TOPIC:

anchorman wrote: Seriously, how does he now go to training and look Hamish Brayshaw in the eye.
I would like to see Hamish tell the WCEs to stick their club up their arse, but it wont happen.The Brayshaw family has too much class for that to happen.

If he blames the whole club for one bad egg, then he’s a very shallow person and you probably wouldn’t want him.

Dwert wrote:

58shark wrote: There’s no positives whatsoever in this for either player. Brayshaw will mend, but he’ll always remember this moment. Gaff will never forget nor forgive himself. It’ll be interesting to see how his on field performance will go when or if he gets back on the field. The Eagles and in fact, the AFL have copped a black eye out of this.
Of course, there’s also winners. Old Tommy gets his name back in the papers, Rossie is a free man and the media have something for another week or two. (Do they know there was a quake in Indonesia?)
If the cops get involved, it will set a precedent and God knows how it could affect our game going forward. I know they did with the Matthews incident, but that was then and today we are a soft loving community now!!

Three years ago?
thewest.com.au/news/australia/rid-amateu...nisbett-ng-ya-120561

Very interesting A/man. That's called being in a very compromising position. A great example of how making big statements can come back to haunt you. WC has a thug in the team.

Anch: there is a section of the population whom will always try and blame the victim, I am afraid.

8-12 weeks

Remember David Meirs got 11 weeks for hitting poor Russell Sparks -- Subi neve complainned either.

It just shows you what a micky mouse competition the AFL is that people are even contemplattting giving him only six weeks. People are free to argue how they like, but don't claim while you do it, that you or the AFL are adequately protecting players from king hits.

Leather Stops wrote:

Demons Forever wrote: Could someone please explain to me what a dog act is?.

A dog act is something decent humans wouldn't do . A dog would bite the hand of its feeder or anyone just for the sake of it. NEVER trust any dog.

Isn't dog mans best friend?

I must say this.
I think some people on here are seriously demented!!!!!!

Emotion is part of everybody and the game of AFL. But in assessing incidents such as this it needs to be put aside.

This is a very unfortunate incident not a dog act. A dog act has undisputable malice and intent. I will garentee you Gaffs intention was to not hit him in the mouth. More likely the shoulder or the chest. If you look at the height of Gaffs hand when he makes contact it is well below Gaffs shoulder and he is smaller than Brayshaw.

Unfortunately he made contact with his mouth as Brayshaw adjusted his position spreading and lowering his natural stance. Brayshaw has suffered considerably as a result of the blow. Gaff now and deservedly so must face the consequences of his actions and miss the remainder of the season. Gaff is a fine young man that unfortunately made a bad error of judgement that had far more severe consequences to his opponent and himself than he intended.

The AFL must stamp out all punching regardless of force. As allowing blows to arms, chests and backs can lead to unfortunate accidents like the Gaff/Brayshaw one.

Oh...so you mean like Colin Sylvia a few years ago when he was playing for your beloved Freo Chunder against Subi?

Well said Rookie draft. Gaff is not a thug people seem a little bit quick in declaring this criminal, dog act, ban him for life, worse than Barry Hall, surely his impeccable conduct over 170 odd games needs to be slightly considered. The bloke has fucked up big time but surely not with intention and malice. How could anybody think that Gaff, a player in big Brownlow contention and a vital cog in a team in big premiership contention three weeks out of finals could possibly think to himself “I am going to fair dinkum smash this bloke straight in his mouth and hurt him badly”
Come on

Rookie draft wrote: Emotion is part of everybody and the game of AFL. But in assessing incidents such as this it needs to be put aside.

This is a very unfortunate incident not a dog act. A dog act has undisputable malice and intent. I will garentee you Gaffs intention was to not hit him in the mouth. More likely the shoulder or the chest. If you look at the height of Gaffs hand when he makes contact it is well below Gaffs shoulder and he is smaller than Brayshaw.

Unfortunately he made contact with his mouth as Brayshaw adjusted his position spreading and lowering his natural stance. Brayshaw has suffered considerably as a result of the blow. Gaff now and deservedly so must face the consequences of his actions and miss the remainder of the season. Gaff is a fine young man that unfortunately made a bad error of judgement that had far more severe consequences to his opponent and himself than he intended.

The AFL must stamp out all punching regardless of force. As allowing blows to arms, chests and backs can lead to unfortunate accidents like the Gaff/Brayshaw one.

Give me break Rookie Draft thuggish act and a king hit is a king hit and needs to called as it is.

You do the crime, you do the time. He deserves everything he gets. The head honcho tried to show remorse today to minimise the penalty. They don't give a stuff about Brayshaw's well-being. All they care about is the big W. Doesn't mean coz you play for the Eagles you should receive special treatment.