- May 29, 2013
- 5,189
- 12,858
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Michael Christian has to go .... its worse than chook lotto it's flipping turkey lotto ... and the chief turkey has to go
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Unfortunately for Banfield the ball bounced away from him at an inopportune moment and he was left reaching for the ball. I’m neither here nor there on whether Butters should have been suspended but the fact it wasn’t a free kick boggles my mind.I see 2 issues this week.
I didn’t want Butters gone either, I felt like he approached the contest in a fair football manner, but I just don’t feel as those absolute milliseconds difference on replay should be the difference between suspension and nothing? The MRO placed so much emphasis on that freeze frame of when hands touched the ball. Is that really the focus? As long as you touch the ball you can approach the contest in any manner?
Essentially they’re saying just get a hand to the ball and it’s fine AND put yourself and your opponent at risk. If you take ANY precaution for your own safety you’re gone.
Secondly, protecting the head needs a systematic review to ensure players are protecting themselves. We heard Dunkley say players are happy to let their heads hit the ground to get a free. They are happy to go head first to an in dispute ball. You can’t stick your head and neck out over these types of contests. It’s just dumb.
Rather than just focusing on punishing any head high hit, they need to ensure coaching & training to go slightly turned so you have shoulder/hip ready to take the hit. Both Banfield & the Blues player would have avoided a head high hit this way, and it also stops Butters in particular taking possession of the ball.
End of the day if I’m coaching juniors I want players to approach the contest like Crouch & Butters.
Perhaps instead of all this week by week drama about what a bad tackle & bump is, the AFL needs to release a series of videos to say what’s the right way to do things? If you go low turned & eyes for the footy and incidental contact is made to the head of a player who went with head, that’s on the receiving player. I can’t make sense of dangerous tackles either - Cameron a fine (but a week initially), Greene & Yeo no case to answer, what?
It's been like that for many years, not only in football.Rules for some ... rules for others
Chol getting a week and Hogan getting off is laughable.
Needs to appeal that.
Ridiculous. It was a push.
Agree. Awful decision to suspend him for that.We aren't appealing apparently.
There's no way that was suspension worthy. Push to the chest and Gulden milked it.
Grundy punches Meek in the gut right in front of the umpires like an idiot (gave away a 50) and doesn't get cited.
We aren't appealing apparently.
There's no way that was suspension worthy. Push to the chest and Gulden milked it.
Grundy punches Meek in the gut right in front of the umpires like an idiot (gave away a 50) and doesn't get cited.
Round 1 against Hawthorn. For Striking Jai Newcombe.Which round?
MATCH REVIEW: Warner learns fate for Pittonet elbow
The Match Review findings for Friday's round 10 game between Sydney and Carlton are inwww.afl.com.au
From this, I assume that you're allowed to elbow a guy in the head and get away with it. Great precedence set there AFL.
He elbowed another player in the head, he knew he was going to contact Pittonet with his elbow but did it anyway. It's like saying, the guy was only speeding a little, lets not fine him.It was as soft as butter honestly probably worth a fine but come on why do fans want every bloke suspended