Oppo Camp Jack Ginnivan (Traded to Hawks 2023)

[sr36]

Did you read my first sentence? Because when I see your response I dont feel you did.

It confused me, because if you were saying that he shouldn't get those ones, thus he shouldn't have gotten most of the ones he didn't get late last year with that technique, then you want lawyers in because they may have missed one on Sunday - one that looked like a Selwood arm raise to me.

But the Redman one? Yes I agree the Redman one last year was a shocker.

 

[Mateyman]

Paying less ones where the player clearly drives into the opponent to generate high contact is good. That's not really what they're doing now though - they've just made it a lottery if you get taken high and will basically pay them depending on who you are. Similar to the push in the back rule now where the same action routinely gets completely different results.

 

[KinderSmock]

I've seen quite a few #33 guernseys floating around footy colours. Smart move by Collingwood will be to commercialise his success, much like the Western Bulldogs have down with Bailey Smith

6

Bailey Smith

Age

24

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

3.8

5star

CL

2.7

4star

D

19.8

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

4star

CL

3.2

4star

D

14.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

7.2

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

1.6

4star

. Except Collingwood has the advantage of size of the Doggies.

 

[Jen2310]

I've seen quite a few #33 guernseys floating around footy colours. Smart move by Collingwood will be to commercialise his success, much like the Western Bulldogs have down with Bailey Smith

6

Bailey Smith

Age

24

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

3.8

5star

CL

2.7

4star

D

19.8

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

4star

CL

3.2

4star

D

14.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

7.2

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

1.6

4star

. Except Collingwood has the advantage of size of the Doggies.

Yeah definitely the new cult favourite. And you imagine that will only grow. Good idea to commercialise it with his growing popularity


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Yeah definitely the new cult favourite. And you imagine that will only grow. Good idea to commercialise it with his growing popularity


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Ginni has been the cult favourite since his 'light work' comment last year backed up by his entertaining goals and celebrations

 

[KinderSmock]

Yeah definitely the new cult favourite. And you imagine that will only grow. Good idea to commercialise it with his growing popularity


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Just imagine the show for JG300. Maybe by then the umpires will give him free kicks.

 

[sr36]

Ginni has been the cult favourite since his 'light work' comment last year backed up by his entertaining goals and celebrations

I'm in Adelaide. The young Adelaide supporters love him. He hits something with that generation. The older supporters hate him.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

I'm in Adelaide. The young Adelaide supporters love him. He hits something with that generation. The older supporters hate him.

I love him even more than my teenage son does I've worried I might jump the fence at games when I've seen him coat hangered.

Which is probably another reason why I wish he could just avoid being tackled altogether..

 

[loki04]

It confused me, because if you were saying that he shouldn't get those ones, thus he shouldn't have gotten most of the ones he didn't get late last year with that technique, then you want lawyers in because they may have missed one on Sunday - one that looked like a Selwood arm raise to me.

But the Redman one? Yes I agree the Redman one last year was a shocker.

What?

The post you replied to, not the whole thread which you obviously did not understand me anyway.


But to clarify my thoughts in here separately to that above.

There was a period of last year he was forcing the high contact with using his head to go up into the arm and or a drop of the knee whilst leaning his body over almost horizontal and charging past the opponent.

Some changes had to happen around using his head but I still think the tacklers got off easy and think some of his other techniques which also garnered high contact was fine. The tackler was at fault.

I disagree with the Selwood call last weekend as the tackle started high, this seems to be something you don't take into account with the arm lift. Where the tackler starts the tackle. Swlwood would force a low tackle that would often start just above the elbow high above his shoulder through brute force and driving upwards. Ginni didn't do that.
This is where we are poles apart, I think first and foremost the onus has to be on the tackler to go low then look at Ginnis actions from there.

Lastly I meant he should get a lawyer if he ends up with some sort of brain or neck damage but admit I didn't make it clear.

 

[Bianconeri]

Personally I think the player with the ball should have every right to be protected from high contact if they’re trying to shrug the tackle like the Bobby incident. Not paying the free kick just encourages poor tackling technique and turns the game into more of a slog. However in most Ginnivan incidents he barely looks like he’s trying to break the tackle. He raises the arm to draw contact but never looks like breaking a tackle.

 

[sr36]

What?

The post you replied to, not the whole thread which you obviously did not understand me anyway.


But to clarify my thoughts in here separately to that above.

There was a period of last year he was forcing the high contact with using his head to go up into the arm and or a drop of the knee whilst leaning his body over almost horizontal and charging past the opponent.

Some changes had to happen around using his head but I still think the tacklers got off easy and think some of his other techniques which also garnered high contact was fine. The tackler was at fault.

I disagree with the Selwood call last weekend as the tackle started high, this seems to be something you don't take into account with the arm lift. Where the tackler starts the tackle. Swlwood would force a low tackle that would often start just above the elbow high above his shoulder through brute force and driving upwards. Ginni didn't do that.
This is where we are poles apart, I think first and foremost the onus has to be on the tackler to go low then look at Ginnis actions from there.

Lastly I meant he should get a lawyer if he ends up with some sort of brain or neck damage but admit I didn't make it clear.

How hard are you trying to make it for the umpires? So if a legal tackle is turned into a high tackle due to an arm raise, it's a free for high contact if it starts on the upper arm, but not if it starts closer to the elbow? Am I reading that right? And if I am, do you realise that you're just making up an interpretation and complaining that umpires aren't adjudicating by your made up interpretation?

 

[Markfs]

However in most Ginnivan incidents he barely looks like he’s trying to break the tackle. He raises the arm to draw contact but never looks like breaking a tackle.

I doubt that the "Ginni can do no wrong people" will ever acknowledge this....

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

How hard are you trying to make it for the umpires? So if a legal tackle is turned into a high tackle due to an arm raise, it's a free for high contact if it starts on the upper arm, but not if it starts closer to the elbow? Am I reading that right? And if I am, do you realise that you're just making up an interpretation and complaining that umpires aren't adjudicating by your made up interpretation?

Loki's confusing himself with his Ginni outrage. I still can't work out if he's actually a Ginni fan or not. Seems to be in favour of Jack getting lots of goals via free kicks only.

 

[TW Sherrin]

It was clearly a free kick imo but unfortunately he is now paying for his earlier sins.

The funny part is Noble is worse at shirking tackles high and he gets them paid every game.

 

[jmac70]

I just hope that Gin kicks as many goals as possible.

 

[Vicky Park]

I'm in Adelaide. The young Adelaide supporters love him. He hits something with that generation. The older supporters hate him.

This is my observation too.

While it’s not immediately obvious by my postings, I also love him.

 

[loki04]

How hard are you trying to make it for the umpires? So if a legal tackle is turned into a high tackle due to an arm raise, it's a free for high contact if it starts on the upper arm, but not if it starts closer to the elbow? Am I reading that right? And if I am, do you realise that you're just making up an interpretation and complaining that umpires aren't adjudicating by your made up interpretation?

I’m saying if it’s starts above the shoulder it’s high regardless of any arm raise or body lowering…don’t pretend to be so dense as to not understood what i meant.

My reference to Selwood was to point out that he raised an arm from a good tackle, Ginni often raises even when it starts high to empathise the contact and keep it there.

you and some others keep arguing that if he lifts the arm he caused it, I’m saying it’s not always the case.

btw the gaslighting I expect from certain posters like sideswipe and jb1975 but thought you were above that.

 

[loki04]

Loki's confusing himself with his Ginni outrage. I still can't work out if he's actually a Ginni fan or not. Seems to be in favour of Jack getting lots of goals via free kicks only.

You are a dolt. Thicker then 2 bricks. Your Gaslighting attempts fall short.

Im in favour of jack getting umpired to the same rules as everyone else and high contact being high contact.
Whether that results in a goal or otherwise.

You getting upset that he got a portion of his goals from this method (as well as his other smart play) is your issue to deal with .

 

[loki04]

Personally I think the player with the ball should have every right to be protected from high contact if they’re trying to shrug the tackle like the Bobby incident. Not paying the free kick just encourages poor tackling technique and turns the game into more of a slog. However in most Ginnivan incidents he barely looks like he’s trying to break the tackle. He raises the arm to draw contact but never looks like breaking a tackle.

Yes he needs to work on keeping his feet, the flop or giving in, is probably what is getting him overlooked by the umos as much as anything imo.

The arm lift with him is not just to draw contact he also does it to emphasise it and lock it high when it starts high. It’s a free kick in those situations.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

It was clearly a free kick imo but unfortunately he is now paying for his earlier sins.

The funny part is Noble is worse at shirking tackles high and he gets them paid every game.

Players from every club get them paid every time. Jack's just going to have to find other ways to get the ball and not expect to get a head high free. Ever.

 

[loki04]

Players from every club get them paid every time. Jack's just going to have to find other ways to get the ball and not expect to get a head high free. Ever.

The fact that you are okay with that says a lot.

 

[MyManLynch]

To be fair he has. On the xbox in his mums bedroom

Why is the xbox in his Mums bedroom?

 

[sr36]

I’m saying if it’s starts above the shoulder it’s high regardless of any arm raise or body lowering…don’t pretend to be so dense as to not understood what i meant.

My reference to Selwood was to point out that he raised an arm from a good tackle, Ginni often raises even when it starts high to empathise the contact and keep it there.

you and some others keep arguing that if he lifts the arm he caused it, I’m saying it’s not always the case.

btw the gaslighting I expect from certain posters like sideswipe and jb1975 but though you were above that.

I thought it was accepted that the tackle on Sunday started on the upper arm and slipped higher?

 

[ipswichpies]

It is Obvious that there are a lot of older supporters of which I am 1 but unlike most I like him,have since the word go.I also was very angry about the Torquay incident and some of his antics but he is our player I will support him as such.

We all know he has made a rod for his own back with some of his antics but some here are just haters and you know who you are but until he is forced out of the club by people like you you but until then you should support him side by side means exactly that.

I do not have to name who the people here you can tell by their posting who they are.

 

[noideaatall]

...
AFL players are kids heros.
What they do has a direct influence on the juniors.

Agree with it or not, don’t really care.

But it absolutely cannot be part of the game to attempt to get high frees by putting your head in danger.
...

Not a lot of agreement in this thread but I assume the bolded is where we are all on the same page. Here is a thing, though: it has been a part of the game for a long time. Ginni no doubt modelled his game on players like Duckwood and Pendles who had been getting away with it for years. It still is a part of the game this year, week in week out.

This thread and the media discussion is about Ginni being targeted, not the targeting of the technique across the league. I am a little sceptical that solely targetting Ginni will be a catalyst to changing the way young children play AFL across the land. Adjust the rules, adjust the interpretation and make it league wide. Aim for an interpretation that is easily understood and umpired.

Sunday's example is a case in point. With the benefit of slowed down footage there is still not a consensus on whether it was legal or not. What about the kiddies at home, what are they going to take from that? Always dispose of the ball before tackled? Don't take possession? Attempting to evade a tackle can result in a free against. In terms of tackling: as long as you can get a hand on a legal area doesn't matter where you end up. I do not believe that decision will help prevent head high contact.

... I disagree with the Selwood call last weekend as the tackle started high, this seems to be something you don't take into account with the arm lift. Where the tackler starts the tackle. Swlwood would force a low tackle that would often start just above the elbow high above his shoulder through brute force and driving upwards. Ginni didn't do that.
This is where we are poles apart, I think first and foremost the onus has to be on the tackler to go low then look at Ginnis actions from there.
...

This is an approach that will simplify rulings and put an emphasis onto the tackler. If young players are learning to tackle low the attempt to create a head high free will be much harder and visible. It will undoubtedly reduce head high contact in leagues across the country.