Will Brodie article

[gOLLy 401]

This article has made me really angry.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/sling-tackle-should-have-been-a-free-kick-afl-20110705-1h04l.html

Don't think I'll be following our game anymore.

14 years of membership and I just don't want to buy one anymore.

[Adzman 2,153]

Maybe the AFL should send out another DVD to players/clubs called: Turning our game into netball.

It is no surprise that other codes (soccer/union/league) are starting to get a strong following in Victoria, and that AFL is treading water in some states. The game is becoming over sanitized. Yes football in a dangerous game in some aspects, and the players are paid accordingly. There are far more dangerous jobs that many of us fans work for less pay. But we are not told "no ban saw" because there is a risk to the player/worker. It is part of the job, so is a tackle in footy.

[Tatu 416]

This article has made me really angry.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/sling-tackle-should-have-been-a-free-kick-afl-20110705-1h04l.html

Don't think I'll be following our game anymore.

14 years of membership and I just don't want to buy one anymore.

The game has definately changed, since i was a kid.

Don't think i'll be going to the footy anymore ether.

I might have to change over to the vixens or the victory......

GO VIXENS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Umpires boss Jeff Gieschen states that the umpire was right to award a free kick to the tackler, Adrian Anderson Football Operations Manager states the opposite and that the tackled bloke should have got the free. This illustrates the total confusion surrounding this issue.

There is obviously no consensus at the top, how the hell are the umpires and players supposed to figure it out let alone us lowly specators.

[mordja 187]

Anderson makes it up as he goes along, there is no way we can keep up.

ruining the game.

[rpfc 28,052]

Get your hands off of it.

It's not the end of the game as we know it - they are trying to get rid of tackles that are designed to injure - Mumford on Ablett, Guerra on Bruce, etc.

They are doing it like drunken apes at the moment and they need to find some clarity but it is not armageddon...

[Range Rover 1,935]

Get your hands off of it.

It's not the end of the game as we know it - they are trying to get rid of tackles that are designed to injure - Mumford on Ablett, Guerra on Bruce, etc.

They are doing it like drunken apes at the moment and they need to find some clarity but it is not armageddon...

How can you "design" a tackle to injure?

With arms flailing and bodies ducking, weaving and moving at pace, it is impossible to "premeditate" exactly how a tackle will unfold. All a player can do is attack the man with the ball with intent and do his best to either bring him to ground (normally the first choice) or force him to cough up the ball.

With these new rulings, we are now headed in a direction where players will be reluctant to "turn" a player (one of the heretofore golden rules of good tackling) and force him to ground, for fear of it being ruled a sling tackle and copping a suspension.

This will result in the farcical situation where players will merely try to "control" the player with the ball, rather than ferociously tackle him.

Isn't that what they do in netball?

Edited July 5, 2011 by Range Rover

[PeterJames 46]

Adrian Anderson is a complete [censored]. To come out and contradict what Jeff said shows how hard his job is. Anderson said there should have been a free kick because it was rough conduct in a tackle. There is no such rule, the umpires cop a lot of abuse and this is because no one know the rules of ur game.

get rid of him asap.

[hardtack 10,423]

How can you "design" a tackle to injure?

The sling tackle when applied with the force used by Trengove IS designed to hurt (perhaps "injure" is too strong a word?). And it cannot be argued that it was accidental as the decision to "sling" the opponent must be consciously made.

Having said that, I have no problem with the sling tackle (I'm never likely to be on the receiving end), but if the AFL is serious about removing the root cause of many head/neck/shoulder injuries, then they should at least be serious about it and ban players for applying it regardless of the outcome resulting in an injury or not.

[Range Rover 1,935]

The sling tackle when applied with the force used by Trengove IS designed to hurt (perhaps "injure" is too strong a word?). And it cannot be argued that it was accidental as the decision to "sling" the opponent must be consciously made.

Having said that, I have no problem with the sling tackle (I'm never likely to be on the receiving end), but if the AFL is serious about removing the root cause of many head/neck/shoulder injuries, then they should at least be serious about it and ban players for applying it regardless of the outcome resulting in an injury or not.

But haven't players been taught from day dot to 'turn' their opponent in the tackle? With these new rulings we're basically telling them now not to do this.

I think anyone who's played footy will vouch for the fact that there is very little time to make such a decision in the cut and thrust of packs, with players moving, ducking and weaving at pace.

If they want to protect head, neck and shoulder injuries ... let's just cut to the chase and make it a game of tag and force them to wear helmets.

[hardtack 10,423]

But haven't players been taught from day dot to 'turn' their opponent in the tackle? With these new rulings we're basically telling them now not to do this.

Yes, but this throwing them to the ground with force is a relatively new approach... it had previously been a case of holding and turning the opponent while keeping your feet. It is nothing to do with the twisting and turning and the pace of the game... it is a conscious and deliberate effort being made to bring the opponent to ground with maximum force.

Edited July 6, 2011 by hardtack

[Bitter but optimistic 22,066]

Our game is focussed on speed and fast reactions. If this tackle confusion continues, players will hesitate before tackling or perhaps not tackle due to fear of suspension. It seems to me that a major change is coming to the way footy as we are used to it is played.

[rpfc 28,052]

Sling tackles are fine, assuming there is no 'Mumford driving' into the turf.

The pin arms driving forward into the turf (that ruined Bruce's career as a very good player) is the one I don't like.

The AFL is welcome to get that out of the game.