Brodie Grundy tackle on Ben Brown

[Keyza]

Discharged from hospital, kept in for observation overnight, so a fairly severe concussion. Everything appears to be ok, outside the concussion.

Good to hear. To be fair to Grundy he seemed to be pretty shaken up by the incident and was concerned about Brown. Last week there was no mention of Kreuzer. According to Chris Scott Dangerfield didnt know he had been injured and apparently hadnt noticed he didnt play the second half!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Keyza]

Kruezer did have the ball, why do people keep forgetting this?

For about one second at the start of the tackle. It spilled out and Dangerfield continued with the tackle.

 

[firefighter]

Of course all the Cat supporters are out here demanding Grundy gets more than 1 week. We play them in 2 weeks and we all know how they can't beat the Pies.

Can't beat them? It's 3-2 from the last 5, and if I'm not mistaken our last flag was courtesy of your sloppy pies.

Can't believe people are still going on about whether or not Kruezer had the ball. Are you still looking for a free kick?

 

[Keyza]

Point to me where Kreuzer had the ball when Dangerfield drove him into the ground, already dislodged when Danger decides to bring him to ground

Thanks for posting this. He had the ball for a micro second and the tackle was continued. Kreuzer should have received a free.

 

[Grrr]

I don't know how long ago you played, but to be fair there is a lot more emphasis placed on tackling these days. I played in the 70s through to the 90s and tackling was nothing like it is now. You were generally coached to aim for the hips and try and hurt them if you could.

I think it was a great tackle. Brown with zero awareness, Grundy pins him so he can't get the handball off and swings him so that the momentum a) prevents him from getting a kick away, and b) stops Grundy from getting into his back.

I don't know why you would think that Grundy seemed to feel, 'the need to drive a player into the ground.'

I wish that I could find vision to put up of Milburn getting suspended a few years back for tackling a young Richmond player and driving his head into the ground. They're the ones that should rightly be umpired / sanctioned out of the game. Dangerfield and Grundy just the unfortunate by-product of playing a contact sport.

Shit happens.

Same 70's and 80's. The young player was Edwards, and it was a shocker.
I was never taught to hurt someone when tackling, I was taught to stop them, if it hurt well that was part of it. That is a far cry from the sort of tackles that have crept into the game. Go and watch a game in the 80's. As soon as there was a tackle the ump blew the whistle, so there was no need to carry on further with the tackle. The umps were very tight with the rules. Nowdays the umps let it go to long so that it gives too much opportunity for the player being tackled to get rid of the ball. So therefore the tackler has to hold for longer and that leads to this head first stuff. 360º tackles!! Half way round you were penalised for holding the ball. Way to much leeway with that.

 

[firefighter]

Kreuzer should have received a free.

Nah threw the ball. Free kick Danger.

 

[Boxhead_31]

Thanks for posting this. He had the ball for a micro second and the tackle was continued. Kreuzer should have received a free.

Illegal disposal means nothing now?

 

[Keyza]

Nah threw the ball. Free kick Danger.

Nah, the ball was knocked out the second the tackle began. He then continued to tackle him even though the ball was at least 5 metres away.

 

[Keyza]

Illegal disposal means nothing now?

The ball was knocked out at the start of the tackle.

 

[firefighter]

Nah, the ball was knocked out the second the tackle began.

Nah throw.

What a dumb pointless argument this is. Games over.

 

[Keyza]

Nah throw.

What a dumb pointless argument this is. Games over.

It was a Geelong poster who brought it up.

 

[romeohwho]

Nah, the ball was knocked out the second the tackle began. He then continued to tackle him even though the ball was at least 5 metres away.

Dangerfield didn't see that Kreuzer no longer had the ball-he is on the right side with his head down and Kreuzer threw it out to the he left.

 

[Power Raid]

Brown was fighting the tackle tos stay upright and not be turned side on...and didnt relaease the ball until very late .

yep, perhaps the umpires need to call htb earlier to avoid this issue.

Taylor Walker was swung 360 and no htb called. The 360 was not an issue for me, but the consequence of not rewarding it, is tacklers need to go further than they need to as a result.

hopefully the AFL find the right balance between the person going for the ball and rewarding the hard work of a good tackler.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

yep, perhaps the umpires need to call htb earlier to avoid this issue.

Taylor Walker was swung 360 and no htb called. The 360 was not an issue for me, but the consequence of not rewarding it, is tacklers need to go further than they need to as a result.

hopefully the AFL find the right balance between the person going for the ball and rewarding the hard work of a good tackler.

HTB couldnt have been called any earlier

 

[falcons2]

Arms pinned, head into the ground, player injured, take a week.

That said, I was at local footy on Saturday and paid close attention to the tackling. Several players had their arms pinned and were hammered into the ground. All got up, some a little slow.
I think the difference was the ground surface. The local ground was quite soft after recent rain. Etihad is like green painted concrete. Therefore I think Collingwood should argue the condition of the ground surface contributed more to the injury than did the tackle. Geelong should hop on board with a legal challenge to Dangerfield suspension arguing that the ground caused the KO not the tackle.

 

[Willo_]

Of course all the Cat supporters are out here demanding Grundy gets more than 1 week. We play them in 2 weeks and we all know how they can't beat the Pies.

I'm not.. i think he should get a week purely because Danger did.

But really neither of them should get anything

 

[Power Raid]

Arms pinned, head into the ground, player injured, take a week.

That said, I was at local footy on Saturday and paid close attention to the tackling. Several players had their arms pinned and were hammered into the ground. All got up, some a little slow.
I think the difference was the ground surface. The local ground was quite soft after recent rain. Etihad is like green painted concrete. Therefore I think Collingwood should argue the condition of the ground surface contributed more to the injury than did the tackle. Geelong should hop on board with a legal challenge to Dangerfield suspension arguing that the ground caused the KO not the tackle.

that's an interesting point you raise

Subi oval is rock hard with long grass rather than cushioning couch that you see in suburban ovals

I trust all AFL grounds are similar?

 

[Garlic muncher]

I just watched 10 minutes or so of the 1982 GF and did not see one tackle or a gang tackle, plenty of tough stuff, late and head high, but the tactic of pinning arms and driving players into the turf did not seem to exist.

It has crept in and IMO it is dangerous.

 

[BPikkers]

I just watched 10 minutes or so of the 1982 GF and did not see one tackle or a gang tackle, plenty of tough stuff, late and head high, but the tactic of pinning arms and driving players into the turf did not seem to exist.

It has crept in and IMO it is dangerous.

Probably because the athleticism of players these days means that you need to remove them from the play. Today's footballer is still in the contest even if they have been tackled.

 

[Garlic muncher]

Same 70's and 80's. The young player was Edwards, and it was a shocker.
I was never taught to hurt someone when tackling, I was taught to stop them, if it hurt well that was part of it. That is a far cry from the sort of tackles that have crept into the game. Go and watch a game in the 80's. As soon as there was a tackle the ump blew the whistle, so there was no need to carry on further with the tackle. The umps were very tight with the rules. Nowdays the umps let it go to long so that it gives too much opportunity for the player being tackled to get rid of the ball. So therefore the tackler has to hold for longer and that leads to this head first stuff. 360º tackles!! Half way round you were penalised for holding the ball. Way to much leeway with that.

Same same, they are taught to pin arms these days, that IMO can lead to some dangerous outcomes, just like the sling tackle which crept in they will legislate it out of the game and IMO a good thing.

Gang tackling is also common place, its not really the footy i grew up with.

 

[david addison]

Still waiting for someone to mention the Etihad surface. Shocking proof that there's no independent voices anymore. Only Carey & Cornes admitted that the Grundy tackle bares no resemblance to the other 'dangerous' tackles this season (not a sling tackle & the ball stayed in possession). Carey & Cornes clearly haven't yet learnt that they need to muddy the waters to keep the debate alive for 5 more days until the next round of football, at which time another 'scandal' will be concocted. On the 'Sunday Footy Show', Cornes exposed Scott's disapproval of the Grundy tackle as disingenuous. He said
that Grundy's method is precisely the way the Kangas players are being taught to tackle this year. A non issue. Accidents happen. If the MRP are dishing out penalties based on the outcome, rather than intent, they'll be frowning upon 'friendly fire' before too long. My guess is that the MRP will find that Grundy has no case to answer, and the journos will fain shock & dismay. On the other hand, I've never successfully predicted an MRP outcome. They're only puppets. If Grundy misses next week, I predict a Pies massacre at the hands of a humiliated Port.

 

[Snarls Barkley]

He'll get a week because arms pinned and concussion and they've been suspending players for that all season. Definitely unlucky but that's the way it's been going. I think it'll be very unfair if he gets more than 1.

 

[PACatter]

Should not be banned.

Difference between this and Danger's tackle is that Brown still had the ball. This was a good, hard tackle.

Play the game like men, dammit.

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

Should not be banned.

Difference between this and Danger's tackle is that Brown still had the ball. This was a good, hard tackle.

Play the game like men, dammit.

He had got rid of it before he hit the ground.. No different to Dangers. He is gone... High impact

 

[hoianbulldog]

You're kidding aren't you

Have you played the game

What happens at AFL level is probably 100% worse at grass roots level

More play the game to inflict damage than actually play the game


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I am not sure if you agree or disgree..