Brodie Grundy's tackle- what's the verdict?

[Apex36]

Zeibell slings Treloar head first in to the ground. Gets penalized for a dangerous tackle. Potentially inches away from disaster but Treloar walks away. - No charge. Outcome takes precedence over action.

Cunnington poleaxes Goldsack, nearly knocking him out cold, forces him off the ground for nearly a quarter to have concussion tests. - No charge. Cunnington stayed on his line to win the ball and there was supposedly no 'bump action'. Action takes precedence over outcome.

Grundy lays textbook tackle, Brown falls awkwardly whilst trying to kick the ball, results in him getting knocked out. - 2 weeks. Outcome over action.


WHERE IS THE ****ING CONSISTENCY??!!?

 

[Adz]

Has the club made a statement or are they still sending emails about lotteries?

 

[Jasper84]

MRP has graded this as intentional, high impact.

The goal post can accept 3 weeks.

 

[Mukesh]

Direct from the AFL Rules page.

Strangely i cant see what rule Brodie broke



TACKLING
When the ball is considered to be in an opposing team’s possession, a player usually carries out a tackle to gain possession, or prevent the other team from maintaining control of the ball. Due to the contact nature of the sport, and the no offside rule, a player can be tackled from any direction. Because of this, teams often employ a shepherding method – where a player is protected by their own team when they have the ball as they are advancing on the field.

When tackling, the person conducting the tackle must do so below the shoulders and above the knees of the person they are tackling, and that player can be thrown to the ground. The tackler is not allowed to push in the back when tackling – making it quite a skill to do so correctly.

When a player is tackled, they must dispose of the ball, by either kicking or handballing it. If they do not, and had prior opportunity to have done so, they are penalised for ‘holding the ball’ and therefore a free kick is handed to the team of the player who made the tackle.

There are a variety of types of tackles which can be carried out in AFL:

• Perfect tackle: Conducted when the opponent has had prior opportunity to dispose the ball, but makes it impossible for them to do so, such as pinning their arms which makes them not able to kick or handball it.
• Gang tackle: When a player is tackled by more than one opponent at the same time.
• Diving tackle: Tackling when off the ground.
• Broken tackle: When the player being tackled is able to break free from it.
• Slam tackle: When the player getting tackled’s head is deliberately slammed into the ground and is not always tolerated.
• Wing tackle: When an arm is pinned in a tackle.

There are a few rules when it comes to tackling – a high tackle is not allowed, which is when the tackle takes place above the shoulder, and results in a free kick for the team who’s player was illegally tackled. Spear tackles are also not tolerated, which is when a player throws themself into an opponent using their shoulder to bring them down, and is a reportable offence which can result in suspension.

The player who has the ball in the tackle has methods at hand in which to dodge an imminent tackle such as:

'Slam tackle: When the player getting tackled’s head is deliberately slammed into the ground and is not always tolerated.'.. So in certain cases it is tolerated ??
And the one I just don't get.. 'Spear tackles are also not tolerated, which is when a player throws themself into an opponent using their shoulder to bring them down, and is a reportable offence which can result in suspension.'... Isn't that an errr bump ? Of course the Rugby watchers amongst us would know that a real Spear tackle is lifting the guy into the air and driving him head first into the ground...

 

[Black_White]

Heard "Bulldog" Murray on the Couldabeen's last weekend saying that he was almost ready to give back his Brownlow after the Dangerfield decision. Said he couldn't recognise the game he played and used to love. Said that the grounds were too hard now and that in his day you used to have to look out for the centre wicket area and the practice pitches but that the rest of the grounds were soft and that concussion's only happened from a biff behind the earhole! But eh??? what would the Bulldog know?

Haha!
Murray will never give up that medal.
He carries it with him and pulls it out whenever asked, and often even if not asked!
I'm in the same region as him, so believe me I tell the truth.
The mans a national treasure. We love him up this way.
But hand back Charlie? Never!

 

[toxic]

'Slam tackle: When the player getting tackled’s head is deliberately slammed into the ground and is not always tolerated.'.. So in certain cases it is tolerated ??
And the one I just don't get.. 'Spear tackles are also not tolerated, which is when a player throws themself into an opponent using their shoulder to bring them down, and is a reportable offence which can result in suspension.'... Isn't that an errr bump ? Of course the Rugby watchers amongst us would know that a real Spear tackle is lifting the guy into the air and driving him head first into the ground...

Is it true In the NRL a spear tackle = suspension... no matter what the outcome

 

[Kirby]

What a joke! Must appeal

 

[Black_White]

Has the club made a statement or are they still sending emails about lotteries?

Clubs to busy drafting Blairs five year deal to worry about incidentals like this.

 

[Black_White]

Not that it happened this time, but some players are now trying to manipulate the rule by throughing themselves into the ground head first to get a free kick.
Once again the AFL have created a problem by over doing rule changes.
Rule should have just stated and outlawed sling and spear tackles, and intent with regard to this! the result or injury should be irrelevant.

Care to give us a video of this?
Because I haven't seen a player drive his head into the turf to gain a free/suspension of an opponent.
Maybe I don't watch enough footy, but that's an outlandish statement and needs to be backed up by video.

 

[Mukesh]

Is it true In the NRL a spear tackle = suspension... no matter what the outcome

Penalty, send off, followed by suspension...regardless of outcome. And 13 opponents looking to square up next time around... Having said that I haven't seen a real spear for quite a while.. lifting in a tackle is also a no-no...but it's risky using RL (or RU) as a comparison, the games are played so differently.

 

[Black_White]

Zeibell slings Treloar head first in to the ground. Gets penalized for a dangerous tackle. Potentially inches away from disaster but Treloar walks away. - No charge. Outcome takes precedence over action.

Cunnington poleaxes Goldsack, nearly knocking him out cold, forces him off the ground for nearly a quarter to have concussion tests. - No charge. Cunnington stayed on his line to win the ball and there was supposedly no 'bump action'. Action takes precedence over outcome.

Grundy lays textbook tackle, Brown falls awkwardly whilst trying to kick the ball, results in him getting knocked out. - 2 weeks. Outcome over action.


WHERE IS THE ****ING CONSISTENCY??!!?

How is anyone surprised by the outcome of a tackle resulting in suspension, or no case to answer?
This has been the MRP's modus operandi for years. They have pretty much openly stated that the result of on field actions will contribute to their decisions.
And the medical report has been the overriding factor for at least two seasons now.

 

[Mukesh]

Not that it happened this time, but some players are now trying to manipulate the rule by throughing themselves into the ground head first to get a free kick.
Once again the AFL have created a problem by over doing rule changes.
Rule should have just stated and outlawed sling and spear tackles, and intent with regard to this! the result or injury should be irrelevant.

Say that again..

 

[TheSierBear]

The forward motion in the tackle was caused by Brown, not Grundy, when he tries to kick it and loses balance. Is Grundy then supposed to hold a 100kg man upright?

That is a very good point. So now you have to bend your knees and lift the guy up? But this is a need based on the reactions of the other player. It would inevitably at some point result in very serious injuries, such as broken legs, serious knee injuries or worst of all career ending back injuries.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

AFL blows.

Think I might just watch the VFL these days. Just footy, no politics.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Realistically it was never going to be 1 week. If it was deemed a reportable offence the fact that Brown missed the entire game meant it had to be high impact - which is 3 down to 2.

If we challenge we have to prove it isn't a reportable offence, which given the current climate on pinning the arms seems difficult to do.

That shouldn't be difficult.

The rule clearly states that the offence "shall be awarded a free kick" and "may be reportable"

The officiating umpire was in a good position and clearly didn't believe the act was even worthy of a free kick - so much so that he awarded the free kick to Grundy.

 

[Black_White]

That shouldn't be difficult.

The rule clearly states that the offence "shall be awarded a free kick" and "may be reportable"

The officiating umpire was in a good position and clearly didn't believe the act was even worthy of a free kick - so much so that he awarded the free kick to Grundy.

Pfffttttt.......the MRP has always overridden the on field umpire.
In fact, that's why the MRP was set up to do!
Think about it......Match REVIEW panel.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Pfffttttt.......the MRP has always overridden the on field umpire.
In fact, that's why the MRP was set up to do!
Think about it......Match REVIEW panel.

Sure ...

... but if the crown prosecutor wants to put me in the slammer for an action caught on CCTV that a policeman has clearly witnessed and has nominated me to receive a bravery award for, well, I reckon I'd have a reasonable chance of getting off.

 

[Black_White]

Sure ...

... but if the crown prosecutor wants to put me in the slammer for an action caught on CCTV that a policeman has clearly witnessed and has nominated me to receive a bravery award for, well, I reckon I'd have a reasonable chance of getting off.

Hang in, you trying to compare real life to AFL?
Real life where 18 year olds get their first job at 16 bucks an hour while AFL draftees get $100,000 p.a. for two years? Even if they don't play a game?
Reality v AFL?
No competition.

 

[Robroy22]

MRP = Medical Reports Panel....so now its just doctors? I see the problem.

 

[Fonzeno1]

I cant believe it was 2 weeks. I could have lived with 1 given the danger incident. The reason this is happening is because players buckle at the knees and pull you forward for the in the back free kick. So players are now turning the man in the tackle to avoid the ITB free the poblem is the sideways swinging motion (not always a sling) gains alot more velocity than a forward fall. Also FWIW i think the AFL should bring in a rule that every club gets 2 challenges a year where they can challenge with no extra weeks added if they fail. As long as the incident isn't graded as intentional.

 

[Robroy22]

I cant believe it was 2 weeks. I could have lived with 1 given the danger incident. The reason this is happening is because players buckle at the knees and pull you forward for the in the back free kick. So players are now turning the man in the tackle to avoid the ITB free the poblem is the sideways swinging motion (not always a sling) gains alot more velocity than a forward fall. Also FWIW i think the AFL should bring in a rule that every club gets 2 challenges a year where they can challenge with no extra weeks added if they fail. As long as the incident isn't graded as intentional.

Challenges....great idea

 

[TW Sherrin]

MRP has graded this as intentional, high impact.
View attachment 401024
The goal post can accept 3 weeks.

He got a reasonable fine for that.

 

[BLERN]

Do we reckon we'll have to wait til tomorrow morning to find out if we're appealing? Surely there's not much to discuss here, no ramifications other than to miss a game in a dead season. Is it common place to find out the next day?

Kohli would have reviewed it already i rekon.

Sorry for the intrusion. And i apologise if my initial stupid comment was seen as offensive.

I hope you guys challenge this. I can to an extent understand why the afl are losing their shit over this. But that is clearly not the right decision.

I wonder how the game will go in a few years when everyone is wrapped in a minimum of 40mm of bubble wrap or those weird inflatable balls that you can put most of your body into

 

[MEDHURST07]

****en joke !!!!!!!

 

[Black_White]

Kohli would have reviewed it already i rekon.

Sorry for the intrusion. And i apologise if my initial stupid comment was seen as offensive.

I hope you guys challenge this. I can to an extent understand why the afl are losing their shit over this. But that is clearly not the right decision.

I wonder how the game will go in a few years when everyone is wrapped in a minimum of 40mm of bubble wrap or those weird inflatable balls that you can put most of your body into

We won't, or shouldn't challenge.
This is the way things are now.
Up to the coaches and players to adjust. And they will.