MRP / Trib. Geelong MRO & Tribunal decisions 2023

[cats_09]

So how did Oliver get off under those guidelines?

Same way that Dawson (?) wasn't reported for his tackle on Holmes - no contact between head and ground

With the Rough Conduct (Dangerous Tackles) suspensions this season, a common theme that's emerged is whether or not the tackled players head hit the ground - there's been some tackles that from one angle look bad but another angle shows no head to ground contact

It's why I'd like to see the MRO reports to back to how they used to be written up, and include an explanation of those incidents that didn't result in a report - such as the Stewart one from this weekend which on viewing looks worse than the Close tackle

 

[The_Todd07]

The AFL will squib it and just say all responsibility rests with the tackler.

Funny you say that
On Reddit, hastumpstuffedup already deemed it a correct call, stating when tackling a player to ground the onus is entirely on the tackler to avoid the head hitting the ground

Basically saying that to avoid suspension in cases like this a player has 3 options

-not tackle to begin with
-identify mid tackle that it could result in head hitting ground and release tackle, possibly allowing other player free to play on
-break the laws of physics (Brad is good but this might be a stretch too far)

3 completely unrealistic expectations

 

[Cataholic]

So they should adjust their tackle to hold only one arm, even though the tackling arms wrap around the body, including both arms. Difficult to execute.

Pin one arm, but fall to that same side because of momentum, or other incidental contact, and you essentially leave the tackled player defenseless once again.

So the element of risk / punishment means you can essentially no longer:
a) pin either arm, allowing the ball carrier to handball given his arms are free, and b) take the player to ground.

So what's the point of tackling now?

 

[The_Todd07]

I could be completely wrong here but I don’t think it being or not being a sling tackle has anything to do with it, I think and again correct if I’m wrong, if you pin an arm and tackle and the head hits the ground without being able to protect themselves they get suspended

Which is utterly ridiculous.
Sometimes the arms are just in that position when tackling. If the hands are down around waist height, you then have basically no legal area to tackle without pinning the arms or going too high/low.

 

[Cataholic]

Funny you say that
On Reddit, hastumpstuffedup already deemed it a correct call, stating when tackling a player to ground the onus is entirely on the tackler to avoid the head hitting the ground

Basically saying that to avoid suspension in cases like this a player has 3 options

-not tackle to begin with
-identify mid tackle that it could result in head hitting ground and release tackle, possibly allowing other player free to play on
-break the laws of physics (Brad is good but this might be a stretch too far)

3 completely unrealistic expectations

Yep. As I also posted earlier, I believe the AFL is actively umpiring the tackle out of the game by degrees, and in doing so, they're gradually conditioning the footy public to accept a game without it.

 

[caitsith01]

Doesn't have to be - this is the tribunal guidelines:

3. Rough Conduct (Dangerous Tackles) The application of a tackle may be considered Rough Conduct which is unreasonable in the circumstances. In determining whether the application of a tackle constitutes a Reportable Offence and whether the offence is Careless or Intentional, without limitation, regard may be had to the following factors, whether:
» The tackle consists of more than one action, regardless of whether the Player being tackled is in possession of the ball;
» The tackle is of an inherently dangerous kind, such as a spear tackle or a tackle where a Player is lifted off the ground;
» The Player being tackled is in a vulnerable position (e.g. arm(s) pinned) with little opportunity to protect himself;
» An opponent is slung, driven or rotated into the ground with excessive force.


The argument will be Close pinned the arms and Dawson had little opportunity to protect himself - I'd love for him to not have been reported & now for him to get off at the tribunal, but don't see how that happens based on all we've seen so far this season when teams have gone to the tribunal

Doesn't every effective tackle require that the arms be pinned?

 

[Cataholic]

Which is utterly ridiculous.
Sometimes the arms are just in that position when tackling. If the hands are down around waist height, you then have basically no legal area to tackle without pinning the arms or going too high/low.

The tackle is quietly being legislated out of the game, just like the bump.

 

[Cataholic]

Doesn't every effective tackle require that the arms be pinned?

Once upon a time, yes, but the AFL is deliberately and slowly migrating us to a game without any form of robust physical contact.

 

[cats_09]

For those wondering, here is the Oliver tackle - the top video is the main footage that's been shown, while the second video shows the rest of the story: Parker with both arms free, able to brace for impact and head not hitting the ground

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Same way that Dawson (?) wasn't reported for his tackle on Holmes - no contact between head and ground

With the Rough Conduct (Dangerous Tackles) suspensions this season, a common theme that's emerged is whether or not the tackled players head hit the ground - there's been some tackles that from one angle look bad but another angle shows no head to ground contact

It's why I'd like to see the MRO reports to back to how they used to be written up, and include an explanation of those incidents that didn't result in a report - such as the Stewart one from this weekend which on viewing looks worse than the Close tackle

So how did Rohan get suspended then?

Not too dissimilar.

 

[gogeelongcats]

They should not allow tackles or bumps to achieve their objective.

Interesting game if that is the case????

 

[you pick one]

By the end of the decade they will all be wearing head gear regardless of whether or not it's effective.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

That's what I'm saying... Players will look to milk frees and get other players suspended.

Not saying that's what Dawson wanted to do... but it'll 100% happen in the future.

Yep they do now.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

By the end of the decade they will all be wearing head gear regardless of whether or not it's effective.

I said that a week or so ago.

 

[Cataholic]

So how did Rohan get suspended then?

Not too dissimilar.

Because they deemed the motion a sling tackle, regardless of outcome.

 

[you pick one]

I said that a week or so ago.

Then you were right

 

[Cataholic]

I said that a week or so ago.

And it'll probably merge with Touch Football Australia.

 

[you pick one]

So they should adjust their tackle to hold only one arm, even though the tackling arms wrap around the body, including both arms. Difficult to execute.

Bring back the chicken wing.

 

[Cataholic]

Bring back the chicken wing.

The arms will become the next 'untouchable'

 

[cats_09]

So how did Rohan get suspended then?

Not too dissimilar.

MRO deemed that Jaith's head hit the ground - hence the grading of high contact:

Rohan's tackle on Changkuoth Jiath was also graded careless and high contact, but the medium impact grading means he will only miss a week.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

MRO deemed that Jaith's head hit the ground - hence the grading of high contact:

Rohan's tackle on Changkuoth Jiath was also graded careless and high contact, but the medium impact grading means he will only miss a week.

And it didn't.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I could be completely wrong here but I don’t think it being or not being a sling tackle has anything to do with it, I think and again correct if I’m wrong, if you pin an arm and tackle and the head hits the ground without being able to protect themselves they get suspended

Then we may as well ban contact and play soccer. It was a correct and legal tackle where he had no alternative

 

[CHAWKTS]

Ridiculous that Close will probably miss.

Let me count-
Bowes
Close
Danger
De Koning
Guthrie
Henry
Menegola
Stanley
Stengle

That's 8 premiership players missing (including Selwood).

Surely that is nearly impossible to cover this week.

This is where Scotty will earn his stripes. I reckon he will relish it. most of the time he is tactically managing stars players and trying to win the game plan battle with other coach. This week he needs to get a depleted team to believe they can win on a big Friday night game. No going through the motions this week for coaching staff. Let’s tap into that enthusiasm of players who know they aren’t best 22 (yet) and have a crack at going 6-3! I am excited

 

[CHAWKTS]

I'd start Clark straight in the middle. My opinion. I'd bring him straight in.

I can see why you are saying it. but imo (and I haven’t “heard” anything so this is just my guess) I think they will default to Parf. They played him first for a reason today (planned not random) and I read into that he is “ahead”. Plus it is a huge message to give him round 9 that he can’t make the team when the entire premiership midfield (except him) from 8 games ago is out.

I just don’t think they can give him that message. Or want to yet.

now if Close is out (and they have to appeal) then Clark surely gets sub. Which I think is ok. Not ideal as from what I hear from the boys who play it, it can be very hard to just switch on (except some like Rohan and even Henry looked wired for that flick the switch impact). The other players can take a quarter to come in and get used to the pace (Dempsey ran around a lot and had some impact in 3rd qtr but really didn’t get comfortable until the 4th)

so issue for Clark debut is that he might only get a qtr (like whyte) and find it hard to impact. That can be bad.

but I still reckon it is what they (not i) would do

 

[mcwilrob]

This has to be challenged. All close did was tackle him. No slinging action, just a normal tackle.
He couldn’t have done anything else.

So will we challenge this. By what Scotty said at presser you’d think so….