Will be interesting to see what comes of this. Virtually an exact replica of the Dangerfield tackle but this time the Dogs player didn't hit his head.

I think he'll be ok. Which is laughable in itself.

As for the rest of tonight's game, yuck.

What a game from him though. Won't get anything as the player he tackled got up, [censored] he could piledriver a player into the ground with the maximum amount of force, but as long as they got up he would be fine. It was only because Dangerfield's lights go out with any sniff of head contact that he got 3.

@jtren9 3 weeks for that tackle or what?

Just a dumb thing to do. No sympathy if he gets suspended this time around. Should know better now.

Great game from him though.

Edited July 1, 201114 yr by Jaded

Great tackle, I loved it.

Good on Callan "Millionaire" Ward for having some guts and getting back up after they dug him out of the turf. The bulldog crowd should harden the F up.

Great tackle, I loved it.

Good on Callan "Millionaire" Ward for having some guts and getting back up after they dug him out of the turf. The bulldog crowd should harden the F up.

Loved the bogan behind me crying foul because the umps were robbing her boys of a win. LOL!

Just a dumb thing to do. No sympathy if he gets suspended this time around. Should know better now.

Are you being sarcastic?

This tackle is laid a dozen times every weekend across the AFL!! Only reason it was noticed tonight is because it was Trengove.

Really hope he doesn't get suspended again. The guy is pure class, has put more runs on the board than Scully. That being said I thought he was smart enough not to be in this position again.

He got the free

It would hilarious if the MRP even looked at it

Nothing in it! If it was any other player in the comp it would barely get a mention

Make him captain...

when was the last time Brad Green made a tackle like that?

JT keep going hard, lead by example...

Bailey & Green, please go away, please

Go where Cam Bruce whent......

He got the free

It would hilarious if the MRP even looked at it

Exactly.

The tackle was almost identicle to the Dangerfield one.

Dangerfield = 3 weeks

Ward = Free kick.

How ridiculous is that.

Superb tackle, i gave it a hearty round of applause.

As far as I'm concerned it was just a tackle, the way it should be done.

He will get rubbed out again because the MRP are a joke!

I would much rather every player in my team tackle of the verge of being rubbed out than the gutless pea hearted effort the rest of the team showed last night!

Keep it up Trenners, hopefully the others will follow!

Jack Viney is going to the U18 tribunal this week, charged with rough conduct for a sling tackle on his opponent.

Epic.

Can we bring him into the team for the Darwin game?

Just a dumb thing to do. No sympathy if he gets suspended this time around. Should know better now.

Couldn't disagree more. I love that he hasn't changed his game. I love that he's willing to smash an opposition player into the turf to win the ball.

I personally had no problems with the first one. I also don't think there will ever be a problem with any of these if the play is not injured because that is the way the afl are umpiring it...

BUT

this was different. for starters trengove tackled around the waist and did not pin either arms. secondly ward landed on his side/shoulder, not on his back/head.

I think these differing circumstances are pure luck, if his arm got caught underneath the tackle trengove would have tackled the same, and when tackling a player to the ground the angle they land is c\hance not design. BUT the tackles are different based on the criteria he got suspended on.

Give Jack Trengove the Captaincy before the Darwin game.

Last night was not his fault.

Mark Robinson via Twitter last night.....

@Robbo_heraldsun Mark Robinson

Re Trengove sling.... you are allowed to sling, unless you drive the opponent's head into the ground. No head. No penalty. JT in the clear

Judgment looms for Jack Trengove

There is something seriously wrong with the system.

I heard the radio interview with the AFL Umpires Adviser this afternoon but I didn't quite catch his name. It could have been either Jeff Gieschen or George Orwell but I don't know if there's any difference.

When asked whether he believed JT should have been awarded a free kick and whether his tackle was legal, he agreed with the umpire's decision. In answer to another question about whether the tackle would be referred to the MRP, he agreed it "potentially" might be.

This is getting beyond a joke.

Judgment looms for Jack Trengove

There is something seriously wrong with the system.

Amazing this is even being considered.

I thought we played "soft footy"?

Grow a brain MRP !

Gieschen said today that it was a 'perfect tackle' but the MRP could well look at it. That does not make sense.

The system is flawed. The rule needs to be shelved, save for extreme circumstances that border upon spear tackles. Clear intent needs to be there. Mere negligence or recklessness should not constitute a reportable offence, for all the reasons we have discussed since the Dangerfield incident.

Judgment looms for Jack Trengove

There is something seriously wrong with the system.

I apologise in advance. But this is nothing short of ridiculous and I can't think of anything else right at this moment other than "pathetic".

Firstly, there is a fricking umpire at the scene who has deemed the tackle legal and correctly applied within the laws of the game. That umpire also awarded JT the free kick. Ward would acknowledge this. Unharmed, un-pinned, caught red handed holding the ball.

This shouldn't even be contemplated on sending to the MRP. It's BS.

If they're worried at all about "duty of care", how about they consider "duty of care" to our frack'n game !

I'm beginning to think someone or something at our club has walked under a ladder or totally messed with the AFL to deserve this tripe. This is an absolute - let me emphasise that - an "absolute" joke !

Agree High Tower, I've never read such trash in my life.

Firstly, Gieschen has basically admitted that it is the outcome that matters, not the conduct. I don't think any reporting system should be based solely on outcome. It should aim to regulate conduct, not outcomes which are out of a player's control. So what Gieschen is saying is that if you deliberately drive someone's head into the ground in a tackle but they manage to escape injury then you're fine, but if you just slightly sling them and they then accidentally hit their head on the ground, you'll get a 2-week suspension. This is completely against the whole concept of punishing dangerous conduct and trying to protect players.

Secondly, on Trengove, in saying that the umpire deemed it a legal tackle but that the MRP may have a different view, he is basically implying that the umpire is incompetent. The umpire was in perfect position and if he is not able to discern whether Trengove's tackle was legal or not then he is incompetent. That, or the umpires have not been informed what is a legal tackle and what isn't. I'm sorry, but you can't have an umpire in perfect position pay holding the ball and deem the tackle legal and then have the MRP overrule him and deem it illegal.

To top it all off, how can Gieschen say that the MRP might regard the tackle as illegal when he says it's more about the outcome? Even though I disagree completely with this 'outcome' approach, if you are going to apply it then Trengove is no chance of copping a suspension as Ward did not hit his head and was not injured. For Giesh to say it's about the outcome and then to imply that Trengove may be in trouble just proves he has no idea.