Unofficial Preview Changes V Swans

[dlanod]

Looking for a preview writer for next week against the Suns! PM or post please.

 

[JackHiscoxWasFast]

Please don’t use our lawyer for CC.

 

[3KZ is Football]

If our appeals are unsuccessful, perhaps we bring Robertson in and get him to play the Mitch Robinson

5

Mitch Robinson

Age

35

Ht

184cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.9

5star

K

11.2

4star

HB

8.7

5star

M

4.1

4star

T

4.7

5star

CL

3.2

5star

D

15.8

4star

K

11.3

4star

HB

4.5

3star

M

3.9

4star

T

1.9

3star

CL

1.8

4star

D

13.2

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

5.2

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

3.6

5star

role in the forward line.

 

[3KZ is Football]

Please don’t use our lawyer for CC.

… and don’t get Andrews to provide Charlie tips on giving evidence.

 

[Tom14]

If our appeals are unsuccessful, perhaps we bring Robertson in and get him to play the Mitch Robinson role in the forward line.

Carrying on like a pork chop when we are down by 50 points with just over a quarter to go?

Robbo gives life to Lions with long bomb

Mitch Robinson kicks a 50m bomb to keep his side in the game

www.afl.com.au

 

[McIvor]

As I just heard on SEN they asked, why would you even bother tackling. Bedford is a bigger joke than Cameron’s but they are not in the class of Davies who is in the wrong.

 

[braddsey]

So what Charlie did is slightly less bad than rankin dog shotting off the ball. Make it make sense.

Surely we appeal this. 3 weeks is excessive.

Yeah, I'm aligned. I would have been happy with 2 (to match the games the victim misses). As much as we don't like it and accidents will happen, concussion is bad and the AFL need to do whatever they can to stamp it out.
The issue is if the umpires don't blow the whistle more quickly, then the tackle goes the extra step and this happens.

I think their grading system needs to have a "footballing incident" criterion. If poor tackling form gets suspended, then anything off the ball needs to be 1 match, on top of whatever the rest of the grading is.

 

[Nathan Barley]

Does this mean it should've been a free?

 

[Hollow Knight]

FWIW neutral fans on the MRP board are almost unanimous in saying this is a bad decision. West Coast fans seem to be almost the only ones in favour.

 

[Warwick]

3 weeks is astounding.

Just play in zorb balls and end this sport.

 

[Nathan Barley]

It looks like the force came from the initial contact. Charlie almost loses his feet after this when their legs get tangled

So no driving

Was Charlie meant to slow down before tackling him?

 

[Warwick]

No high impact. No slinging motion. No forceful front on contact.

As someone said, his chance for a successful appeal ended the moment he got off earlier in the year.

 

[Nathan Barley]

I think it was the dodgy surface that made Duggan lose his feet

 

[Big Sauce 21]

Dev in ?

 

[Hollow Knight]

I think it was the dodgy surface that made Duggan lose his feet

Good shout.

A biomechanist can have a field day with this one. Duggan was trying to pull out of the tackle and Charlie gets tangled up and goes for a ride when Duggan loses his feet. If Charlie was trying to drive him over, why were his hands grabbing and pulling Duggan rather than bracing for the forward impact he was supposedly trying to cause?

The Lions should also call the umpire as a witness and ask him why no free kick was paid. You’ll find the umpire will corroborate the Biomechanists view.

Duggan might too, who knows?

 

[irish]

Maybe one of the new boys in ? If we need a like for like or as close as we have

 

[McIvor]

Unfortunately it doesnt matter - the tackler has some sort of "duty of care" to the player they are tackling, to ensure they dont hurt them. Harley copped 2 games for the same thing, and his bloke didnt even get hurt.

Cmon massive difference. You can’t tell me Harley didn’t intend to hurt the Saints player as his slinging tackle was deadset aggressive and miraculously didn’t injure his opponent. Charlie simply tackled Duggan and Duggan was also trying to shrug Charlie off. Completely different tackles.

 

[werdna78]

I think it was the dodgy surface that made Duggan lose his feet

And concuss him.

 

[woosha24]

Cmon massive difference. You can’t tell me Harley didn’t intend to hurt the Saints player as his slinging tackle was deadset aggressive and miraculously didn’t injure his opponent. Charlie simply tackled Duggan and Duggan was also trying to shrug Charlie off. Completely different tackles.

I dont honestly think Harley was trying to hurt the Saints player - I think he was attempting to stop a player from escaping a tackle with the ball. The head hitting the ground was an accident. But he still copped 2 weeks for something that didnt even phase the other bloke at the time. Again, its "optics".

Unfortunately guys the AFL wants to stamp out any and all contact with the head moving forward - accidental or not. They are starting to have blokes come after them for brain injuries caused during their playing days, and they know they are going to have to pay out the arse for these cases.

Charlie doesnt deserve 3 weeks - thats absolutely wrong. But the fact of the matter is that we live in a world where "it was an accident" isnt seen as a good enough case to plead anymore - someone has to be the "bad guy" in an incident and "claim responsibility", so the AFL can turn around and punish them for it in order to meet HR requirements.

In a few years im willing to bet that players will be told specifically not to pin the arms in a tackle, because it will be cited as being dangerous.

 

[McIvor]

Yeah, I'm aligned. I would have been happy with 2 (to match the games the victim misses). As much as we don't like it and accidents will happen, concussion is bad and the AFL need to do whatever they can to stamp it out.
The issue is if the umpires don't blow the whistle more quickly, then the tackle goes the extra step and this happens.

I think their grading system needs to have a "footballing incident" criterion. If poor tackling form gets suspended, then anything off the ball needs to be 1 match, on top of whatever the rest of the grading is.

What’s the second game that Duggan misses; it’ll only be one just like Starc will only miss one?

 

[McIvor]

I dont honestly think Harley was trying to hurt the Saints player - I think he was attempting to stop a player from escaping a tackle with the ball. The head hitting the ground was an accident. But he still copped 2 weeks for something that didnt even phase the other bloke at the time. Again, its "optics".

Unfortunately guys the AFL wants to stamp out any and all contact with the head moving forward - accidental or not. They are starting to have blokes come after them for brain injuries caused during their playing days, and they know they are going to have to pay out the arse for these cases.

Charlie doesnt deserve 3 weeks - thats absolutely wrong. But the fact of the matter is that we live in a world where "it was an accident" isnt seen as a good enough case to plead anymore - someone has to be the "bad guy" in an incident and "claim responsibility", so the AFL can turn around and punish them for it in order to meet HR requirements.

In a few years im willing to bet that players will be told specifically not to pin the arms in a tackle, because it will be cited as being dangerous.

Could’ve fooled me; the potential for injury was I think far greater in this tackle than Charlie’s even though the outcome to the player being tackled was different. Anyway, you couldn’t get starker incidents so it’s pointless comparing them

 

[Kernel Kurtz]

Charlie gets 3 games even two game suspension, or even One well it's a bit of a joke isn't it.
There is no consistancy at all, between common sense and just random pulling up certain players and letting others off with a slap.
Are we now saying when you elect to tackle and you hurt someone you will get weeks.
Ffs, get a grip, it's all about money and liabilities not even about the health of these blokes.
Maybe players should have velcroed tags on their shorts , rip them off and in a high squeeky voice yell tagged.
No thanks.

 

[Perrip]

We're appealing the MRO decision at tribunal according to Jon Ralph

 

[Sproj]

Can we just put Levi in as ‘Ashcroft’ and when the AFL see the name twice, tell them it’s a typo?

 

[Lazza16]

Maybe one of the new boys in ? If we need a like for like or as close as we have

Would like to see one of Maclaughlan or Lloyd get a gig ro rest Logan.

 

[McIvor]

Charlie gets 3 games even two game suspension, or even One well it's a bit of a joke isn't it.
There is no consistancy at all, between common sense and just random pulling up certain players and letting others off with a slap.
Are we now saying when you elect to tackle and you hurt someone you will get weeks.
Ffs, get a grip, it's all about money and liabilities not even about the health of these blokes.
Maybe players should have velcroed tags on their shorts , rip them off and in a high squeeky voice yell tagged.
No thanks.

A massive part of this issue is the new administration at the AFL as I’ve banged on all year. They’re simply out of touch and as Luke Hodge just said, too many of the rule makers and administrators making the rules have never played the game, out of touch and therefore have an unrealistic understanding of the nuances of playing the game particularly in these sorts of incidents.