cunnington's cheap shot was harder than that. staggered he got nothing.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Brodie Grundy tackle on Ben Brown
- Thread starter BG32
- Start date
-
- Tags
- #tackle #armspinned
- Tagged users None
cunnington's cheap shot was harder than that. staggered he got nothing.
Umpires getting it wrong is crazy? Yep, it's colossal crazy in every game
200kgs worth of force
Touch footy rules this weekend I assume?
- Jun 2, 2010
- 5,942
- 6,844
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
This whole thing is very tricky imo. If tackles like these are deemed "correct" then no player should ever get suspended for accidental injuries therefore I keep maintaining that the mrp therefore mustn't then deem tackles such as these correct and obviously deems them dangerous hence the suspensions.
Like if a player took a speccy and accidentally kneed an opponent in the head resulting in concussion, there would be no suspension. If said player went to spoil though and smashed opponent in head resulting in concussion it would be deemed dangerous and result in suspension.
This is the only logical way I can see this. Obviously tackles that result in concussion are deemed dangerous. End of conversation.
Like if a player took a speccy and accidentally kneed an opponent in the head resulting in concussion, there would be no suspension. If said player went to spoil though and smashed opponent in head resulting in concussion it would be deemed dangerous and result in suspension.
This is the only logical way I can see this. Obviously tackles that result in concussion are deemed dangerous. End of conversation.
i agree, i hate it so much
At the end of season, they have to get stricter with tackles in that holding the ball gets paid quicker.
Don’t give the guy a million years to get it out and once they go to ground pin them, none of this crap they get tackled and then go to ground and still have time to handball it out
toxic
Premium Gold
Completely ****ed
AFL have become a reactionary bunch of flogs.
Pinning the arms happens 50 times a game.
Either outlaw the action or not.
Right now the afl are having a bit each way and its ****ed. Completely ****ed
AFL have become a reactionary bunch of flogs.
Pinning the arms happens 50 times a game.
Either outlaw the action or not.
Right now the afl are having a bit each way and its ****ed. Completely ****ed
If they ever go back to the stupid htb interpretation they had in recent years that basically encouraged players not to win the ball then the game is ****ed. I've been enjoying seeing players encouraged to win the footy and not get penalised for it!
Right, so the perfect tackle by Bucks defenition rederns the opposition player to be knocked unconscious.
Yep. It's time the umpires stopped telling players how to play, and START blowing the whistle.
CakeEater
Brownlow Medallist
Its an interesting suspension here.
1. On the face of it, looked a mighty good tackle, did everything a coach would have wanted- no release of the footy and earnt his team possession via a free kick.
2. The interesting part is that the arbitrator on the ground thought it was a good tackle worthy of being rewarded, where as the arbitrator off the ground thought it was worthy of a suspension.
3. I really think a serious conversation needs to occur at AFL house surrounding footy and non footy acts- and the severity surrounding punishment.
4. The whole prior opportunity conversation (and its impact on HTB) needs to come into play- once the ball is pinned in the umpire needs to move quicker to restart play
1. On the face of it, looked a mighty good tackle, did everything a coach would have wanted- no release of the footy and earnt his team possession via a free kick.
2. The interesting part is that the arbitrator on the ground thought it was a good tackle worthy of being rewarded, where as the arbitrator off the ground thought it was worthy of a suspension.
3. I really think a serious conversation needs to occur at AFL house surrounding footy and non footy acts- and the severity surrounding punishment.
4. The whole prior opportunity conversation (and its impact on HTB) needs to come into play- once the ball is pinned in the umpire needs to move quicker to restart play
Last edited:
What do you mean outlaw the action or not. It has been explained how many times in this thread, quoting rules and regulations and still you don't get it.
It is an illegal to pin arms and drive head into ground. Dangerous tackle. If there is a concussion, it is weeks. Why is that so hard to accept.
toxic
Premium Gold
Its not illegal to pin arms in a tackle. Not sure why you think it is illegal???
If Brown is not concussed no action is taken.
The system is too reliant on outcome not the action imo
It is illegal to pin arms to the ground and sling them. The rules have been quoted about three times on this thread earlier. Duty of care by the tackler. Prestia did it about half way through the third on the weekend, but didn't sling him all the way around, so both went to ground on their sides, not causing injury.
If you continue with the tackle, it is incumbent on you not to let the players head hit the ground.
It is a new rule because players have started doing it the last 5 years or so.
It is tough one. Another option is to consider intent
- Jul 13, 2015
- 38,111
- 43,000
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,492
- 28,832
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Is it harsh that the impact was higher than danger's?
magpie_marty
Premium Platinum
- Apr 30, 2017
- 6,570
- 7,780
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Did Grundy sling the player?
I find duty of care when two men attack a contest and how would Grundy avoid injuring a person in a tackle that he won a free kick.
Just wondering what else Grundy should have done in what 2 seconds during an AFL game.
Grundy slung him? I must need glasses. they both fell forward.
What is the explanation for why Grundy got more weeks than Dangerfield?
toxic
Premium Gold
Ok
toxic
Premium Gold
Requote them if possible please.
The actual afl rule as i haven't seen it
Not the clause regarding rough conduct and subsequent classifications for suspension
That is a fair point, and one that won't be lost on St Kilda fans (having had Kozi on our list recently). But rules are rules. I think the MRP largely base their decisions on outcomes - as opposed to intent. I don't think Grundy intended to slam Brown's head on the turf. Nevertheless, he will be suspended, and probably heftier than someone who intended to slam their opponents head on the turf but didn't succeed (Mumford is always a good example of this - although recently he has been succeeding).
