident. I then proceeded to refrain from viewing AFL 360 for quite some time after that.

https://www.tiktok.com/@senradio/video/ ... 62?lang=en

He refined "unemployable" somewhat in his editorial comment on SEN, possibly on legal advice?

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/06/20/ ... cruitable/

[jonmac1954]

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1030791/afl-daily-listen-the-questions-that-will-define-brayden-maynards-finals-hopes
And the controvosy is generated by click bait hungry media

What exactly is click bait hungry media? Without a counterbalance, is that your only argument that's this is what is fueling this? Is there no opposing opinion on the matter?

People need to get over this notion of click bait media, I see just as much click bait commentary. Flagrant emotional tirades of what people think, as opposed to offering any considered opinion.
Doing some is as sound a reasoning as trying to debunk or confirm UFO theory. Tabloid style media is guaranteed to not change and hasn't done since the first tabloid stone tablet...
Media simply has more reach to the masses than it ever has and as a result more chances to land a bite.

You have the choice though of what you read and absorb in order to proffer considered opinion. Reacting to this tabloid or online social content won't change a thing if you continue to get lured in by the byline. My observation is people get frustrated when their tunnel vision of insight gets challenged.

Maybe I need to move my comments to the VPT, but I'll move on from here all the same.

And you need to get real.

My brother in law spent 40 years in the media and left because of eternal editorial interference.

He knows the media inside out <Let's try to be civil, please. Thanks, BBMods.>

[PyreneesPie]

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/09/12/ ... ened-when/

[Mr Miyagi]

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/09/12/brayshaws-brother-admits-he-jumped-the-gun-reveals-what-happened-when/

“I think if this happened in Round 3, sweet no worries mate you’ve got weeks, the scrutiny comes under the fact that I think the AFL are desperate for Collingwood to win a premiership.”

Just damn wow. But good of him to set Caro straight on Bruz’s call to their mum.

[jonmac1954]

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2023/09/12/brayshaws-brother-admits-he-jumped-the-gun-reveals-what-happened-when/

Thanks PP.

That response from his brother revealing the TRUE cause for Brayshaw's mothers reaction just shows what a gutter crawling lowlife Wilson is.

[Woods]

Whateley in his pontification on SEN bangs on about Maynard’s duty of care to Brayshaw.

But let us not forget that Brayshaw had a duty of care to Maynard as well. This whole incident would not have occurred had Bradshaw not chosen to kick the ball when he did. He had options.

It is Brayshaw who chose to kick the ball when he did in full sight of Maynard coming at him like a steam train. Brayshaw could have kicked a step earlier in which case Maynard would not have leapt up to smother the ball. Or Brayshaw could have tried to dodge to one side, go past Maynard and then kick the ball. But no, he chose to kick when he did resulting in a collision.

Also consider that Brayshaw was the only one of the two who had sight of his opponent throughout the incident. Maynard didn’t. His eyes were tightly shut as he leapt up (courageously) towards the ball in anticipation of it smashing into his face. To scrunch up your face with eyes closed is a normal and reasonable reaction when trying to smother an oncoming ball. And smothering is an accepted, and indeed lauded, part of the game.

Whateley also ignores the presumption of innocence. It is up to the AFL to prove its case, not for Maynard to prove his innocence, although this would not be the first time an AFL tribunal behaved like a Star Chamber. But if Collingwood take an adverse finding to the Supreme Court the AFL will not have the protection of the cosy AFL interpretation of justice.

[woodys_world69]

why doesnt blakey's Dad hit the media trail and ask for Jack Martin to be banned for 4 weeks "because its my son dammit"

too many podcasts out there these days smh

[jonmac1954]

Whateley in his pontification on SEN bangs on about Maynard’s duty of care to Brayshaw.

But let us not forget that Brayshaw had a duty of care to Maynard as well. This whole incident would not have occurred had Bradshaw not chosen to kick the ball when he did. He had options.

It is Brayshaw who chose to kick the ball when he did in full sight of Maynard coming at him like a steam train. Brayshaw could have kicked a step earlier in which case Maynard would not have leapt up to smother the ball. Or Brayshaw could have tried to dodge to one side, go past Maynard and then kick the ball. But no, he chose to kick when he did resulting in a collision.

Also consider that Brayshaw was the only one of the two who had sight of his opponent throughout the incident. Maynard didn’t. His eyes were tightly shut as he leapt up (courageously) towards the ball in anticipation of it smashing into his face. To scrunch up your face with eyes closed is a normal and reasonable reaction when trying to smother an oncoming ball. And smothering is an accepted, and indeed lauded, part of the game.

Whateley also ignores the presumption of innocence. It is up to the AFL to prove its case, not for Maynard to prove his innocence, although this would not be the first time an AFL tribunal behaved like a Star Chamber. But if Collingwood take an adverse finding to the Supreme Court the AFL will not have the protection of the cosy AFL interpretation of justice.

This is the second time in a few years a Collingwood player has been publicly keelhauled whilst following the AFL rules.

Collingwood football club - it's time.

Enough trial by media and public crucification of Collingwood players. Take it all the way to the supreme court if needs be.

[RudeBoy]

The problem with taking it to the Supreme Court, is that it then simply becomes an issue of whether AFL rules were followed and conducted properly. They can't really make a judgement on the issues of reasonable or unreasonable actions on the field.

[jonmac1954]

The problem with taking it to the Supreme Court, is that it then simply becomes an issue of whether AFL rules were followed and conducted properly. They can't really make a judgement on the issues of reasonable or unreasonable actions on the field.

As far as a civil case is concerned the paper trail is everything.

Take it all the way and then sue the FCKERS for every penny they have (individually).

Many times others have accused me of anger in my posts but that has never been the case - I make sure that specific words or phrases are plain.

However

In this particular case I am INFURIATED with the above the law media and the spineless AFL.

[Johnno75]

Kane Cornes had a valid point last night that knees in the head from players flying for marks can do more damage than what Maynard’s act did and showed a few examples where it was pretty bad, saying is this the next thing to stamp out of the game. Caro laughed it off as nonsense when Kane asked her what the difference was.

What I don’t like is they are going to crucify Maynard on the fact that Angus was out cold for 2 mins and while no one ever wants to see this on the field and no player to be seriously injured I think the knock out was more due to history and earlier events that night and not just the impact from Maynard.

I suspect the AFL will want 3 weeks and won’t stand down until that happens. Question then begs why waste all this time and money on a tribunal.

[Damien]

What a $$%^%%$ joke, Lethal Leigh and Dermie, want Bruzza suspended, two of the biggest thugs who ever played footy, yeh, great players but bloody thugs, Lethal dropped a geelong player cold, Bruns I recall and faced criminal police charges, him of all people. what a total **** this is now, a bleeding kangaroo court now. Getting real angry now, real **** off bigtime now.

I’m saying this honestly, I genuinely think that Matthews and Brereton’s views are based on guilt. They look back now at some of the brutal acts that they committed on the footy field, many of them within the rules of the day (not all though) and they feel ashamed. Ashamed at the harm they caused and the damage they did to other players. Stuff that would today see them publicly labelled as thugs and outcast from football society. Stuff that was seen as hard acts by hard men to win at all costs. Stuff that now no longer passes the Pub Test. They’ve evolved and matured (Matthews is now a grand father) and have probably reflected many times about the pain and injury they dished out and the dire ramifications if things went worst case scenario. Stuff that possibly keeps them awake at night. They want to be in step with how society thinks and what it now knows about brain injury. They’ll console themselves with the fact that it was a different era, with different rules and that they weren’t armed with the medical knowledge that we all now have. They’ll have regret like we all do about stupid mistakes we make as we evolve as adults.

I'm not concerned about the outside noise and narrative because it wont affect the tribunal members ability to judge this fairly by the rules. It can't. Of all of the comment though, the one that is the most irresponsible is Brayshaw's brother. He is understandably very emotional about the whole thing, but to suggest that the AFL are desperate for the Pies to win the flag and that it will impact the case is a joke; and totally contradicted by the actions of Laura Kane anyway.

[jonmac1954]

What a $$%^%%$ joke, Lethal Leigh and Dermie, want Bruzza suspended, two of the biggest thugs who ever played footy, yeh, great players but bloody thugs, Lethal dropped a geelong player cold, Bruns I recall and faced criminal police charges, him of all people. what a total **** this is now, a bleeding kangaroo court now. Getting real angry now, real **** off bigtime now.

I’m saying this honestly, I genuinely think that Matthews and Brereton’s views are based on guilt. They look back now at some of the brutal acts that they committed on the footy field, many of them within the rules of the day (not all though) and they feel ashamed. Ashamed at the harm they caused and the damage they did to other players. Stuff that would today see them publicly labelled as thugs and outcast from football society. Stuff that was seen as hard acts by hard men to win at all costs. Stuff that now no longer passes the Pub Test. They’ve evolved and matured (Matthews is now a grand father) and have probably reflected many times about the pain and injury they dished out and the ramifications of things went worst case scenario. Stuff that possibly keeps them awake at night. They want to be in step with how society thinks and what it now knows about brain injury. They’ll console themselves with the fact that it was a different era, with different rules and that they weren’t armed with the medical knowledge that we all now have. They’ll have regret like we all do about stupid mistakes we make as we evolve as adults.

No excuse for the public vilification no excuse at all.

[jonmac1954]

I'm not kidding here - if I was just a casual AFL watcher instead of a lifelong supporter I would simply walk away.

I'm eternally tired of this rubbish.