News The Ginnivan Rule - AFL cracks down

[MyManLynch]

I'm glad Lethal has called the AFL out for the poor treatment of Ginnivan. It's a lot more difficult for them to victim blame and obfuscate now. The broader media are something else though. They whip up a storm and create the issue then when Ginnivan gets predictably targeted they're up-in-arms. There's no accountability there, they're quite happy to milk both sides of the story, while dodging any responsibility themselves.

Paging Mr Robinson, paging Mr Robinson…can you please report to the ‘please explain’ counter & lodge your truth & confessional papers.
Don‘t forget to fill out the ‘I was wrong’ form in triplicate & the ‘high horse’ section must also be signed & witnessed.

 

[gerryg400]

Paging Mr Robinson, paging Mr Robinson…can you please report to the ‘please explain’ counter & lodge your truth & confessional papers.
Don‘t forget to fill out the ‘I was wrong’ form in triplicate & the ‘high horse’ section must also be signed & witnessed.

There's zero chance he'll admit to being wrong. It's unlikely he even remembers what he said.

 

[soreplums]

I used to think if a tackle slips up from the shoulder then ok, play on, but, you can lay a fair bump and accidentally clash heads and you can cop a week suspension.

if you choose to tackle, it needs to be between the knees and shoulders. Full stop.

 

[Mollythedolly]

Both Wright and Fly should be.

Come out and support your player, just looks weak as fk atm.

Disagree. The club is supporting Ginnivan. They don’t need to go head to head publicly with the AFL to demonstrate that.

 

[Maggie5]

if you choose to tackle, it needs to be between the knees and shoulders. Full stop.

Agree and the option to do that in this tackle was there.

 

[Quicky]

Agree and the option to do that in this tackle was there.

It wasn't even a poor tackle. Redman meant what he did. He intended to take Ginnivan high and intended to take him in a headlock. It's the worst non-free i've ever seen.

 

[nahnah]

the AFL have to admit they've ****ed this up and apologise to Ginnivan. They've brought the game into disrepute

 

[Hong Kong Pie]

It wasn't even a poor tackle. Redman meant what he did. He intended to take Ginnivan high and intended to take him in a headlock. It's the worst non-free i've ever seen.

I get what you mean, but do you remember what it was like back in the early 90s and earlier? This kind of thing happened every so often back then, back when this was still semi-acceptable.

That's what the AFL have freaking done. They have taken the game back about 3 decades, where crude swinging arms to the throat and head were still happening as part of the game, and on the weekend Jack Ginnivan didn't even get a free kick because he needed to be taught a lesson.

Absolutely disgraceful.

 

[Mollythedolly]

Well, I can tell you this. If there is no support shown on the field, then the opposition players will continue to do it for the whole game no matter how much support he gets behind closed doors. So no, it's not utter rubbish..it is fact.

As soon as team mates retaliate the battle is lost IMHO. The old school “fly the flag” mentality is now the “sucked in” mentality. Team mates know what Ginnivan is doing. He’s trying to draw a free. Much as the opposition are doing trying to entice retaliation.

Opinions aren’t facts either.

 

[loki04]

As soon as team mates retaliate the battle is lost IMHO. The old school “fly the flag” mentality is now the “sucked in” mentality. Team mates know what Ginnivan is doing. He’s trying to draw a free. Much as the opposition are doing trying to entice retaliation.

Opinions aren’t facts either.

You can't allow it to happen on a weekly basis over an extended period, as a club and team you look soft.

If we are talking a one off incident (pending severity and level of dog act) I'd agree with your premise. But not when it's a weekly event.

 

[jathanas]

the AFL have to admit they've *ed this up and apologise to Ginnivan. They've brought the game into disrepute

Their incompetence is how they've communicated about this issue has been breathtaking. Bumbling fools.

 

[Markfs]

so now we all think that jack and joel need to be given more frees?

 

[MyManLynch]

so now we all think that jack and joel need to be given more frees?

If they are tackled high…pay em.

 

[ThePhantom777]

You can't allow it to happen on a weekly basis over an extended period, as a club and team you look soft.

If we are talking a one off incident (pending severity and level of dog act) I'd agree with your premise. But not when it's a weekly event.

Agree. Half the team should have run in for the one against Essendon. The Lions, Cats, Hawks and Tigers multiple premiership teams wouldn't have allowed it to happen to a team mate without a response.

 

[OEP MKII]

I'm so sick of this nonsense from the, supposedly, intelligent people within the AFL hierarchy. A few dickhead journalists decide to make a mountain out of mole hill with regards to the way Ginnivan was able to draw free kicks. Something I might add players have been doing in this competition for as long as I can remember, but for some reason those same dickhead journalists and the moronic AFL decision makers decided to unfairly make Ginnivan the devil poster child for this.
As has already been pointed out by those on this site and others in the media, the handling of this matter has been so poorly mismanage that's it'd be comical if it wasn't so dangerous. If it was a movie you'd be laughing your ass off watching players getting their heads ripped off while listening to the AFL justify their stance and the decisions being made. But it's not a movie, it's real life and a young man's physical and mental health are at stake and the AFL are being borderline criminally negligible in their handling of this.
Does the AFL seriously think the best way to protect a players head is to make it fair game for opposition players to target it until that player plays the game the way they think it should be played.
It's simple, a head high tackle is a head high tackle whether it's a sloppy tackle or drawn by the player, or both. The onus should ALWAYS be on the tackler to avoid the head, not the ball carrier to make it easy for the tackler to make a tackle.
And by the by if the AFL wants to continue to go down this path then I expect the same consideration to be made whenever any players actions cause head high contact, such jumping for a mark and the player attempting to spoil the ball hits them in the head, if they didn't jump they wouldn't have been hit. A player goes low to get the loose ball and is collected high, if the player stays upright they don't get hit. I could give more stupid examples of stupid ways to not pay obvious free kicks for players making deliberate actions that cause head high contact, but I don't think I need to. As I already stated it's not up to the player being hit in the head to make sure they don't get hit in the head.
The AFL seriously needs to pull their collective heads out of their asses and realise they've totally screwed this up and then act like adults and say they overreacted and fix this before someone, probably Ginnivan, gets seriously hurt.
Apologies for the long rant but this has been pissing me off for a while.

 

[Pie eyed]

Old graph

The AFL approves 350 games ducking like a weak campaigner.

 

[Markfs]

If they are tackled high…pay em.

i'm not arguing with you but a lot of people are still complaining about the amount of free kicks selwood gets..

 

[doofdoof]

i'm not arguing with you but a lot of people are still complaining about the amount of free kicks selwood gets..

Ginnivan is being umpired differently to Selwood who would certainly have received a free kick there.

There has been a media witch-hunt calling out Ginnivan solely.

This may be because he plays for Collingwood or because he is a show pony or because he does it too often or, most likely, all of the above.

There hasn't been any real discussion or analysis about how much other players have been doing the same thing for years. It has been piss poor lazy opinion-based "journalism"

 

[Markfs]

Ginnivan is being umpired differently to Selwood who would certainly have received a free kick there.

There has been a media witch-hunt calling out Ginnivan solely.

This may be because he plays for Collingwood or because he is a show pony or because he does it too often or, most likely, all of the above.

There hasn't been any real discussion or analysis about how much other players have been doing the same thing for years. It has been piss poor lazy opinion-based "journalism"

any other player would have got a free kick. I think most rational people would argue that. As for your explanation i think most umpires would reject that. However, selwood has been portrayed as respected, and not playing for free kicks. He doesnt directly look at the umpire and challenge him to give a free. Ginnivan is the opposite. He does play for frees. His coach admitted it. And yes Selwood is well liked in the media. I doubt ginnivan is thought of that way. People in life who are well liked have an easier time in life....that's the reality

 

[loki04]

so now we all think that jack and joel need to be given more frees?

They need to be paid the genuine frees there.

I have no issue with the overarching message of if a player deliberately causes high contact despite the tacklers best efforts to make sure its low then its play on.

But in instances that the tackler has not attempted to tackle correctly then regardless off the ball winners actions it should be a free kick.

Many of Ginnivans frees whilst his tactics draw the high contact many of the tacklers aren't even trying hence should be free kicks.

 

[loki04]

'If the umpires won't, we will': Ross Lyon urges Pies to stick up for Jack Ginnivan​

The former coach thinks Collingwood should take matters into their own hands if Jack Ginnivan continues to be unfairly treated by umpires.

'If the umpires won't, we will': Ross Lyon urges Pies to stick up for Jack Ginnivan

The former coach thinks Collingwood should take matters into their own hands if Jack Ginnivan continues to be unfairly treated by umpires.

www.theroar.com.au

 

[gouki88]

'If the umpires won't, we will': Ross Lyon urges Pies to stick up for Jack Ginnivan​

The former coach thinks Collingwood should take matters into their own hands if Jack Ginnivan continues to be unfairly treated by umpires.

'If the umpires won't, we will': Ross Lyon urges Pies to stick up for Jack Ginnivan

The former coach thinks Collingwood should take matters into their own hands if Jack Ginnivan continues to be unfairly treated by umpires.

www.theroar.com.au

No surprise that a coach who saw the game fly by him thinks this way

 

[Kappa]

It wasn't even a poor tackle. Redman meant what he did. He intended to take Ginnivan high and intended to take him in a headlock. It's the worst non-free i've ever seen.

And the worst free I’ve ever seen was a Collingwood player being done for HTB when he wasn’t in possession of the ball.

Surprisingly also Ginnivan !

 

[Quicky]

And the worst free I’ve ever seen was a Collingwood player being done for HTB when he wasn’t in possession of the ball.

Surprisingly also Ginnivan !

Yeah that was ridiculous.

 

[sr36]

And the worst free I’ve ever seen was a Collingwood player being done for HTB when he wasn’t in possession of the ball.

Surprisingly also Ginnivan !

That one looked ridiculous but it actually happens a lot. Bloke dives on it and it doesn't come out it's a free against him even though it's often the opponent holding the ball in. It's a ridiculous rule. Ginnivan standing up showed exactly how ridiculous it is.