Taylor Walker's dangerous tackle on Morris

[Kailon]

Far, far too lenient.

why cos if it's a genuine accident and no malicious intent a reprimand is all that is needed. do it again reprimand. do it a third time suspend them. accidents happen all the time. the education and correcting of the problems should be the forefront.

 

[DonsRule]

why cos if it's a genuine accident and no malicious intent a reprimand is all that is needed. do it again reprimand. do it a third time suspend them. accidents happen all the time. the education and correcting of the problems should be the forefront.

Perhaps, but I think the 3 weeks is a little soft, in that case. If you do it 3 times, perhaps the weighting should take into account all 3 incidents, make it 4-5, maybe if there was a serious injury higher?

I don't think there was any malice in the tackle, just it was very poorly executed, and had the potential to be dangerous.

 

[Niximus]

Are Richmond supporters as outraged by this tackle?

 

[Punt_Road_Roar]

So you actually think this type of tackle is perfectly fine? As you can tell his head doesnt even hit the ground.....

 

[Niximus]

So you actually think this type of tackle is perfectly fine? As you can tell his head doesnt even hit the ground.....

Well no, I think it was a dangerous tackle.

Do you think the Nahas tackle was perfectly fine?

 

[Punt_Road_Roar]

Well no, I think it was a dangerous tackle.

Do you think the Nahas tackle was perfectly fine?

Two different tackles, did Nahas lift the bloke up off the ground?

 

[Niximus]

Two different tackles, did Nahas lift the bloke up off the ground?

Isn't the issue about how dangerous it was?

Do you think that the Nahas Tackle was perfectly fine?

 

[Punt_Road_Roar]

Isn't the issue about how dangerous it was?

Do you think that the Nahas Tackle was perfectly fine?

The issue is how much force is used in a tackle and whether it was necessary, Nahas was lucky to escape a weeks holiday but in saying that it was looked at by the MRP and deemed not forceful enough, your bloke on the other hand .....

 

[Cap]

The issue is how much force is used in a tackle and whether it was necessary, Nahas was lucky to escape a weeks holiday but in saying that it was looked at by the MRP and deemed not forceful enough, your bloke on the other hand .....

hasn't been charged yet ,either.

but that hasn't stoped the Richmond fans squealing like stuck pigs

 

[muzzington]

So you actually think this type of tackle is perfectly fine? As you can tell his head doesnt even hit the ground.....

"Dr. Death" Steve Williams would be proud.

Morris is both tough and lucky.

 

[ommot]

In trouble for sure, definitely didn't intend to hurt him. I'm still glad he's actually tackling this year as opposed to last year, he's just gone to overboard from nothingness last year. Will see what the MRP makes up this time. The other reportable offence at the game was a Richmond supporter in the members area asking some of us Crows fans to stop cheering for our team.

 

[Niximus]

Even sticks his leg out to make sure he topples onto his head instead of his belly...dog

 

[Ron The Bear]

Isn't the issue about how dangerous it was?

Do you think that the Nahas Tackle was perfectly fine?

Would like to see the entire tackle in context, not just from the mid-point. MRP report said Smith's momentum carried him forward.

 

[DonsRule]

Even sticks his leg out to make sure he topples onto his head instead of his belly...dog

Probably a little lucky to get off that , though they are very different tackles.

One issue I have had this year is the umpires have allowed play to continue on too far after a tackle that wraps someone up, but doesn't bring them to ground, the player then tries to take them to ground often resulting in a sling like tackle, and they are in trouble for it. It would have all been fine had an umpire blown the whistle when the was no chance of the ball getting out,

 

[m0zza]

Certainly reckless and High contact
The only wriggle room is impact.

The MRP often fudges the category to get the desired result,
so I expect medium impact to create a signicant suspension

Leaves high impact for a similar tackle causing injury

 

[Niximus]

Would like to see the entire tackle in context, not just from the mid-point. MRP report said Smith's momentum carried him forward.

His momentum carried him forward...right into the leg that Nahas stuck out in front of him...

 

[DonsRule]

Certainly reckless and High contact
The only wriggle room is impact.

The MRP often fudges the category to get the desired result,
so I expect medium impact to create a signicant suspension

Leaves high impact for a similar tackle causing injury

Yep, they might be lucky and they will call it low impact, but I see t as medium with all that weight, they'd probably call it high or severe if there was an injury.

And Kirky.

The who no injury isn't rally a let off to me, for low impact, his someone as hard as you like on their arm, and almost certainly the worst you're going to get a bit of a bruise, maybe nothing at all.

 

[Ron The Bear]

His momentum carried him forward...right into the leg that Nahas stuck out in front of him...

Maybe Walker will get off then. Bit farcical that nobody knows for sure.

 

[Niximus]

Maybe Walker will get off then. Bit farcical that nobody knows for sure.

If the tribunal allowed precedent to be cited he'd be fine.....he'll get 2 bumped to 3 with his carry over though.

Then again, I predicted suspensions for Nahas and Franklin too.

 

[Vince12]

His momentum carried him forward...right into the leg that Nahas stuck out in front of him...

What are you even arguing. Of course the Nahas one was bad, however it wasn't as bad as Walkers one. They are both worth dangerous, Walkers definitely more so. Could've broken his neck. Nahas' one was bad, but had no chance of causing spinal damage.

 

[Vince12]

As a side note why is my quote showing a woman with a bear rather than the original gif...

 

[headache1]

One issue I have had this year is the umpires have allowed play to continue on too far after a tackle that wraps someone up, but doesn't bring them to ground, the player then tries to take them to ground often resulting in a sling like tackle, and they are in trouble for it. It would have all been fine had an umpire blown the whistle when the was no chance of the ball getting out,

Hit the nail on the head there. All it takes is a quick whistle for holding the ball or a ball up and taking them to ground never happens. Same thing with his tackle against Taylor earlier in the year and the tackle on Priddis by Lovett-Murray.

Yep, they might be lucky and they will call it low impact, but I see t as medium with all that weight, they'd probably call it high or severe if there was an injury.

I have an issue with this. Are we really going to start penalising players for being big and strong? Are the bigger players in the game supposed to timidly tackle their opponents for fear of perhaps injuring somebody in a full contact sport?

 

[headache1]

As a side note why is my quote showing a woman with a bear rather than the original gif...

And further to that, what the hell is she doing with that dog in the shower.

 

[00Stinger]

I'm amazed the he wasn't rubbed out in the last 2 games.
Kicking- gets off
Blatantly pushing a guy into the post- gets off
Sling tackle-?

 

[Righteo]

Looks like you have to an Adelaide supporter to reckon that's OK.

Completely agree, it's actually pretty shameful how the majority of Adelaide fans think there was nothing in it. One of the ugliest tackles I've seen in some time and Morris could have been seriously injured. It was completely unecessary too.