Hannebery's gotta go

[master bate]

I never said Hurley wouldn't be expecting contact just doesn't know when or where its coming. I don't think Hannebury should be suspended I'm just stating it wasn't Hurley's fault.

It was an accident so it was no ones fault. But I'm comfortable, in fact fully supportive of some blame going towards Hurley.

The question to ask is - If this was video footage of 2 kids playing in the under 12's and you were the coach and had to sit down and teach these kids how to play footy do you

A) Tell Hannebery to slow down, not attack the ball so hard and to let Hurley pick it up and then try to tackle him
OR
B) Tell Hurley to always be aware of contact and to always turn his hips when picking up the ball from the ground

I believe the correct coaching method is point B.

The difficulty comes with the split second nature of footy unfortunately. If Hurley doesn't fumble he's fine. If Hurley gets to the ball first and clearly has taken possession then Hannebery is out for 3 or 4 with a dangerous bump. But Hannebery's timing is unfortunately perfect and he's right on to a loose ball at exactly the wrong moment for Hurley.

 

[Micksy]

He was going for the ball. No case to answer.

 

[fabulousphil]

It was an accident so it was no ones fault. But I'm comfortable, in fact fully supportive of some blame going towards Hurley.

The question to ask is - If this was video footage of 2 kids playing in the under 12's and you were the coach and had to sit down and teach these kids how to play footy do you

A) Tell Hannebery to slow down, not attack the ball so hard and to let Hurley pick it up and then try to tackle him
OR
B) Tell Hurley to always be aware of contact and to always turn his hips when picking up the ball from the ground

I believe the correct coaching method is point B.

The difficulty comes with the split second nature of footy unfortunately. If Hurley doesn't fumble he's fine. If Hurley gets to the ball first and clearly has taken possession then Hannebery is out for 3 or 4 with a dangerous bump. But Hannebery's timing is unfortunately perfect and he's right on to a loose ball at exactly the wrong moment for Hurley.

If Hannebery was to make high contact and give away a free kick, then quite clearly option A is the correct option.

I don't understand how that is so hard to understand.

Do you think players should just charge around, and because they are going the ball be able to smack people head on ?.

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

Oh, you mean not brace himself for inevitable contact?

Were you pretty unimpressed when Luke Hodge did the same thing to Murphy last year?

Hodge didn't even get Murphy high, play on

 

[MC Bad Genius]

I don't think there was anything malicious in the contest at all, but Hanners had the option to pull up a step and go for the tackle rather than turning and going for the ball, which in the process led to him slamming into Hurley's head. I'd be disappointed if he took that option because I'd much rather see a Swans player going for the ball first and foremost, but that option might mean that he gets weeks.

As much as we want to make sure the game remains tough, there is a HUGE amount of neurological research on head injuries and concussions that show that the AFL's massive campaign to "keep the head sacrosanct" is actually the correct one.

The massive difference of opinion (from supporters of all clubs) shows that this is obviously a grey area. Opinions are one thing but I reckon the two types of posters that need to really pull their heads in* are a) those saying that Hanners was being a coward/sniper, and b) placing blame on Hurley.



* = bad pun definitely intended.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

some people clearly haven't looked at the footage of the incident.

it was a contest Hanners beat him to it, turned his body into it as he should.
Hurley lead with his head as players do because they get free's for doing so.

But Hurley did not have his head over the ball and the side on replay shows this. Now the outrage over this means the MRP have to charge Hanners with something. Many understandably think Hanners should be charged with making forceful contact with a player with his head over the ball, Negligent, high contact, high impact which is 3 matches.

however, there's a problem such a charge isn't a clear cut case at the tribunal in these circumstances
there's three get out of jail free cards he can play at the tribunal (and as he's gone for three and wouldn't be able to plea it to two matches he would go to the tribunal)
1: side on view shows that Hurley lead with his head, but at no time was his head actually over the ball, nor was he in a position to take possession.
2: Hanners was contesting the ball and did not have a realistic alternative to contest the ball (the AFL tribunal will not rule Hanners should have lead with his head, because they are trying to reduce head clashes)
3: this has two clause's relating to circumstances outside the control of the player which could not reasonably be foreseen
3A: the speed at which the contest occurred and Hanners "not seeing" hurley
3B: hurley contributing to the collision.

Because of this i suspect that much like Roughead was offered a week Hanners will be offered one or two weeks as well, The MRP has made it clear they are basically saying ANY head contact is a suspension and they don't want this challenged as they know the rules they have in place don't cover all impacts (such as this one)

 

[stevo86]

the slo mo shows hurley actually duck his head right into his hip while hannabery literally isn't even looking at him, because last he saw his heigh was fine. He will get off and should. He has no intent to bump ..just to get footy. Hurley didn't need to drop his head another foot

 

[FatChicksRejectMe]

"Had to laugh how he faked his own injury to make it look like he didn't do anything wrong

That was funny and I dint think tribunal will buy that"



LOL

I agree it was pretty piss weak from Hannebery and it looked obvious he was making his injury more worse then it really was.

I still dont think he should get suspended. However the umpire should of paid a free kick to hurley and gave hurley a 50 meter penalty as well.
The umpire that decided not to pay a free to hurley should be suspended for 4 weeks, what an absolute joke. Im not saying this because im a bombers supporter but gee the umpiring was horrible and the bombers were unfairly treated in a few examples[/QUOTE]

 

[master bate]

If Hannebery was to make high contact and give away a free kick, then quite clearly option A is the correct option.

I don't understand how that is so hard to understand.

Do you think players should just charge around, and because they are going the ball be able to smack people head on ?.

YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! *10000 YES.

That's the idea of football.

Jump for a high mark, if you're going the ball you can put a knee in the head. Charge in at the ball on the ground, if you get to the contest first then so be it for any heads in your way. Run out on a lead at full forward, defender backs in to your space, you can take the mark and clean them up on the way.

If someone has the ball or is going for it and you are spoiling, tackling, bumping, shepherding etc (all defensive actions) then you can't contact the head. But in an even contest if you are attacking the ball and get to in first then you don't concern yourself with the opponent.

 

[Jugada]

"Had to laugh how he faked his own injury to make it look like he didn't do anything wrong

That was funny and I dint think tribunal will buy that"



LOL

I agree it was pretty piss weak from Hannebery and it looked obvious he was making his injury more worse then it really was.

I still dont think he should get suspended. However the umpire should of paid a free kick to hurley and gave hurley a 50 meter penalty as well.
The umpire that decided not to pay a free to hurley should be suspended for 4 weeks, what an absolute joke. Im not saying this because im a bombers supporter but gee the umpiring was horrible and the bombers were unfairly treated in a few examples

[/QUOTE]

Lol what? Give Hurley a 50m penalty just for good measure? Learn the rules please

 

[Suntory Boss Coffee]

I don't like this incident by Hannebery. Forget Fyfe's incident - that's not really a danger in the game. This incident is. It's extremely dangerous to hit a bloke head on when his head's over the ball. You risk head, neck and spinal injuries. If the AFL are serious about protecting the head, these are the most severe cases that should be cracked down on.

I should walk around the world with a helmet on because I MAY break my neck.
Scared of rolling your ankle? Wear an ankle brace.
Scared of breaking your leg? Wallah, put a cast on it to stop the likelihood of you MAYBE breaking your leg.
The players no the risks involved and wouldn't be playing if they didn't like them.

 

[fabulousphil]

YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! *10000 YES.

That's the idea of football.

Jump for a high mark, if you're going the ball you can put a knee in the head. Charge in at the ball on the ground, if you get to the contest first then so be it for any heads in your way. Run out on a lead at full forward, defender backs in to your space, you can take the mark and clean them up on the way.

If someone has the ball or is going for it and you are spoiling, tackling, bumping, shepherding etc (all defensive actions) then you can't contact the head. But in an even contest if you are attacking the ball and get to in first then you don't concern yourself with the opponent.

Do you, or have you actually played footy, because the more awareness you have about players and the game around you, saves you some pretty serious injuries, and BTW you contradict yourself between your first and second paragraphs.

Your idea might be to maim your opponents, but you know what, that is a pretty easy cowardly route to take.

 

[master bate]

Do you, or have you actually played footy, because the more awareness you have about players and the game around you, saves you some pretty serious injuries, and BTW you contradict yourself between your first and second paragraphs.

Your idea might be to maim your opponents, but you know what, that is a pretty easy cowardly route to take.

Worked it out the other day I probably played up to about 100 games as a kid and 60 or more as a young adult. I knew when to protect myself and I knew when to pull out without fully squibbing if I was going to get smashed. I bumped in to a few blokes and left a few winded but I didn't move fast enough to ever really clean anyone up.

I have no interest in anyone getting maimed. And I think it's important to note Hurley is fine and the contest looked horrible but Hannebery put most of his weight over the ball as that was his aim. Never at all was his aim to bump Hurley. It was also about using his hips and backside to protect himself over the ball. Hannebery's old man played AFL so he might well have learned this proper technique from his dad.

As you said awareness saves you injuries. But the person who lacked awareness in this scenario wasn't Hannebery. He knew contact was coming and used his awareness to protect himself whilst winning the ball. If only Hurley did the same.

And no I don't contradict myself at all. As I said if the ball is your object of desire and you get to contests first and focus on the ball then where your hips, knees or any other part of you goes is really not your problem. If you are bumping, tackling or spoiling someone who has the ball or is about to get it then you have to implement these defensive tactics in a safe way. If Hannebery had lined up Hurley with a bump then I'd be the first to say throw the book at him.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

If Hannebery was to make high contact and give away a free kick, then quite clearly option A is the correct option.

I don't understand how that is so hard to understand.

Do you think players should just charge around, and because they are going the ball be able to smack people head on ?.

so players now have to pull out of the contest? thats what your saying, the moment one bloke get's his head down and everybody else backs off?

most people who think hanners should go are reasonable but this, this is something else.

even in your ridiculous world hanners stops calmly lets Hurley pick up the ball.
he then has to wait until hurley either runs past him of stops leading with his head.

we get it you have an almost bay like hate on for the swans but gee's pull your head in, your seeing shit that isn't even there it was a simple accident happens all the time. hanners will get 2 weeks at most if the MRP tries for more then that they will lose at the tribunal.

 

[fabulousphil]

Worked it out the other day I probably played up to about 100 games as a kid and 60 or more as a young adult. I knew when to protect myself and I knew when to pull out without fully squibbing if I was going to get smashed. I bumped in to a few blokes and left a few winded but I didn't move fast enough to ever really clean anyone up.

I have no interest in anyone getting maimed. And I think it's important to note Hurley is fine and the contest looked horrible but Hannebery put most of his weight over the ball as that was his aim. Never at all was his aim to bump Hurley. It was also about using his hips and backside to protect himself over the ball. Hannebery's old man played AFL so he might well have learned this proper technique from his dad.

As you said awareness saves you injuries. But the person who lacked awareness in this scenario wasn't Hannebery. He knew contact was coming and used his awareness to protect himself whilst winning the ball. If only Hurley did the same.

And no I don't contradict myself at all. As I said if the ball is your object of desire and you get to contests first and focus on the ball then where your hips, knees or any other part of you goes is really not your problem. If you are bumping, tackling or spoiling someone who has the ball or is about to get it then you have to implement these defensive tactics in a safe way. If Hannebery had lined up Hurley with a bump then I'd be the first to say throw the book at him.

Thats a fair enough response mate, and i actually agree with the bulk of it, but from what i saw, it was on Hannebery to avoid making front on contact with Hurley.

If we go back some years and look at Magro V Jezza or Milburn V Silvagni the onus fair and square is on the player who is aware of the situation to either avoid or continue with the contact.

That is why Hannebery will go, he has a choice to avoid high contact and IMO he chose not to in what was a particuarly dangerous scenario.

 

[fabulousphil]

so players now have to pull out of the contest? thats what your saying, the moment one bloke get's his head down and everybody else backs off?

most people who think hanners should go are reasonable but this, this is something else.

even in your ridiculous world hanners stops calmly lets Hurley pick up the ball.
he then has to wait until hurley either runs past him of stops leading with his head.

we get it you have an almost bay like hate on for the swans but gee's pull your head in, your seeing shit that isn't even there it was a simple accident happens all the time. hanners will get 2 weeks at most if the MRP tries for more then that they will lose at the tribunal.

I dont hate the Swans at all, really bad post mate.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

I dont hate the Swans at all, really bad post mate.

sure thing phil, this is dead set the first time i've ever heard someone suggesting a bloke should pull out of contest completely, according to you whenever anyone drops there dead everyone else has to stop. your not related to KB by any chance?

 

[fabulousphil]

Thats a fair enough response mate, and i actually agree with the bulk of it, but from what i saw, it was on Hannebery to avoid making front on contact with Hurley.

If we go back some years and look at Magro V Jezza or Milburn V Silvagni the onus fair and square is on the player who is aware of the situation to either avoid or continue with the contact.

That is why Hannebery will go, he has a choice to avoid high contact and IMO he chose not to in what was a particuarly dangerous scenario.

Beautiful hip and sholder, except Stan the man got Jezza quite a bit high , but he did have a choice, Jezza was unawares, but Stan was not, Stan was a naughty boy, unfortunately i am old enough to actually remember the game.

My point is, that Hannebery IMO had a choice, Hurley did not, that is why Hanners has to go.

 

[fabulousphil]

sure thing phil, this is dead set the first time i've ever heard someone suggesting a bloke should pull out of contest completely, according to you whenever anyone drops there dead everyone else has to stop. your not related to KB by any chance?

If you think i suggested that you are wrong, if you think you can now attempt to twist my words or cut and paste to prove your point, you are still wrong.

I think you have been drinking, own up !, have you ?.

 

[Demonated]

People in here calling for Hannebery to get games can hardly call themselves footy fans. Not the ones that think he will go, but the posters that actually WANT him to get weeks. It wasn't either players fault, Hurley possibly could have gone side on but he also has the option of going front on as he did. Dan could have pulled up quicker but in his defence he did not go into that contest with any real speed and he did get low and turn side on.

He may actually get weeks but if you enjoy this game you would surely hope that he gets off. Just because other players have been rubbed out in ridiculous manners doesn't mean that it should become the norm. Imagine if a star missed a GF because of an incident like this.

 

[Keys]

Beautiful hip and sholder, except Stan the man got Jezza quite a bit high , but he did have a choice, Jezza was unawares, but Stan was not, Stan was a naughty boy, unfortunately i am old enough to actually remember the game.

My point is, that Hannebery IMO had a choice, Hurley did not, that is why Hanners has to go.

Correct me if I'm wrong but are you comparing what hannebery did to that hit from Magro?

 

[fabulousphil]

Correct me if I'm wrong but are you comparing what hannebery did to that hit from Magro?

My point is, that IMO Hannebery had a choice and chose to hit him high, there were other options, i am not suggesting Magros shirtfront was similar to what Hannebery did, only that both Hurley and Jezza were unaware of the situation and Hanners and Magro were and had other options available to them.

This season and in many other i have seen many players ( like Hannerbery) attack a similar type contest in other ways, that does not see them labelled shirkers or not contesting.

 

[master bate]

Thats a fair enough response mate, and i actually agree with the bulk of it, but from what i saw, it was on Hannebery to avoid making front on contact with Hurley.

If we go back some years and look at Magro V Jezza or Milburn V Silvagni the onus fair and square is on the player who is aware of the situation to either avoid or continue with the contact.

That is why Hannebery will go, he has a choice to avoid high contact and IMO he chose not to in what was a particuarly dangerous scenario.

I suppose it comes down to what is greater.

A.. Hannebery's right to go for a contested loose ball
OR
B. Hannebery's duty of care to a guy who is in a compromised position sure, but is also going after that same loose ball

Personally I think the game is better served by trying to let the players go after the ball when it's there to be won instead of making them worry about how their non deliberate actions can impact other players. Sure it would be great if Hannebery had pulled up and tackled Hurley but if you extend that course of action over entire games you end up with a game that's much less physical, much less exciting and still has plenty of room for accidents. You only have to look at the umpire getting cleaned up to see accidents are going to happen. And I'm not saying these incidents should be encouraged because I think with coaching and training Hurley can clean up his contribution to the incident.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

If you think i suggested that you are wrong, if you think you can now attempt to twist my words or cut and paste to prove your point, you are still wrong.

I think you have been drinking, own up !, have you ?.

of course i've been drinking my team won!
and your wrong i can copy and paste to prove your being a twat

It was an accident so it was no ones fault. But I'm comfortable, in fact fully supportive of some blame going towards Hurley.

The question to ask is - If this was video footage of 2 kids playing in the under 12's and you were the coach and had to sit down and teach these kids how to play footy do you

A) Tell Hannebery to slow down, not attack the ball so hard and to let Hurley pick it up and then try to tackle him
OR
B) Tell Hurley to always be aware of contact and to always turn his hips when picking up the ball from the ground

I believe the correct coaching method is point B.

The difficulty comes with the split second nature of footy unfortunately. If Hurley doesn't fumble he's fine. If Hurley gets to the ball first and clearly has taken possession then Hannebery is out for 3 or 4 with a dangerous bump. But Hannebery's timing is unfortunately perfect and he's right on to a loose ball at exactly the wrong moment for Hurley.

If Hannebery was to make high contact and give away a free kick, then quite clearly option A is the correct option.

I don't understand how that is so hard to understand.

Do you think players should just charge around, and because they are going the ball be able to smack people head on ?.

actually watch the whole bloody replay the only way of avoiding that was to pull out. stopping slowing and waiting for a bloke to pick up the ball is pulling out of the contest. it's your words phil, shit i didn't even have to quote you out of context.

 

[Tedeski]

What made it dangerous was Hurley's head being lower than it normally would be in a such contest.
Umpire clearly doesn't pay the free for this reason. What will save Hanners is that it was an even contest for the ball with both players' hands on the ball.

What will get him rubbed out is that he braced to protect himself.

I've got no freeking idea what will happen.
Hurley took a hit to the head earlier in the game & he played out the game which pretty much helps the situation for Hanners.