MRP / Trib. James Sicily tackle on Hugh McCluggage

[thetank]

Brockman involvement made no difference.

Unfortunate situation and split second stuff, but didn't deserve to get no suspension. Hawks should give Patty Cripps' lawyer a call.

 

[Roby]

He's an athlete at the highest level, who can turn, lunge and grab onto a moving player within the blink of an eye, but suddenly he's too slow to be able to react and let go half way through the tackle.

Sure

Leave the science talk to others if you don't know what is discussed.

 

[Dewyyyyy]

Boxing is different. it has a clear goal to knock someone out
AFL is about scoring.

Most sports are going down this path and there will be collateral damage like this.
alternative is a league gone bankrupt through compensation claims and another generation of players who can't remember their own name later in life..... and a lot worse.

People who are suing the AFL are apart of the problem. You play a contact sport, expect it.

It's ridiculous.

 

[Maddo11]

Leave the science talk to others if you don't know what is discussed.

You couldn't even keep a chain of three quoted posts in order mate. Did Sicily let go of Mcluggages left arm?

 

[Reginald Perrin]

So now we have to ban the “speccy” in case of errant knees to the head.

Or the smother in case the ball hits a player in the face.

What if someone is “falconed?” Does the last player touching the ball get a week or two?

This is where we are headed if we allow this sort of bullshit to go unchallenged.

 

[Flog_Toolist]

One in every thread

Is Luke Sayers wife going get more government grants to fund her existing Inclusion Foundation and start a new one and name it the Exclusion (from AFL tribunal penalties) Foundation? Tax Free of course.

 

[Roby]

The thing I'm confused about is what Sicily should have done differently. Does this judgement mean that he should not have tackled? Realistically that's the only plausible alternative given the rapid time of the tackle and this is based on instinct (and he did follow instructions to roll the player over).

If the answer is yes then this means there's a much larger ramification for the game than I imagine the AFL initially wanted, and I have no doubt that similar, to Will Day, Sicily will be the test case and others will get lesser penalties as the AFL realise they've screwed up and roll this back.

I've asked this numerous times and in multiple ways.

The AFL apologists have come to the conclusion that as soon as Sicily initiated the tackle he should've released 0.2 seconds later. Of course they'll never phrase it this way but this what they're basically saying.

 

[citizen-erased]

People who are suing the AFL are apart of the problem. You play a contact sport, expect it.

It's ridiculous.

i get your point, but it doesn't work

At what point do you risk the next Buddy saying thanks, but no thanks. i'd rather live the last 50-60 years of my life healthy vs. living it up in my 20s then live with CTE for 3/4 of my life.....if i make it that long.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Hawks must appeal. A particularly egregious decision by the AFL in a year full of them. Not even worth a week, the over policing of this game is ridiculous.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Is Luke Sayers wife going get more government grants to fund her existing Inclusion Foundation and start a new one and name it the Exclusion (from AFL tribunal penalties) Foundation? Tax Free of course.

I’m not in that deep but sounds wild

 

[Pure_Ownage]

i get your point, but it doesn't work

At what point do you risk the next Buddy saying thanks, but no thanks. i'd rather live the last 50-60 years of my life healthy vs. living it up in my 20s then live with CTE for 3/4 of my life.....if i make it that long.

You call their bluff and let them sue if they want to.
Its by no means certain that they would succeed legally.

You dont fold before the battle has started but then again the afl is run by echo chamber morons.

 

[MarcMaverick]

we said the same on Merrett on Sparrow and it meant zilch.

i'm not agreeing (or disagreeing) with the outcome. this is what the AFL wants. So this is what it is now.
fans have to accept it. we're not the ones who deal with the consequences. the players and league do

Should have appealed, would have gotten off.

 

[citizen-erased]

You call their bluff and let them sue if they want to.
Its by no means certain that they would succeed legally.

You dont fold before the battle has started but then again the afl is run by echo chamber morons.

no CEO is going to play chicken with a brand worth what the AFL is.
especially when the alternative is what? some upset fans who said the same things when the bump was in the spotlight.

 

[citizen-erased]

Should have appealed, would have gotten off.

we did. he didn't.
you move on.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

You call their bluff and let them sue if they want to.
Its by no means certain that they would succeed legally.

You dont fold before the battle has started but then again the afl is run by echo chamber morons.

It isn’t a bluff. This stuff is very real.

 

[Faz 2000]

i get your point, but it doesn't work

At what point do you risk the next Buddy saying thanks, but no thanks. i'd rather live the last 50-60 years of my life healthy vs. living it up in my 20s then live with CTE for 3/4 of my life.....if i make it that long.

But it’s what makes the game. We admire the players because they’re tough and brave. If you eliminate the risk - however you do that - why watch? It’s an athletic meet.

The ugly truth is we all love footy because it’s modern day gladiators. The danger is inherent and vital.

We don’t WANT injuries, but the fact the danger is there is part of the excitement. Same as risk of smashes in car racing.

There logically MUST be risk in a contact sport (or one involving hard balls, or big animals, or fast cars, or ice, etc). To punish the participants for that risk coming to fruition is to kill the sport itself.

Just because something goes “wrong” or someone gets hurt doesn’t mean somebody is to blame. This is the madness of litigious society. I want it to piss off out of the AFL.

 

[bungalow_bill]

If someone’s head hits the ground and an arm is pinned you’re gone.

Yup happy to see Sicily out for 3, well deserved.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Peter Venkman is a hero.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

Peter Venkman is a hero.

Possibly why your post immediately reminded me of that scene. He's in your head.

 

[MarcMaverick]

Yup happy to see Sicily out for 3, well deserved.

Only because it was against your team. Bet you if Hugh was not playing for the Lions you'd be silent.

 

[Dewyyyyy]

i get your point, but it doesn't work

At what point do you risk the next Buddy saying thanks, but no thanks. i'd rather live the last 50-60 years of my life healthy vs. living it up in my 20s then live with CTE for 3/4 of my life.....if i make it that long.

Because that's the whole idea, many people who play the game will realise the risks that it comes with. There has likely been generational talents you would've never even known because they early on made the decision to not play the game.

People who play the game should and often do know the risks it attaches. Those suing the AFL are bizarre. It's the same thing with cricket. I play both and expect that injury is apart of it. If it isn't a dog act like Barry Hall punching me, and it's a football act. I can live with that. Because i signed up for it. Or cricket. If the ball hits me in the head, i often have a chance to get out of the way etc etc and there's no real time where i can put it on the bowler.

I expect it.

 

[josephine666]

the mark with the knee in the head is probably next but we digress.

That's exactly my point, are you happy for that to be next? The most exciting passage of play in Dees v Pies was the brutal collision between Hunter and Hosking-Elliot. No heads involved, but what if Hosking-Elliot was concussed when he hit the ground? Do you just accept Hunter should be penalised? The footy public has already been conditioned to accept that the bump is pretty much dead. Now it's tackling. Tomorrow it's the speccy or crashing a pack.

The physicality of football is being eroded so quickly. At least the vast majority here seem to be concerned what is happening to our game but how do we stop these MoROns from killing it altogether?

 

[Maddo11]

Only because it was against your team. Bet you if Hugh was not playing for the Lions you'd be silent.

Why are you or I here then genius

 

[citizen-erased]

But it’s what makes the game. We admire the players because they’re tough and brave. If you eliminate the risk - however you do that - why watch? It’s an athletic meet.

The ugly truth is we all love footy because it’s modern day gladiators. The danger is inherent and vital.

We don’t WANT injuries, but the fact the danger is there is part of the excitement. Same as risk of smashes in car racing.

There logically MUST be risk in a contact sport (or one involving hard balls, or big animals, or fast cars, or ice, etc). To punish the participants for that risk coming to fruition is to kill the sport itself.

F1 is the pinnacle of car racing. a guy went through a barrier at about 250km/h, ripped his car in half and sat in a fireball for about a minute or two
the halo that some fans protested as looking ugly meant he's not dead.

This is what the AFL is doing. they don't want concussions. they don't spinal injuries. and they sure as shit don't want anyone dying over a sport.

It won't kill the sport.
F1 is more popular than ever and crashes are far far far less prevalent or dangerous than 40 years ago.
the AFL more or less killed the bump. It is more popular now than ever.

i feel like im at work now, so forgive my well trotted out line. Yes, there is always risk, but it doesn't mean you can't always be trying to mitigate it.

 

[Faz 2000]

F1 is the pinnacle of car racing. a guy went through a barrier at about 250km/h, ripped his car in half and sat in a fireball for about a minute or two
the halo that some fans protested as looking ugly meant he's not dead.

This is what the AFL is doing. they don't want concussions. they don't spinal injuries. and they sure as s**t don't want anyone dying over a sport.

It won't kill the sport.
F1 is more popular than ever and crashes are far far far less prevalent or dangerous than 40 years ago.
the AFL more or less killed the bump. It is more popular now than ever.

i feel like im at work now, so forgive my well trotted out line. Yes, there is always risk, but it doesn't mean you can't always be trying to mitigate it.

F1 would be safer if they limited cars to 60km/h. Why don’t they do it?