Head High - Impact dilemma?

[dee-luded 2,959]

... another head high clash, Nick Suban knocked down via a head high heavy collision - http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-05-10/suban-cops-some-friendly-fire

and Roughy has made the contact high on diminutive McGlynn. - http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-10/clarkson-post-match

Should they both be charged with head high collisions, & suspended.

Imagine charging Alex Silvagni for knocking out his own teammate. Or is it the responsibility for the player under the ball to get the hell out of there? should Nick Suban be charged for reckless conduct? staying in harms way.

thoughts?

[jnrmac 20,206]

And Jones on Terlich yet no free? Unfathomable.

[sue 9,151]

And Jones on Terlich yet no free? Unfathomable.

I posted elsewhere that it isn't surprising. We have the advantage of knowing there must have been head high contact because we see Terlich on the ground motionless after the impact. If he didn't actually see the shoulder hit the head, the umpire follows the play and doesn't notice Terlich hasn't moved. And we certainly wouldn't want them to pay frees on the back of motionless players or we'd see the field littered with prone players trying to milk a free.

The head high impact that bothers me was the head-lock that Dunn was put in by Cameleri (I think?). Crude, not in the play, intentional, prolonged and dangerous. I hope they rub him out for it but they won't even cite it

[jazza 1,323]

I posted elsewhere that it isn't surprising. We have the advantage of knowing there must have been head high contact because we see Terlich on the ground motionless after the impact. If he didn't actually see the shoulder hit the head, the umpire follows the play and doesn't notice Terlich hasn't moved. And we certainly wouldn't want them to pay frees on the back of motionless players or we'd see the field littered with prone players trying to milk a free.

The head high impact that bothers me was the head-lock that Dunn was put in by Cameleri (I think?). Crude, not in the play, intentional, prolonged and dangerous. I hope they rub him out for it but they won't even cite it

just saw areplay of the incident.

the umps view was blocked by one of our players.

[sue 9,151]

just saw areplay of the incident.

the umps view was blocked by one of our players.

So no 50m penalty, but in any case the mrp should look at it.

Edited May 11, 2014 by sue

[GM11 787]

just saw areplay of the incident.

the umps view was blocked by one of our players.

There are three of them!!!

They are quick to pay incidental over the shoulder & marking infringements from 200 meters away that they couldn't possibly see.

[jazza 1,323]

There are three of them!!!

They are quick to pay incidental over the shoulder & marking infringements from 200 meters away that they couldn't possibly see.

yeah,it happens a lot in footy.funny game we know.

sometimes from the stands you can see incidents{viney round the neck last night}that the umpire ends up on the wrong side of.

i dont sweat on umps as much as others do,quite happy with their output actually.

[monoccular 17,607]

I posted elsewhere that it isn't surprising. We have the advantage of knowing there must have been head high contact because we see Terlich on the ground motionless after the impact. If he didn't actually see the shoulder hit the head, the umpire follows the play and doesn't notice Terlich hasn't moved. And we certainly wouldn't want them to pay frees on the back of motionless players or we'd see the field littered with prone players trying to milk a free.

The head high impact that bothers me was the head-lock that Dunn was put in by Cameleri (I think?). Crude, not in the play, intentional, prolonged and dangerous. I hope they rub him out for it but they won't even cite it

We certainly don't want stagers rolling on the ground or lying doggo like soccer players, who then get up and run on.

But one would have to imagine that Jones will be cited and put out for a few weeks - not in any way comparable to the Viney incident - just a cheap shot from a frustrate player.

I didn't see the Dunn incident - but if a choking off play headlock is caught on camera then these are the sorts of things that need stamping out.

[Sir Why You Little 37,241]

Howe sling tackle didn't look good either.

The head bounced off the turf.

[sue 9,151]

I didn't see the Dunn incident - but if a choking off play headlock is caught on camera then these are the sorts of things that need stamping out.

It was with 9:40 to go in the 3rd quarter.

Another thing which should be reportable but is happening less than I might have expected was the 'attempts' to punch the ball away by the player tacked by Garland. He was clearly hitting Garland in the head quite hard. If he has to strike his head as part of the pretence of making an attempt, he should pull his punches.

Howe's sling tackle is a bit of a worry, but the MRP is about as consistent there as a roulette wheel.

[monoccular 17,607]

It was with 9:40 to go in the 3rd quarter.

Another thing which should be reportable but is happening less than I might have expected was the 'attempts' to punch the ball away by the player tacked by Garland. He was clearly hitting Garland in the head quite hard. If he has to strike his head as part of the pretence of making an attempt, he should pull his punches.

Howe's sling tackle is a bit of a worry, but the MRP is about as consistent there as a roulette wheel.

I will look it up; and when did the (alleged) sling tackle occur?

Re the MRP - yes, very inconsistent, but usually seem to single us out if at all possible - no, I am not paranoid, it is just that everyone is out to get us :-(

[DeeSpencer 26,091]

Dunn's head lock was boys being boys. Nothing in it.

Howe's tackle was exactly that. A great tackle. There was swing but no sling.

Suban on his own team mate was an accident, the entire point of the Viney debacle.

Roughead (on McGlynn), L. Jones, Duffield (I think, on Wingard) and LeCras are all facing time on the side lines for negligent or reckless high bumps where their shoulders hit other players heads. The Jones one will be graded higher due to causing an injury. The Duffield and Le Cras ones seemed more reckless than negligent like the Roughy one.

[Chook 15,022]

Howe sling tackle didn't look good either.

The head bounced off the turf.

I think he'll be fine because:

1. The Dogs player didn't have his arms pinned

2. Howe's tackle was all one motion.

The infamous Trengove tackle was a multi-step process where he grabbed Dangerfield's arm and then slammed him to the turf, in two separate actions.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Chook

[DeeSpencer 26,091]

I think he'll be fine because:

1. The Dogs player didn't have his arms pinned

2. Howe's tackle was all one motion.

The infamous Trengove tackle was a multi-step process where he grabbed Dangerfield's arm and then slammed him to the turf, in two separate actions.

Good point. Trengove pinned Dangerfield then tipped him with the sling. It's that driving of a head to the ground thats dangerous. Slinging round and round is way less dangerous. Old mate who was tackled didn't hurt his head in his incident, just his shoulder, and shoulders get hurt in tackles, that's kind of the point

[sue 9,151]

I think he'll be fine because:

1. The Dogs player didn't have his arms pinned

2. Howe's tackle was all one motion.

The infamous Trengove tackle was a multi-step process where he grabbed Dangerfield's arm and then slammed him to the turf, in two separate actions.

Looked that way, but when I stop living in fear of the MRP's consistency then I'll probably be dead.

[Biffen 12,949]

Howe sling tackle didn't look good either.

The head bounced off the turf.

I liked the look of it personally.