News JOM offered a week

[oldgoat]

They recognise that players are 'shrugging' to make a tackle slip high.

They really should recognise this, too, but this is a really weird time for the AFL. They know they are going to face massive future litigation for not protecting players from CRT. Whether anyone likes it or not, it is coming like a tsunami on the horizon.

So here we are, with the AFL shitting itself and overreacting to every minor head impact. Sad days for our sport, but maybe the 'good old days' weren't so good either.

Hopefully some common sense middle ground can be attained, but it is a tricky situation.

But if they don't crack down on "dangerous" staging...
then there is a perverse incentive to put their own heads at risk to win a free.
Leading to more infuries/litigation?

 

[rgauci]

But if they don't crack down on "dangerous" staging...
then there is a perverse incentive to put their own heads at risk to win a free.
Leading to more infuries/litigation?

This is the absolute truth, the players will do anything, including hurting themselves to win. It’s in their nature, that’s why they are elite sports people, win at all costs mentality.

I liked this post and didn’t think “a like” did it enough justice.

 

[Lach72]

Carlton are challenging the sling of Cerra on Hickey and his was worse than jaeger’s

 

[BeepTest]

Its JOM deliberately driving down thats the problem. Combined with Spargos momentum it creates a sling movement which is unintentional but is what results - regardless of whether Spargo accentuates the action by going off his feet. We will get to a point where players wont be able to bring players to ground anymore. He should get off due to the grading as his head doesnt hit the ground but either Freo wont contest or the AFL will just reject this.

 

[Ge3ks]

Give the umpire a week for not blowing the whistle quick enough.

Edit: just rewatched, in this case I take it back. Happened so fast.

 

[Kram]

How is it high contact?

 

[DockerDerek]

It just smacks of the MRP wanting to impose a one week penalty and then finding an offence which will give that result.

There was no high contact and impact could only be low given that Spargo immediately jumps to his feet to take his free kick.

I think it has to be challenged otherwise the AFL will know that we will meekly accept anything they want to throw at us.

 

[Piggy Smalls]

We had to have appealed by 10am so I guess we’ll know soon if we did lodge it or not

 

[BettercallSaul]

We know too that in the preliminary finals at least they will basically ignore sling tackles.

 

[Alfonz]

Its JOM deliberately driving down thats the problem. Combined with Spargos momentum it creates a sling movement which is unintentional but is what results - regardless of whether Spargo accentuates the action by going off his feet. We will get to a point where players wont be able to bring players to ground anymore. He should get off due to the grading as his head doesnt hit the ground but either Freo wont contest or the AFL will just reject this.

But he's not driving him down. Watch it closely and you can see JOM is simply trying his best to just hold onto Spargo. Spargo is 100% responsible for diving into the ground, and JOM simply can't hold him up due to his own body position, so he falls down too. If JOM had actually driven him into the ground, Spargo would have been concussed. I have watched it in slow motion heaps of times and there is almost zero downwards force from JOM. The more I look at it, the more absurd it is that this is even a free kick, let alone suspension. Should have been holding the ball.

 

[muckypup]

WT FN F

Anyone else noted this rule has created the peverse situation where the player being tackled instigates the sling? Many are doing it across all clubs.

 

[kingswood71]

Even if the tribunal thought it was a dangerous tackle, how can it even be graded medium impact??? If this is medium what does low even look like?

Insignificant impact would be more accurate to describe this one.

Low was the De Goey one from earlier in the year....Apparently...
Which looked more impact than the JOM one ironically....

 

[kingswood71]

Club to challenge O’Meara charge

Walyalup can confirm the Club will challenge Jaeger O’Meara’s one-week suspension at the AFL Tribunal

www.fremantlefc.com.au

Challenging! Great. Hope they use the De Goey one as an example....If thats low, then JOM's is even lower!

 

[kingswood71]

Maybe go with interpretation rather than rules. Just from watching other examples this year.

Whats your view on the De Goey tackle that was graded as low impact? Did they interpret that wrong?

 

[EastcoastDocker]

Has Jaeger ever been suspended? Couldnt find anything.

Would have to be one of the cleanest players going around

 

[Docker82]

Club to challenge O’Meara charge

Walyalup can confirm the Club will challenge Jaeger O’Meara’s one-week suspension at the AFL Tribunal

www.fremantlefc.com.au

Challenging! Great. Hope they use the De Goey one as an example....If thats low, then JOM's is even lower!

Commit to the appeal too if comes to it. We can get JOM off this one

 

[Ge3ks]

Hopefully reduced to a fine.

 

[Bigger]

I will tell you who does need to curb his natural impulse to dump people in tackles.

Johnno. That's who.

 

[Ge3ks]

I will tell you who does need to curb his natural impulse to dump people in tackles.

Johnno. That's who.

Whoa easy there. This isn't Minority Report. You don't need to concern troll a player for something he hasn't done yet.

 

[BigTacoBandit]

Under the new rules that looked like a suspension all day to me.

How so?
This is from the tribunal guidelines. I'D argue the tackle is none of these things.

 

[Tonga Bob]

Into them lads!

 

[Bigger]

Whoa easy there. This isn't Minority Report. You don't need to concern troll a player for something he hasn't done yet.

Except he has (reported in Brisbane game) and he was halfway through it again on the weekend, remembered what happens and carefully put the dude down. I don't think he is a mongrel, just has this new rig with waaay more power than he is used to.

And. to be frank, I would like it if he did have a bit of mongrel, I just don't want him suspended.

 

[Joao]

I will tell you who does need to curb his natural impulse to dump people in tackles.

Johnno. That's who.

100% Thought he was about to repeat his Zorko tackle on some dude on the weekend. Pulled out of it.

How so?
This is from the tribunal guidelines. I'D argue the tackle is none of these things.
View attachment 1699808

As I said, I meant more on the interpretation and other successful bans this year.

The main thing I think triggers the MRO is the arm pinned.

 

[BigTacoBandit]

100% Thought he was about to repeat his Zorko tackle on some dude on the weekend. Pulled out of it.

As I said, I meant more on the interpretation and other successful bans this year.

The main thing I think triggers the MRO is the arm pinned.

Othere who got banned this year had elements of these things - JOM's didn't. Sure one arm was pinned but the other wasn't and he chose to hold the ball rather protect himself.

Pinning arms is a legitimate tackling technique. If the AFL are going to penalise tackles like this, all the ball carrier has to if their arms get pinned is dive head first into the ground and they'll get the free kick instead.

 

[Joao]

Othere who got banned this year had elements of these things - JOM's didn't. Sure one arm was pinned but the other wasn't and he chose to hold the ball rather protect himself.

Pinning arms is a legitimate tackling technique. If the AFL are going to penalise tackles like this, all the ball carrier has to if their arms get pinned is dive head first into the ground and they'll get the free kick instead.

I guess if the players are dumb enough to deliberately throw their head into the ground they are probably not smart enough to notice the damage.