AFL - N Brown Hit was a Cheapshot

[Dave The Man]

How was it a CheapShot? He was going for the Ball and Arrived late and Accidentally got him in the Head

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-ducks-chance-to-send-a-strong-message-about-cheap-shots/story-fnp04d70-1227490439561

[Pete 70]

Dave I'll let you in in a secret - they hate us. Still - we are on the way back so the hatred will increase - unlike Carlton and Essendon who are irrelevant for at least 5 more years

[Pies4shaw]

I've actually had this assassination of Brown's character.

Watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfzXec2m418

If you just watch the slo-mo replays in this footage (from a side angle), it looks like a deliberate hit from a player who wasn't contesting the ball. If, however, you watch the normal-speed footage of the play, what you see is that the Swans had control of the ball in the back pocket and an up and under kick looked to be straight down Brown's throat. Unsurprisingly, he charged in to take the mark and cause the turnover. Parker runs back with the flight of the ball and gets right in Brown's path. Brown is running straight at the ball and would have expected to mark it.

It is outrageous that Brown was given any penalty for that. It was a complete accident caused by an idiot who decided to do a "courageous" thing and jump into the path of the player who "had his name on" the ball. It wasn't a careless, mistimed challenge - it was the inevitable consequence of Parker putting himself in Brown's path as Brown charged in to mark a ball that had been kicked straight to him.

The bemusing aspect of all of this is that it was actually Parker who went at Brown front on. It is inconceivable that Brown should have been expected to leave himself open for a hit in that circumstance.

[E]

I think you guys have the shades on (you know the ones that only allow you to see out of one eye). Brown is not a dirty player, but AT BEST, he is guilty of being incredibly reckless. When he realized he was out of the contest, he turns side on and cleans him up.

If someone did that exact play to Pendles, we would be looking for 6 weeks!

[Pies4shaw]

I think you really need to look at that video again. You're just perpetuating the same rubbish that's been unfairly directed at Brown since this happened.

If you look at it in proper speed, you will recognise just how stupid your proposition is.

[jackcass]

I'm not suggesting that Brown had any malice toward Parker but as soon as he left the ground and tucked up he was gone. If he'd kept an arm extended to indicate his intention was to spoil he may well have escaped with a fine.

[3rd degree]

I am just happy that Brown is right to play the Handbaggers after Ling was desperate to put him away with his snodnose commentary for a few weeks!

[Pies4shaw]

But his intention was never to spoil - he was going for the mark - until Parker came into the frame from the wrong direction. That's the entire point here - Brown was in the box seat to mark that ball - and was charging in to do so. The laws of physics dictated the outcome from the moment Parker decided to put himself into that picture. It needs to be understood that it was Parker who was running at Brown from front on, with the flight of the ball, not vice versa. Brown must be allowed to "butter up" to protect himself - it simply can't be correct that he has to stay open and cop a shirtfront from a bloke running at him from the wrong direction.

[jackcass]

[Pies4shaw]

I do blame Parker - if he had not run into the frame from the wrong direction, Brown would have taken a comfortable mark.

I'll say it again - short of dematerialising, there was nothing Brown could do to avoid that contact. It only looks otherwise in the slo-mo. Once there is going to be contact from a player running from entirely the wrong direction to make a contest, Brown must be entitled to protect himself.

The play has to be looked at in its context - it was an errant Swans turnover kick out of the back pocket. Brown had a full, straight run at it and must have expected to take the mark.

[Neil Appleby]

Brown has been laughing all week Pies4Shaw! He left the ground, connected Parker in the head with force. I don't think it was deliberate, but is was avoidable. OK Parker got up and continued to play, but there was no way Brownie was going to, or should, escape penalty for that hit. I do agree though that the media went over-board, especially Ling and Carey.

[Pies4shaw]

Of course it was avoidable - he could just have let Parker clean him up - that would've been an acceptable outcome.

[jackcass]

[Pies4shaw]

Yes, we will. What we do, I think, agree about, though, is the disproportionate and appalling vehemence of the media response.

[Deja Vu]

I'm with you Pies4Shaw. There seems to be an unwritten rule now that if someone backs into a pack to take a mark and you're coming the other way you need to pull out of the contest.

**** that! Brown had as much right to go for the ball as soon as he saw it come off the boot as Parker did. Yes Parker was courageous. And yes Brown was a smidge late. But played at full speed we're talking about split seconds.

It's the kind of play where if Brown did pull out I would have been cursing as to why he didn't go harder