MRP / Trib. Tribunal Thread - rules and offences discombobulation

[Doctor Feel]

Jon Ralph and his lazy eye lol

 

[Grave Danger]

That serving part of the suspension in the pre-season is a bit of a furphy - they'll just add a game to the penalty he would've got.

 

[PAFC66]

Theres no conspiracy. Whenever a Port player is involved its 'time to finally make an example' and they get a proper punishment. Any other team and its a lottery whether they get 0 weeks or 3.

Don't forget all the garbage about Aliir last year, then a Crows player gets knocked out a week later and plays out the game.

We've been copping this all the way back to when K.Cornes was the first and only player to be officially warned for diving

Didn't Byron Pickett get the ban bumped? Oh and don't forget the Primus ruck rule

 

[PAFC66]

Im struggling to see the argument really. Its a clear 2-3 weeks

It is it's just not been applied consistently and the medias uproar when it's one of ours vs a good bloke .There's your argument.

 

[JimmyBC]

He was unlucky in the sense the tackle swung the player into his path, but you really can't brace & bump to protect yourself anymore you should just tackle or avoid.

It will become less of an issue as the next gens come through, their instincts will be different as the bump or brace for contact is already being coached out.

 

[philthy05]

He was unlucky in the sense the tackle swung the player into his path, but you really can't brace & bump to protect yourself anymore you should just tackle or avoid.

It will become less of an issue as the next gens come through, their instincts will be different as the bump or brace for contact is already being coached out.

Yeah if he hadn’t turned he still would have collected Keane , and high, and knocked him out, only spp would have been in bits from the clash as well.

But it wouldn’t have looked so bad.

The state of the game eh.


I think players are always going to brace for impact, it’s never going away. It’s a natural human instinct. We’ve seen players protect themselves a little worse going into contact, but contact they don’t see coming (but should know to expect) is the change we’ve seen. (Ie players happy to lead with head)

My 17 month old already learned those reactionary instincts to protect herself long ago, there’s no way any amount of bad media coverage is going to change how someone reacts in 0.3 seconds.

 

[davesnothere]

Didn't Byron Pickett get the ban bumped? Oh and don't forget the Primus ruck rule

Primus Ruck rule has now been repelled I believe.

 

[PAFC66]

Primus Ruck rule has now been repelled I believe.

Still made an example

 

[PAFC66]

He was unlucky in the sense the tackle swung the player into his path, but you really can't brace & bump to protect yourself anymore you should just tackle or avoid.

It will become less of an issue as the next gens come through, their instincts will be different as the bump or brace for contact is already being coached out.

And that's fine but the instinct to protect yourself still needs to be taken into account when grading the suspension

 

[Brian McGee]

And that's fine but that still needs to be taken into account when grading the suspension

Totally agree. But it won’t be.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Isn't it an amazing coincidence that one of the handful of players on the field that has a reputation for running around like a lunatic crashing into bodies with reckless abandon somehow ended up in the wrong place at the wrong time and had Keane's head slung into his shoulder through absolutely no fault of his own. Keane should probably bring him flowers to apologise for this horrible misfortune.

Running around like a lunatic?
Stupid player?

Dude you’re picking a really weird hill to die on here.

Who needs David king when you’ve got TeeKray!

 

[Festerz]

Jeez ... Blaming Keane for this is peak Janus!

It wasnt a malicious act, but it was crude. There is no defense for SPP, other than stupidity!

Take the time to look at that video you posted.

It starts here:



It ends here:



Take a look at where Keane's head and the ball are at the opening of that sequence- tall and high.

Look at where Keane's head and the ball are at the end of that sequence- low and falling.

And now take a look at the time.

One second has elapsed.

ONE SECOND.

That is the context of that contact which matters.

We all know Sammy will get games because of where he was and the result.

But FFS can we please understand the concept of reaction time in a game of professional football where physicality at the contest is not just expected but demanded.

SPP had ONE frigging second to change that approach from attack to avoid collision as the context of the contest totally changes.

FMD.

 

[PAFC66]

If they paid holding the ball instantly and got rid of prior opportunity it would 100% make the game safer, Keane riding the tackle and holding possession of the ball in doing so puts him at an increased risk.
No prior and we would see Less sling tackles, less aggressive tackles , less players being taken to the ground and hits like we saw on the weekend.

 

[Wargreymon90]

2 if we’re lucky

3 if they’re applying the same standard as last year

4 if they want to set a new standard

 

[snozulu]

2 if we’re lucky

3 if they’re applying the same standard as last year

4 if they want to set a new standard

5 for port tax

 

[Festerz]

If they paid holding the ball instantly and got rid of prior opportunity it would 100% make the game safer. Less sling tackles, less aggressive tackles, less players being taken to the ground and hits like we saw on the weekend.

You are so right.

Players are told to hold the ball high in the tackle and not release it until they see a team mate and rotate the body and legs to continue the movement.

And so the spin tackle has come into play with players holding to ball high in the tackle looking for the chance to hand ball it into advantage. If no opportunity is there they then bring it in to the body to feign the ball being held in.

There is clearly a prior advantage that is ignored by umpires under existing rules that is being taken advantage of.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Take the time to look at that video you posted.

It starts here:

View attachment 1913293

It ends here:

View attachment 1913297

Take a look at where Keane's head and the ball are at the opening of that sequence- tall and high.

Look at where Keane's head and the ball are at the end of that sequence- low and falling.

And now take a look at the time.

One second has elapsed.

ONE SECOND.

That is the context of that matters.

We all know Sammy will get games because of where he was and the result.

But FFS can we please understand the concept of reaction time in a game of professional football where physicality at the contest is not just expected but demanded.

SPP had ONE frigging second to change that approach from attack to avoid collision as the context of the contest totally changes.

FMD.

Where could Keane have ended up that made attacking the contest in the way that SPP did okay? He went in too hard to the point where he lost control of his body and had to brace.

People are acting like Keane was subject to some unforseeable motion that caused the contact to be so forceful. He wasn't. The contact was forceful because SPP went in too hard to a contest where a bloke was already being tackled, and didn't make a play for the ball. If SPP's hands are up trying to win the ball, Keane probably cannons into SPP's chest and we've got no case to answer here.

 

[El_Scorcho]

I think players are always going to brace for impact, it’s never going away. It’s a natural human instinct. We’ve seen players protect themselves a little worse going into contact, but contact they don’t see coming (but should know to expect) is the change we’ve seen. (Ie players happy to lead with head)

Players brace for impact when they've lost control of their body into a contest. Look at Maynard last year, a classic case of "whoops i've gone in too hard here" and instinct takes over.

If you're going in so hard that instinct has to take over to protect you, outside of some wildly unforeseeable movement, getting pushed or being blindsided, none of which apply here, you're responsible for the outcome.

SPP is usually very good at this, he goes hard into contests every week and is usually elite at getting his body in the right position, and attacking and winning the footy. He's stuffed up this contest and concussed a bloke. It's weeks.

 

[It Just Is]

He went in too hard to the point where he lost control of his body and had to brace.

What’s the wording of the rules now? This seems irrelevant, particularly when he was approaching from behind Keane.

 

[JimmyBC]

And that's fine but the instinct to protect yourself still needs to be taken into account when grading the suspension

Totally agree. But it won’t be.

Yea agree with Brian it's a new world in regards to head knocks now and their reaction to it.. except if you are playing for a 'big 4' malbun club in finals of course.

 

[Festerz]

Where could Keane have ended up that made attacking the contest in the way that SPP did okay? He went in too hard to the point where he lost control of his body and had to brace.

At the start of that ONE SECOND of play, Keane (who is 194cm tall) is upright and is holding the ball above his head against a much smaller opponent to break the tackle and commence the spin movement to avoid a HTB call. SPP is running into that tackle.

At the completion of that ONE SECOND of play, Keane has dropped his knees and brought the ball down to his waist in an attempt to handball or get a ball up. SPP has stopped dead (commentators describing it as 'planting his feet' as if it is evidence of SPP's intent to cause harm when the complete opposite is the case) turns side on and lowers his body to brace for impact.

All in ONE SECOND.

To be clear there is no fault being levelled at Keane here. It is an attempt to explain the split second dynamics of action and consequences in a high impact game of professional football.

No one is for a moment criticising the AFL's desire to limit brain trauma in our game and punish those who deliberately go out to hurt opponents.

But the AFL needs to understand that it is the protector of our game whose very nature poses the greatest risk to its competitors. Not the players who make thousands of split second decisions in a high impact game and are simply at the wrong place at the wrong time when their prediction of what might happen is not 100% perfect.

 

[El_Scorcho]

What’s the wording of the rules now? This seems irrelevant, particularly when he was approaching from behind Keane.

This is what makes it "careless"

 

[El_Scorcho]

At the start of that ONE SECOND of play, Keane (who is 194cm tall) is upright and is holding the ball above his head against a much smaller opponent to break the tackle and commence the spin movement to avoid a HTB call. SPP is running into that tackle.

At the completion of that ONE SECOND of play, Keane has dropped his knee and brought the ball down to his waist in an attempt to handball. SPP has stopped dead (commentators describing it as 'planting his feet' as if it is evidence of SPP's intent to cause harm when the complete opposite is the case) turns side on and lowers his body to brace for impact.

All in ONE SECOND.

To be clear there is no fault being levelled at Keane here. It is an attempt to explain the dynamics of action and consequences in a high impact game of professional football.

This hasn't answered my question. What was SPP expecting to happen in the contest that made going in so hard the reasonable option?

Negate the "careless" aspect for me. If we can negate the careless aspect of the charge, he might get off. But what you're describing when talking about "one second" is the result of SPP going into a contest carelessly. If he'd taken proper care (like players do at every contest in every game) he wouldn't have been in that situation.

 

[Brian McGee]

This hasn't answered my question. What was SPP expecting to happen in the contest that made going in so hard the reasonable option?

Negate the "careless" aspect for me. If we can negate the careless aspect of the charge, he might get off. But what you're describing when talking about "one second" is the result of SPP going into a contest carelessly. If he'd taken proper care (like players do at every contest in every game) he wouldn't have been in that situation.

While i agree with you on your point that this makes it careless, it could easily be argued that he wasn’t even entering the contest. The contest came to him as the player was slung around in a totally different direction to where he originally was. If Keane had been slung and his head hit Sam’s knee it would be the same outcome, but no suspension. It’s this bullshit “elected to bump” idea that is unrealistically applied to contests like these. If Keane wasn’t being tackled and he bumped him, totally different scenario.

 

[Festerz]

This hasn't answered my question. What was SPP expecting to happen in the contest that made going in so hard the reasonable option?

Well it has. But you clearly missed it.

So let me put it another way.

Here is the opening shot in the post I responded to. Willie Rioli commences his tackle on a guy who is much heavier and taller than he is. Keane is upright and the ball is above his head - putting it at about 210 cm high. Keane is looking to get the ball forward into attack and looking to his right for a target.





Imagine you were SPP in that situation - you are more than a metre from the conflict. Your smaller team mate is clearly struggling to make his tackle stick and a handpass from Keane to his right resulting in a forward entry appears imminent. You have just commenced running and have less than a second to react whatever happens.

What would you do?

The collision with Keane occurs one second later during which time both Keane's head and the ball have dropped by more than a metre from where it was a second earlier.

Hint: there is no right answer here.