Player Watch Willie Rioli

[Sleezy]

You are 100% correct in that there are occasions when a head collision is purely incidental and the view as espoused by some that players should not elect to bump or spoil is crap. Last Saturday when Connor Rozee was flattened Dermot Brereton was full of, 'how great the body contact was', yet if Rozee had hit his head on the ground when he fell and had a HIA the incident would have been looked at by the tribunal.

It would not have. Shiel had the ball. When you have the ball, it is not a bump. The onus is on the tackler to not knock themselves out in the tackle.

Otherwise Barrass would have been cited for causing Marshall's concussion when Marshall knocked himself out trying to tackle him.

 

[raptalia]

It would not have. Shiel had the ball. When you have the ball, it is not a bump. The onus is on the tackler to not knock themselves out in the tackle.

Otherwise Barrass would have been cited for causing Marshall's concussion when Marshall knocked himself out trying to tackle him.

I posted that it would have been looked at and I am not sure that possession of the ball always counts.

 

[PowerBaz]

Is the ball not being in the vicinity a bigger problem than the actual flapping hand?

 

[PAFC66]

If the head is to be truly sacrosanct in Aussie Rules my opinion is that players who duck, particularly those who do so obviously and repeatedly, should be as liable for match review sanctions as those who are the instigators. They are just as responsible for head high contact in the game, even if it is their own heads they are putting at risk.

Luke shuey should get 10 weeks then.

 

[philreich]

My dislike of all things AFL is growing by the day - this is a joke.

 

[theouthouse]

A bit off topic but why are the majority of players not wearing mouth guards these days.
They not only save your teeth but helps with hits to the jaw from progressing to concussion. The jaw muscles are connected to the skull.
The reason Ridley suffered concussion was mainly because he wasn't expecting it and didn't brace his jaw for impact.
Ask any boxer about the benefits of a mouth guard. They should be mandatory for professional footballers.

Pretty sure they are mandatory in Junior football for that very reason. Seems illogical that they aren't a compulsory part of the uniform.

 

[Mr Experience]

Going for marks is slightly different to things like making it hurt in a spoiling attempt, once you take out see ball get ball football actions the sport is dead.

Spoiling is a football act no less legitimate than marking. Or it was until the Van Rooyen decision last night. That's the future and marking will be in the cross-hairs eventually.

 

[JimmyBC]

Spoiling is a football act no less legitimate than marking. Or it was until the Van Rooyen decision last night. That's the future and marking will be in the cross-hairs eventually.

They are football acts but defending is more opponent focused than purely flying for a mark completely focused on the ball.

As I said you'll have to ban jumping, then ban rucking as they collide as well.. in all this I can't think of one incident where a hanger has knocked anyone out.

 

[philthy05]

Rioli can be told to keep his arms lower and especially his feet on the ground.

He is dead unlucky here but had his feet been on the ground id say it's highly likely he wouldn't have been reported here.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Rubbish.

His arms are not raised / extended any more than anyone else.

I’ve I’ve posted many times and shown in the pics

His arms are more in than Ridleys for gods sake.

It would not have. Shiel had the ball. When you have the ball, it is not a bump. The onus is on the tackler to not knock themselves out in the tackle.

Otherwise Barrass would have been cited for causing Marshall's concussion when Marshall knocked himself out trying to tackle him.

Wrong. Shiel was going for the ball.

He collected rozee high.

Only the dumb result based afl muppet rules mean Shiel didn’t get done.

Rozee leaves the field and that’s weeks.

Is the ball not being in the vicinity a bigger problem than the actual flapping hand?

No.

1. It was in play, only the moron dons fans contend it wasn’t.

2. As I’ve shown many times riolis arm is no more out than any other player on the field regularly has their hands

 

[Sleezy]

Wrong. Shiel was going for the ball.

He collected rozee high.

Only the dumb result based afl muppet rules mean Shiel didn’t get done.

Rozee leaves the field and that’s weeks.

Hate to break it to you philth, but Sheil had the ball well before making contact with Rozee. Not a bump.

 

[philthy05]

Hate to break it to you philth, but Sheil had the ball well before making contact with Rozee. Not a bump.

View attachment 1683368

Show the ****ing video.

That is the freeze frame of him the moment he’s collecting the ball, and he hits rozee about 0.3 seconds later.

I never said it was a bump. I said he’s collected rozee high, and I argued against your, “Shiel has ball ergo he can’t get games for concussing a player” argument which doesn’t hold water.

Sheil was going for the ball, collected rozee high. Rozee got up. If Rozee stays down … that’s weeks. End of story. I’m not sure how you can contend otherwise.



Are you honestly saying if rozee had been concussed that’s not a suspension?

 

[Sleezy]

Show the ******* video.

That is the freeze frame of him the moment he’s collecting the ball, and he hits rozee about 0.3 seconds later.



Are you honestly saying if rozee had been concussed that’s not a suspension?

I'll ask you this: when has the ball carrier ever been suspended for a high hit? I certainly can't think of one. Probably because he doesn't have a realistic alternative method of contesting the ball. Gets to the ball first, takes it cleanly, braces for contact. That's football, nothing more.

Note: I'm not sure why still images count as proof for you, but not for me.

 

[philthy05]

I'll ask you this: when has the ball carrier ever been suspended for a high hit? I certainly can't think of one. Probably because he doesn't have a realistic alternative method of contesting the ball. Gets to the ball first, takes it cleanly, braces for contact. That's football, nothing more.

Note: I'm not sure why still images count as proof for you, but not for me.

View attachment 1683377
View attachment 1683378
View attachment 1683374
View attachment 1683382
View attachment 1683383

Wait? You think a player has never been done for high while collecting the ball?

That’s happened plenty of times!

Your stills clearly show Shiel has only just collected the ball.

He’s hit rozee in the contest.


I’m baffled that I have to point out to someone that head high + leave the field = suspension.


Regardless of who got to the ball first. That doesn’t matter. It’s results based punishment.

Having to explain that to someone who’s been following this sport is like having to explain gravity to a pilot.

 

[TeeKray]

People are overreacting with this fabric of the game stuff. It's never been permitted to make high contact, it's not part of the sport. The difference is what used to be a free kick now results in a suspension if the player is hurt.

 

[Blinky Nyland]

The fact the AFL were still paying frees to Selwood and Schuey (and now Weightman) for ducking into tackles, after supposedly making the head sancrosant, shows it's about appearing to do the right thing, rather than doing the right thing. These three should have been suspended for multiple weeks each time until they learnt to set that the AFL was/is serious about protecting the head. Whilst we get those ducking are still rewarded, rather than punished, and the continual Vic/Non-Vic difference in the severity of penalties. the AFL deserve all the lawsuits that will come their way.

I agree and I'm concerned that the even greater focus on protecting the head this year has increased the practice of players ducking into tackles and to opponents blocking a players way. Penalising the ducker is the only way to stop this.

 

[Powerage]

People are overreacting with this fabric of the game stuff. It's never been permitted to make high contact, it's not part of the sport. The difference is what used to be a free kick now results in a suspension if the player is hurt.

That's right. As Dermie said during the broadcast, while alienating the whole AFLW, "It's still a man's game"...

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Rubbish.

His arms are not raised / extended any more than anyone else.

I’ve I’ve posted many times and shown in the pics

His arms are more in than Ridleys for gods sake.



Wrong. Shiel was going for the ball.

He collected rozee high.

Only the dumb result based afl muppet rules mean Shiel didn’t get done.

Rozee leaves the field and that’s weeks.





No.

1. It was in play, only the moron dons fans contend it wasn’t.

2. As I’ve shown many times riolis arm is no more out than any other player on the field regularly has their hands

View attachment 1683354View attachment 1683355

That's not careless, it's accidental contact. Junior has his back to the player and wouldn't be able to see he's stumbled into the tackle. If Ridley was standing straight the arm would have contacted his chest.

 

[philreich]

Spoiling is a football act no less legitimate than marking. Or it was until the Van Rooyen decision last night. That's the future and marking will be in the cross-hairs eventually.

Quite obviously the AFL wants a player to allow an opponent to mark the ball uncontested, as opposed to risking a mistimed spoil. His coach wouldn't be too impressed!!!

 

[Sleezy]

Wait? You think a player has never been done for high while collecting the ball?

That’s happened plenty of times!

Your stills clearly show Shiel has only just collected the ball.

He’s hit rozee in the contest.


I’m baffled that I have to point out to someone that head high + leave the field = suspension.


Regardless of who got to the ball first. That doesn’t matter. It’s results based punishment.

Having to explain that to someone who’s been following this sport is like having to explain gravity to a pilot.

Philthy, can you please stop talking at me like I'm the dumbest person you've ever met? Even if you were unequivocally right, arguing this way is disrespectful and does nothing to encourage calm, reasoned debate.

Back to the issue at hand. What you are arguing doesn't seem to be true at all. Head high + leave the field <> suspension in all or even most circumstances, even this season. Sometimes a head high hit is considered incidental contact and play on is called. Three examples involving just the one player:

• Marshall tackled Paddy McCartin and his head hit the ground, concussed him, and he hasn't returned. Marshall wasn't cited.
• Marshall hit Tom McCartin in the head, with his hip, in a contest for the ball. Tom McCartin was concussed and left the field. Marshall wasn't cited.
• Marshall tackled Duggan, hit his head on his shoulder. Marshall was concussed and left the field. Duggan wasn't cited.

That's three incidents from one team in the span of three games where concussion did not lead to suspension. There will be more, but we don't know about them because a) they don't involve Port and b) they weren't cited by the MRP so we've not had a chance to review them in detail. (There was one I saw involving Cerra, very similar to Marshall/McCartin & Shiel/Rozee but I can't remember who Carlton were playing at the time so I can't find it.)

In the incident we're discussing, Shiel got to the ball first and took clean possession. Rozee recognised this, propped and waited to tackle. Sheil was too strong. That's it. Even if Rozee had hit his head on the turf and gotten concussed that would have been it.

As long as Shiel doesn't try to stiff arm Rozee, he has no duty of care to protect the tackler. He has the ball and can run in any direction he likes. It's up to Rozee to stop him without getting himself hurt.

Snapshots of the examples referenced above:
Marshall tackles McCartin into the ground, possibly ending his career, but not getting cited, let alone suspended:


Todd Marshall & Tom McCartin contest the ball (Note this is different from the Rozee/Shiel incident, where only Sheil was contesting the ball. Rozee stopped and waited to tackle)


Todd Marshall collects Tom McCartin's head with his hip, causing a concussion. Todd Marshall is not cited for this.


Liam Duggan collects Marshall in the head with his shoulder while being tackled, causing a concussion. Duggan was not cited.


And I'll finish with this one:

• R1 2021 - Dan Houston knees Curtis Taylor in the head spoiling the ball, causing concussion. Houston was not cited.
• I am very interested to see how this circumstance would be treated today. It's the only instance of concussion resulting from a knee in the marking contest that I can think of.

 

[philthy05]

Philthy, can you please stop talking at me like I'm the dumbest person you've ever met? Even if you were unequivocally right, arguing this way is disrespectful and does nothing to encourage calm, reasoned debate.

Back to the issue at hand. What you are arguing doesn't seem to be true at all. Head high + leave the field <> suspension in all or even most circumstances, even this season. Sometimes a head high hit is considered incidental contact and play on is called. Three examples involving just the one player:

• Marshall tackled Paddy McCartin and his head hit the ground, concussed him, and he hasn't returned. Marshall wasn't cited.
• Marshall hit Tom McCartin in the head, with his hip, in a contest for the ball. Tom McCartin was concussed and left the field. Marshall wasn't cited.
• Marshall tackled Duggan, hit his head on his shoulder. Marshall was concussed and left the field. Duggan wasn't cited.

That's three incidents from one team in the span of three games where concussion did not lead to suspension. There will be more, but we don't know about them because a) they don't involve Port and b) they weren't cited by the MRP so we've not had a chance to review them in detail. (There was one I saw involving Cerra, very similar to Marshall/McCartin & Shiel/Rozee but I can't remember who Carlton were playing at the time so I can't find it.)

In the incident we're discussing, Shiel got to the ball first and took clean possession. Rozee recognised this, propped and waited to tackle. Sheil was too strong. That's it. Even if Rozee had hit his head on the turf and gotten concussed that would have been it.

As long as Shiel doesn't try to stiff arm Rozee, he has no duty of care to protect the tackler. He has the ball and can run in any direction he likes. It's up to Rozee to stop him without getting himself hurt.

Snapshots of the examples referenced above:
Marshall tackles McCartin into the ground, possibly ending his career, but not getting cited, let alone suspended:
View attachment 1683406

Todd Marshall & Tom McCartin contest the ball (Note this is different from the Rozee/Shiel incident, where only Sheil was contesting the ball. Rozee stopped and waited to tackle)
View attachment 1683414

Todd Marshall collects Tom McCartin's head with his hip, causing a concussion. Todd Marshall is not cited for this.
View attachment 1683415

Liam Duggan collects Marshall in the head with his shoulder while being tackled, causing a concussion. Duggan was not cited.
View attachment 1683444

And I'll finish with this one:

• R1 2021 - Dan Houston knees Curtis Taylor in the head spoiling the ball, causing concussion. Houston was not cited.
• I am very interested to see how this circumstance would be treated today. It's the only instance of concussion resulting from a knee in the marking contest that I can think of.

View attachment 1683455
View attachment 1683456

You’ve given examples that are nothing like this and have never ever been considered like this.

No one, absolutely no one thinks a player going for a tackle and hitting their head on the player means that player getting tackled gets done. Absolutely no one (but you) thinks it’s remotely similar to the Shiel rozee collision.

The afl, even with all their inconsistencies do not take that to the tribunal.

The same for a player hitting his head on the ground in a regular tackle. Unless there’s a sling or reckless action, players do not get cited for that.

You might as well be arguing using examples from chess. These actions are in no way related to the example we’re talking about.


Rozee gets concussed, shiel gets done for that hit.

No it’s or buts about it. It’s not even remotely contentious.

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

There is no world where Shiel is getting a suspension for that collision.

 

[philthy05]

There is no world where Shiel is getting a suspension for that collision.

The world where rozee gets concussed he gets done every ****ing day.

That’s the way it’s been ruled for years now.

Who the hell has been watching football and thinks that you collect a player high, he gets concussed and the player gets off (barring a few very contentious times the afl has manufactured a result usually near finals for a vic like Cotchin)


High high + concussion is weeks 99.9999% of the time.

 

[JakeNeadeFan]

The world where rozee gets concussed he gets done every ******* day.

That’s the way it’s been ruled for years now.

Who the hell has been watching football and thinks that you collect a player high, he gets concussed and the player gets off (barring a few very contentious times the afl has manufactured a result usually near finals for a vic like Cotchin)


High high + concussion is weeks 99.9999% of the time.

Can you show one case where a player has the ball in their hands and gets suspended for a collision? I can't think of any.

The closest was probably the Mackay case a few years back where he sort of missed the ball with his hands. And he got off from that in the tribunal.

Suspensions for collisions/bumps only occur when the players doesn't have posession of the ball. That's the way it is.

 

[FishingRick04]

What I don’t get is people up in arms about the Dees player getting two weeks for running with the flight of the ball, missing the ball and clobbering the guys head. He would be fully aware he’s at risk of this with his act.

However Rioli putting an arm out back to the player and not knowing where his head is, with an innocuous hit is worthy of 3 and guilty?

The Melbourne player
A) performed an act with greater risk
B) had a lot more speed and ferocity in impact
C) reckless hit the head.

I’m confused with the defence and argument of both

 

[Sleezy]

You’ve given examples that are nothing like this and have never ever been considered like this.

No one, absolutely no one thinks a player going for a tackle and hitting their head on the player means that player getting tackled gets done. Absolutely no one (but you) thinks it’s remotely similar to the Shiel rozee collision.

The afl, even with all their inconsistencies do not take that to the tribunal.

The same for a player hitting his head on the ground in a regular tackle. Unless there’s a sling or reckless action, players do not get cited for that.

You might as well be arguing using examples from chess. These actions are in no way related to the example we’re talking about.


Rozee gets concussed, shiel gets done for that hit.

No it’s or buts about it. It’s not even remotely contentious.

1.
Regarding the purpose of the examples, I think we're arguing different points. You said head 'high contact + concussion = suspension'. I disagreed and supplied examples, that's all. I'm not saying all three incidents are similar, clearly they are not. They are just examples where 'head high contact + concussion = suspension' is not true. Involving one player, within a three week span. An indication that the 'head high contact + concussion = suspension' rubric is quite often not true.

2.
Regarding the applicability of the examples to the Shiel/Rozee contest, I'm wondering if you've seen the Marshal/T McCartin contest? It's not just analogous - it's worse.

Shiel/Rozee

• Ball is in dispute
• Rozee props, Sheil takes possession
• Rozee braces to tackle, Shiel braces for contact
• Rozee is not strong enough to stick the tackle and hits the dirt, but does not hit his head on the ground and is therefore not concussed

Marshall/T McCartin

• Ball is in dispute
• Marshall & T McCartin both go for the ball
• Marshall turns his body as he gets to the ball a fraction of a second before McCartin, also going for the ball
• Marshall hits McCartin in the head with his hip, causing a concussion

The key difference in these incidents is that McCartin also has his head over the ball in an attempt to win it. Here is the key question:
If Marshall didn't get cited for actually concussing a player he was competing with for the ball, why would Shiel get cited for hypothetically concussing a player who did not contest the ball but waited to tackle?

3.
It's probably worth discussing what the differences are between the Shiel/Rozee contest and the Duggan/Marshall contests actually are. As I see it:
- Movement: Marshall is moving to tackle, Rozee is waiting to tackle
- Time in possession: Duggan has had prior opportunity to dispose of the ball, Shiel has not had prior opportunity to dispose of the ball
- Impact: Marshall is concussed, Rozee is not concussed

These are the differences that I can find between the two contests. Ignoring the fact that Rozee was not concussed (as we're arguing the hypothetical that he was here):
What do the other two differences have to do with whether the ball holder's action is reportable or not?
- Movement: I can't see why a stationary player waiting to tackle needs to be protected, but a moving playing chasing to tackle does not. They are both initiating the contact, not the ball carrier. What's the functional difference?
- Time in possession: If time in possession is the difference between whether the ball carrier is liable for the impact to the tackling player (which you did seem to argue, when you stated that Shiel only had the ball for a fraction of a second) how long does the ball carrier have to have the ball for, before he is no longer liable for the body positioning of the tackler? 0.5 seconds? 1 second? Where is the cut-off?