are you allowed to defend yourself if a player slaps you???

[E]

according to the MRP, you are supposed to just allow them to slap you as often as they like.

I guess you are allowed to bitvh slap them back, but otherwise, a career of good behaviour goes down the toilet and you get weeks.

what a serious pathetic joke this is.

I have defended the MRP for years. This one is outrageous. Selwood hit someone in the head behind the play and got nothing for it!

[burnsy17]

Conversely, players should just cruise around slapping others behind play.... its obviously approved behaviour, so they may as well do it.

If they get sighted, they point to the 'Selwood' case and they get off every time.

[Cuthbert Collingwood]

I'd call a retaliatory hit an instinctive reaction for a lot of footy players, especially a smack in the mouth, which can - even for the biggest toughest bloke - scare the crap out of you rather than hurt you and provoke an instant reaction.

The best way to respond would obviously be to attempt to strike .... oh no you can't do that can you?

[Lazza]

[mosig]

Also - did anyone see John Cock get tripped in the 4th quarter of the Adelaide / Port derby? As blatant as the Luke Ball incident... I thought Bally gots weeks for that??? This wasn't even looked at or mentioned in the slightest...

[Dave The Man]

Selwood is a AFL Love Child

[Brenny]

Not retaliating has been like that forever and a day.

As I said on spacebook, the issue I have is, the AFL want to stop behind the play off the ball incidents. Yet only one get's punished (supension had nothing to do with the bump). Should be both or nothing.

I'm the record here on Nicks as saying he shoould, and would, only get 1 week.

Selwood should have been sighted for Intentional, High Contact and Low Impact which should have resulted in about 6 points minus early plea plus loading of 2-3 total.

The other issue is peoples tolerance to taking a hit. Some players can take a hit and others can't. Had that hit been on Barry Hall, I'm sure Hall would of laughed and Raines would have got off.

Raines shoudl risk the 3 weeks. Take it to the tribunal (who have been pretty good in 2012) and argue it!

[Beast]

[magpieazza]

Yep ok where is the consistency.

Just on striking, what looked worse, the Scarlett hit on Ballantyne or that one on Duckwood.

[Brenny]

^ Comes back to who can withstand a hit more.

Ballantyne, to me, looks like he can handle a fist to the face better than Selwood, who looked dazed and cofused.

I can't handle a hit at all, it knocks me out straight away (doing my martial arts, it happens). Whereas, others I know, it doesn't phase them.

[BBHS]

Only if his name is Milne

[King Monkey]

Apparently not......

Great message to send to the kiddies AFL - you won't get suspended for hitting someone, unless it is in response to being hit yourself??????????????? Huh????????

[Jezza]

I think you've been hit for no good reason like Raines was with Selwood, I think it's only instinctive to give it back a bit. The decision about Selwood and Raines was an injustice and disgrace. I understand Raines being suspended, but why not Selwood?

Since Selwood wasn't suspended, Raines should also be cleared as well. What makes me more angry about this whole decision is the fact Selwood has a record at the tribunal. He was suspended for 4 matches last year.

[HAL]

Patience.

[magpieazza]