I can't believe the noise that surrounds this issue. Every commentator on TV and radio had Alan Didak sitting out the season for the bump he laid on former team mate Heath Scotland. It seems the only people that were on his side were his team mates and his coach. In the after match interview, Mick took a journo to task about labeling the incident as a hit rather than a bump. Mick refused to answer his question until he acknowledged that it was a legitimate bump and not a hit. A hit implies it was a premeditated punch. The distinction is crucial as this is where the case may have been thrown out if it had of gone to the tribunal.
Watching the incident, the match review panel decided that the contact WAS accidental. What happened was that as Didak ran in with the intent to bump, Scotland looked up and saw him coming, and in trying to avoid contact, he ducked ever so slightly. As Scotland is a small bloke, he only had to duck by a few inches and he put his head into danger. Had he stayed upright, there would have been contact but it would have been shoulder to shoulder. Therefore the panel decided it was accidental.
I love the way some of the experts are bleating about it, and they will continue all during the week. I especially liked seeing Robert Walls crying while "on the couch". He is a confirmed Collingwood hater, therefore I take great pleasure in his testy response to the news that the charge was thrown out. Where was he when Blake Caracella was left almost paralyzed after being accidentally bumped in the head? I don't recall the same public outcry. The difference was that the Collingwood player was on the receiving end, and while he may have said something about the players need to be protected, he wasn't calling for the Brisbane Lions players blood, which is interesting. Probably because he coached them all those years ago. Anything he says about Collingwood is pretty much always negative. (Except for when the pies were on top of the ladder earlier this year, he actually gave them praise, I wondered who that guy on the couch was!).
I'm waiting to see what Tim Lane has to say about it. Just wait, he'll be all guns blazing and blaming Eddie for getting him off. Then Caroline Wilson will chime in with her pennies worth and usual rants about the influence of media moguls on the game. There was an article in today's Herald Sun by ex-umpire Derek Humphrey-Smith, who does his best to uphold the law from an umpires perspective, but he's just typical of the umpiring fraternity. As Sam Newman continually repeats, they believe they are a more important part of the game than the players. Get this through your thick skull, No Players - No Game!!!
DH-S reminds me of an old friend of mine who joined the umpiring ranks many years ago, he loved footy but couldn't make it through to any senior teams once he turned 17, so he took the option to umpire. Being a rover, he had the perfect height for an umpire, and he also had plenty of that "short man syndrome". He used to really throw his weight around during games, and this was during the days when umpires were allowed to jump into fights and physically separate players. He always believed that he was a major part of the game and used to umpire that way. That was nearly 20 years ago, and things are worse now.
Have a look at this photo. Why wasn't Whitnall cited for this hit. Have a look at it, it's not doctored. Surely this is an elbow to Didaks chin ? In the past, evidence like this was used to book players and suspend them. Luckily, these days we have many more cameras at the ground, and the actual footage of this incident shows that Didak avoids the elbow as Whitnall slipped as he was trying to push Didak away. Whitnall got what he deserved, a free kick against him and an easy goal to Collingwood. This was followed by the punch by Bannister to Brodie Hollands chin and another free and goal to the Pies.
Anyway, I Don't expect any comments on this one. I just like to point out the footy injustices.
