Oppo Camp Non-Eagles Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.


Interesting take from two players to take responsibility for poor form..


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

If wce had current players step down due to not being afl quality (fitness or skill) then we would only be left with Oscar Allen and Bailey williams (wouldnt have said this at the start of the year).
 

Log in to remove this ad.

He had mCluggage off his feet and carried the tackle through to its conclusion with full force and the bloke didn't have the footy after the first split second of the tackle.

If you drive the tackle home and knock a bloke out l, you are going to get weeks. It's not a bolt from the blue ruling.

You see plenty of players easing into the end of the tackle these days, aware that they are running a risk if they apply maximum force to the end

Now...whether it's worth the same punishment as sniping a kid off with a late, high bump is another question altogether.

He's brought the player to the ground using his own bodyweight, there's no 'driving the tackle home'. It's called physics and people seem to be forgetting you can't suddenly change momentum/direction mid tackle once you commit.

If he wasn't concussed there wouldn't have been an issure, and therin lies the problem as the AFL are punishing outcomes, not the action.

Shock horror, the AFL are making it up as they go along yet again.
 
David King pretty much tried to end Rich's career last night on 360.
He has form for it.

I did see that. The vision was damning for sure. Rich has been a great player for so long, but you can see why the Lions didn't want him and Witherden in the backline and now Rich has slipped even further. Looks like he's on a treadmill the poor bloke.
 
He's brought the player to the ground using his own bodyweight, there's no 'driving the tackle home'. It's called physics and people seem to be forgetting you can't suddenly change momentum/direction mid tackle once you commit.

If he wasn't concussed there wouldn't have been an issure, and therin lies the problem as the AFL are punishing outcomes, not the action.

Shock horror, the AFL are making it up as they go along yet again.

In that case, if a player chose to jump when contesting a ball and unfortunately happens to collect a player in the head, well it's just physics, you cannot change momentum or direction once you're in the air, he should just get off then.

You want to drive the tackled player into the ground, you cop the consequences. It's not like Sicily's tackle was unavoidable and the consequences were unforeseen. It had to be a suspension given the class action law suits and duty of care to protect players from concussion nowadays.
 
In that case, if a player chose to jump when contesting a ball and unfortunately happens to collect a player in the head, well it's just physics, you cannot change momentum or direction once you're in the air, he should just get off then.

You want to drive the tackled player into the ground, you cop the consequences. It's not like Sicily's tackle was unavoidable and the consequences were unforeseen. It had to be a suspension given the class action law suits and duty of care to protect players from concussion nowadays.

What's the context of the player jumping, are they contesting the ball because it's at height or are they so simply trying to collect a player high? Your argument is rubbish without context.

Explain to me how Sicily impacts that contest from where he was positioned then. We are legislating football actions out of the game now and it's ridiculous.

Nothing about Sicilys suspension will reduce head knocks going forward, it was a football action that had an unfortunate result but the reality is no matter how many players you suspend, short of removing all physical contact from the game there will be head injuries due to the nature of AFL. Don't like it? Don't play.
 
He's brought the player to the ground using his own bodyweight, there's no 'driving the tackle home'. It's called physics and people seem to be forgetting you can't suddenly change momentum/direction mid tackle once you commit.

If he wasn't concussed there wouldn't have been an issure, and therin lies the problem as the AFL are punishing outcomes, not the action.

Shock horror, the AFL are making it up as they go along yet again.
He brought the player down using his own weight then continued to roll him over head first into the turf. 3 games might be a bit harsh but worth a couple in my estimation.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He brought the player down using his own weight then continued to roll him over head first into the turf. 3 games might be a bit harsh but worth a couple in my estimation.
He rolled due to his own momentum lunging.

As someone who has to tackle people who generally don't want to be brought down as part of their job I can tell you you can't simply stop that momentum mid movement just because you wish it, it just doesn't work like that.

The 360 slings(umpires fault for not blowing the whistle earlier btw) and two motion tackles where a distinctive secondary movement is made to smash a player into the turf I get wanting to limit, but this simply isn't one of them.
 
David King pretty much tried to end Rich's career last night on 360.
He has form for it.
To be fair there’s a few of us on the Lions board who have been saying this since last season. This season, the majority of the Lions board has wanted to see him dropped.

Rich has played on one season to long, but he has credits in the bank, and Fagan really doesn’t drop his experienced players, almost no matter what.


So this week, we’re now playing the 4 youngest players on our list.

It’s like we’re now transitioning to our “next” team.

No Rich. No Zorko. No Gunston.

No one over 30 in this weekend’s team (well three 30 year olds).
 
He rolled due to his own momentum lunging.

As someone who has to tackle people who generally don't want to be brought down as part of their job I can tell you you can't simply stop that momentum mid movement just because you wish it, it just doesn't work like that.

The 360 slings(umpires fault for not blowing the whistle earlier btw) and two motion tackles where a distinctive secondary movement is made to smash a player into the turf I get wanting to limit, but this simply isn't one of them.

To be honest, and as unpopular as it may be, my feeling towards this issue is that no resolution is possible without removing incorrect disposal entirely.

If players weren't penalised for ridding themselves of possession by any means under tackling pressure, the requirement to maintain the tackle longer and cause a potential slinging action in order to gain favour of an umpiring decision evaporates.


It would also have the following knock-on effects:
  • player safety improved
  • holding the ball becomes suddenly becomes a much easier rule to adjudge
  • stoppages are much quicker to reset, leading to less congestion
  • inside to outside transfer of possession becomes more likely, causing play to become faster and more open
  • increased open play ends up with more one-on-one contests, which allows the elite players of the competition greater opportunity to display the full range of their skills

It's blasphemy, but gameplay, umpiring and player care would all be improved.


Besides, the interpretation of what constitutes a handball now is becoming increasingly blurred anyway - look no further than what Liberatore and Oliver get away with in each game they play.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top