Oppo Camp Non-Eagles Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

100% - the Eagles recruitment team have been poor for years and they have no imagination. They haven't found a diamond in the rough for years. They are also not good at developing players when you compare them to clubs like Geelong and Sydney - that's why they find themselves in their current predicament. Humphries elite disposal efficiency on both feet and hands was obvious at every level I saw him play at over the last few years - staggering that the Eagles didn't at least rookie list him. The positive is that after 30 years List Manager Roham O'Brien has finally gone
Body Hough is pretty good too, but I agree that the recruitment could be better overall. O'Brien was excellent at finding talls (Harry Edwards off Rookiee list and Jack Williams with pick 50 are two that are pushing their way into best 22 this year) but was average with mids. Was also conservative with trades. It will be interesting to see what the new guy can do.
 
Duggo got him clean with one of his trademark solid bumps (maybe in the 1st) that sent Cameron flying out of a ground ball contest in congestion. Even on the TV you could see his head snap around to see who it was that got him pretty good. That lingering tackle was a cheap shot at payback. There was defo a bit in it. Not such a good guy.
Cameron also put.Brockman out for 4 weeks or the season by accidentally or not accidentally treading on his ankle.
Perhaps he’s not such a good guy after all.
 
Cameron also put.Brockman out for 4 weeks or the season by accidentally or not accidentally treading on his ankle.
Perhaps he’s not such a good guy after all.
There was a couple of Brissy players standing on feet, Happened to Hutch I think as well.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Most people would lose their job if they called anyone any slur at work so footballers who get a few weeks of paid leave for doing it could probably consider themselves lucky?

As they would too, if they at work hit someone in the head.

The AFL is at sixes and sevens on this one, verbally insult or slur someone, gets greater punishment than physically assaulting someone.

As had been said before in this thread, it's the lack of parity and equity in the distinction between a verbal and a physical offence that is the issue, none here are excusing or defending the verbal assault.

In the community, I ask you this - are you more likely to go to prison for calling someone a derogatory name or make a racial slur, or punching someone ?

I think we all know the answer to the question that I posed.

So by virtue of the weight of severity of the suspension, the AFL are making a statement that verbal abuse is more heinous than physical abuse.

And then of course there is that additional problematic and hypocritical technicality, if you want to bring the workplace is as an illustrative example.

In the AFL

If your management you get a lighter punishment - Clarkson.
While the worker, cops a more severe and punitive suspension.

It gets worse, when you doubled that, with the fact that one is a serial offender of AFL, code of conduct breaches - Clarkson
The other a first offender.

The duplicity of AFL is once agin, in the spotlight.

You have to give the AFL one plaudit, they are consistently inconsistent.
 
Helmets make no difference in concussion. Again for those that are unaware, HELMETS MAKE NO DIFFERENCE IN CONCUSSION.

On Pixel 6 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app
No difference whatsoever? Don’t even have potential to reduce severity?

I’m not a doctor but I understand basic physics. I’ve googled the subject of helmets and concussion and have found a few bald assertions and some conflicting conclusions.

If concussion occurs when the brain bounces around the skull, it’s unclear to me why a helmet with heavy padding that absorbs impact could not reduce the force with which the brain impacts the skull.

I’m aware that some AFL players who’ve worn helmets have still suffered concussion. That of itself isn’t conclusive of the question.

I assume a punch to the head could cause concussion. But if I held a cushion to my head and the same punch hit the cushion, then the force of the punch would dissipate. Presumably the risk of concussion would reduce, or at least the severity in that scenario?
 
No difference whatsoever? Don’t even have potential to reduce severity?

I’m not a doctor but I understand basic physics. I’ve googled the subject of helmets and concussion and have found a few bald assertions and some conflicting conclusions.

If concussion occurs when the brain bounces around the skull, it’s unclear to me why a helmet with heavy padding that absorbs impact could not reduce the force with which the brain impacts the skull.

I’m aware that some AFL players who’ve worn helmets have still suffered concussion. That of itself isn’t conclusive of the question.

I assume a punch to the head could cause concussion. But if I held a cushion to my head and the same punch hit the cushion, then the force of the punch would dissipate. Presumably the risk of concussion would reduce, or at least the severity in that scenario?

No difference to change severity.

The medical research is unequivocal. Cushioning does Nothing to blunt the brain rattling inside it's casing.

Look no further than the last paddy mccartin concussion incident that ultimately was his last game.





Watch this to see the mechanics of concussion





What all of the anecdotal evidence at grassroots footy shows though, is that when you mandate helmets in kids, they don't protect themselves going in for the ball and have a greater incident of head knocks and collision injuries.

On Pixel 6 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Would love to know why UFC hasn't been bankrupted by concussion claims, or at least why they seem unconcerned by the risk given they haven't banned head strikes (hell you can knee an opponent to the head and its applauded)?
Merica!

Sent from my SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Happy to be corrected but I believe Boxing and MMA etc have special rules outside of the law for them to take part in. As you can't allow yourself by law to get punched in the face. The law has the right to charge the person whether you wanted it or not.
Those sports are mandated so that assault can take place and both parties are aware of it going into the ring.
I would assume it's not ideal for footy to go that route as you will reduce the number of people who want to play the game if that's the view you take.
That's why there was a grey area when Hall hit Staker as it wasn't really a footy act and more an assault. From a legal perspective Hall could have been charged but the police were happy with the fact the AFL were going to hand out a punishment etc under the games rules. But they could have.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It's a brilliant bit of info but in the heat of battle with 0.5 seconds to act... c'mon. Like someone said, height and weight calculations etc
Rugby League hits hard in tackles but penalties for error or poor technique are very tough. Players will adapt quickly, coaches on $1m will sort it out quickly. Shep and others remind the AFL they cannot turn back.
 
If better tackling technique can prevent concussions, why wouldn't we want that taught?

I don’t disagree, but the biggest potential improvement in limiting head injuries is rules and umpiring (fyi this is a crack at current rules, not umpires who have a horrifically difficult job).

Momentum to me seems the #1 indicator of whether there is a head injury or not. Not a lot of guys who get tackled standing and remain standing get concussed. If a player slings them then yes it happens (and the rules are sufficient for that I think).

Next one is where a player is not standing still. Have they had any prior and not disposed of the ball?

No - currently blowing the whistle for a ball up a bit faster - but make it even quicker again (and to keep the game moving remove the nomination rule and throw it up/in immediately).

Yes - maybe 1 second then HTB… does this stop HR a little, yep, but also stops most tackles needing to take a player to ground. Note that the player still gets PRIOR opportunity, just not a second 360 (or even 180) once tackled.

Cameron one could have been avoided, Bedford on I think still occurs under the above (not sure it is ever avoidable..)


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
It's a brilliant bit of info but in the heat of battle with 0.5 seconds to act... c'mon. Like someone said, height and weight calculations etc
That's why it needs to be trained, preferably at all levels.

With players getting suspended left and right the motivation to learn better technique is high. My problem with the Bedford tackle was around the lack of alternative. This shows there is a clear alternative that just needs to be taught.

Won't stop the complaining about suspensions immediately but at least there's a path forward that protects players and doesn't stop players tackling. At least for this type of tackle.
 
That's why it needs to be trained, preferably at all levels.

With players getting suspended left and right the motivation to learn better technique is high. My problem with the Bedford tackle was around the lack of alternative. This shows there is a clear alternative that just needs to be taught.

Won't stop the complaining about suspensions immediately but at least there's a path forward that protects players and doesn't stop players tackling. At least for this type of tackle.
I just don’t think Bedford’s technique was that bad. Viney’s brother’s demos are done standing still, it’s a bit different when you’re running and chasing someone. I agree that poor technique should be trained out though, so long as supposed good technique is actually achievable on-field.
 



Except he's leaving out the height/weight difference between the two.

The technique is sound but Bedford doesn't have the leverage Cripps does to be able to be more upright in the tackle allowing him to get his legs under him while dropping.
 
tackling in 2026:

XkDxc5.gif


KR5d6i.gif
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Oppo Camp Non-Eagles Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top