Players Ducking to win frees

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,778]

Umpires have fallen back to the habit of rewarding players who bend over and present their head and shoulders to the oncoming tackler, by awarding frees for "high tackles".

The player who ducks should be penalised for "dangerous play"(danger to himself)

I brought this up a few years ago on this forum, warning of the possibility of a serious spinal injury.

While not penalising the ducker, they usually haven't rewarded him ,in recent years, but I've noticed a recent tendency to pay the free for the high tackle in the last few weeks.

I just heard about Lynch of Adelaide ducking and receiving a heavy knock today. I hope he isn't seriously injured, because I think it's the fault of the AFL Umpiring directors.

[KingDingAling 3,752]

Protect the head.. I watched the Geelong game, they let a few go - paid a few, cannot get them all right.

Wouldn't of thought Bartel would need to duck. This deep in his career, it just baffles me.

I think Selwoods are legit, he hits the ball at such pace, they do get him high, then you see players like Bartel throw their head back everytime the ball is close to them.

Edited August 10, 2014 by KingDingAling

[Bitter but optimistic 22,220]

Umpires have fallen back to the habit of rewarding players who bend over and present their head and shoulders to the oncoming tackler, by awarding frees for "high tackles".

The player who ducks should be penalised for "dangerous play"(danger to himself)

I brought this up a few years ago on this forum, warning of the possibility of a serious spinal injury.

While not penalising the ducker, they usually haven't rewarded him ,in recent years, but I've noticed a recent tendency to pay the free for the high tackle in the last few weeks.

I just heard about Lynch of Adelaide ducking and receiving a heavy knock today. I hope he isn't seriously injured, because I think it's the fault of the AFL Umpiring directors.

I'm not sure they have "fallen back" Jack. I think it's just another example of that great malaise of inconsistency that seems to be the only consistent in umpiring. How often do you see high hits - especially in marking contests - escape penalty?

[Deecisive 1,709]

Selwood lifts his arm to get the arm to slip up around his shoulder, i consider that the same as ducking. His stats for head high or across the shoulder frees are an indication of how bad our umpiring is, as it encourages users to duck and to lift their arm so that someone will get hurt.

[Ted Lasso 19,334]

I think what Selwood does goes beyond honestly trying to win the ball, as great a player as he is, the fact he does that on such a regular basis to earn soft free kicks hurts the level of respect I can have for him as a player.

I don't see the difference between ducking your head to get free kicks and taking a dive to get one, it's staging, an un needed action that is only done to try and induce a free kick.

it's already taken far too long for the umpires to stop it, would be a disgrace if a team lost a legitimate close final because Mr Selwood decided to duck his head and get a free that shouldn't be there.

[daisycutter 29,605]

Selwood lifts his arm to get the arm to slip up around his shoulder, i consider that the same as ducking. His stats for head high or across the shoulder frees are an indication of how bad our umpiring is, as it encourages users to duck and to lift their arm so that someone will get hurt.

but he doesn't duck his head, he lowers his legs and moves laterally.....quite different and i think legitimate in that he tries to evade tackle rather than duck into tackle

i know it annoys many but it is more testament to his skill

nothing says a player must make himself easy to tackle

[Biffen 12,940]

He wouldn't duck if Grinter was coming through.

[Bitter but optimistic 22,220]

If Rotten Rodney had you in the crosshairs it made no difference.

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,778]

My point is completely different to the Selwood ducking manoeuvre.

I'm talking about the way players with the ball see an on-coming tackler, and bend forward, presenting their head and shoulders, giving the tackler a choice of getting out of the way, or tackling and giving a free (or whacking him, possibly breaking his neck)

It's got nothing to do with the Selwood/Shuey " duck" to get a high tackle free, which also shouldn't be rewarded, but isn't dangerous.

This thread has been diverted to the Selwood tactic.

I'd like peoples' opinions on the forward dive to draw the high tackle.

I think it's a terribly important point.

I hear Lynch is OK..... Thank heavens.

Let's stop it NOW, before there's another Neil Sachse.

Edited August 10, 2014 by Jumping Jack Clennett

[rjay 24,889]

This is a whole lot different to slipping down or going low to draw a head high free kick. What Lynch did today was absolutely stupid, it's a bit like what that Carlton guy did in the 2's last year. It will end up in someone being permanently disabled, lucky for Lynch it was a jarred neck.

He went down to pick up the ball, all good there as I don't know any other way of picking the ball off the ground without bending down. As he started to come up he noticed a Brisbane player coming directly at him then put his head down a rammed into the on coming player.

Lynch was given a free kick for a high tackle and it was the wrong decision. This is what the AFL have been trying to sort out, it's where the player puts himself in danger to draw a free. At present it is play on.

I believe they need to go one or two steps further, 1st is that if a player does this it should be a free against and 2nd maybe he should be rubbed out for a week for stupidity.

Dropping your knees I a tackle is a whole different thing.

[sue 9,099]

I thought the AFL decided players would get a free against them if the charged with their head. True? I can't recall seeing any such free paid this year?

[daisycutter 29,605]

I thought the AFL decided players would get a free against them if the charged with their head. True? I can't recall seeing any such free paid this year?

don't think they did sue, just discussed it

would be a bad look if someone ducked into a tackle, took a bad hit and laid prone on the ground with all the medics attending and ump awarded a free against

what i would like to see though is umps having a strong word to player and cautioning him

if repeated in same game then report player, not for tribunal but for counselling or maybe a fine

[rjay 24,889]

I thought the AFL decided players would get a free against them if the charged with their head. True? I can't recall seeing any such free paid this year?

I think it is now called play on instead of a high tackle, they must pay a free against minimum if they are serious about this. Lynch is a very, very lucky man today and this can't be allowed to go on.

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,778]

don't think they did sue, just discussed it

would be a bad look if someone ducked into a tackle, took a bad hit and laid prone on the ground with all the medics attending and ump awarded a free against

The argument I'm trying to make is that the umpires must strongly discourage players from using this tactic.

It would soon stop if players were penalised.

[daisycutter 29,605]

don't think they did sue, just discussed it

would be a bad look if someone ducked into a tackle, took a bad hit and laid prone on the ground with all the medics attending and ump awarded a free against

The argument I'm trying to make is that the umpires must strongly discourage players from using this tactic.

It would soon stop if players were penalised.

and i offered an approach in the 2nd part of my post that you didn't quote

a fine and/or counselling would help stop it

we agree though that more should be done, i don't like the free approach because it is too controversial and many cases are marginal

we have enough rules already that are hard to adjudicate

it can be handled off field

[rjay 24,889]

and i offered an approach in the 2nd part of my post that you didn't quote

a fine and/or counselling would help stop it

we agree though that more should be done, i don't like the free approach because it is too controversial and many cases are marginal

we have enough rules already that are hard to adjudicate

it can be handled off field

I don't think the fine or counselling approach will work, something similar is in place for acting for frees and has yet to be used, it's not taken seriously. A player who ends up paralysed is much more serious than B grade acting and this must be dealt with before it happens.

Again, I'm not talking about slipping down in a tackle or to avoid a tackle, I'm talking about a player who uses his head to run into an opponent. I would err on the side of caution here, we don't want what happened in the NRL this year and must put a stop to this lunacy.

If it means they get the occasional one wrong so be it.

[Macca 16,940]

and i offered an approach in the 2nd part of my post that you didn't quote

a fine and/or counselling would help stop it

we agree though that more should be done, i don't like the free approach because it is too controversial and many cases are marginal

we have enough rules already that are hard to adjudicate

it can be handled off field

I can remember a time not so long ago when players rarely, if ever, ducked into a tackle - and ... they got penalised when they did so. We need to get back to that type of adjudication with regards to the ducking of the head.

Both you, rjay and JJC make good points. The real issue is that the people that oversee proceedings are just not governing things properly. They're meant to be the custodians of the sport but they do a lousy job.

Since the coaches created all the congestion and demanded more numbers at the contest, the AFL have reacted like rabbits in the spotlight. I honestly don't believe the AFL have a clue on how to fix things.

Some people might say there's nothing to fix but the basic issue I keep hearing is that there's too many players around the ball. I don't have any magic solutions but I'm not running the sport.

Back in the day the then VFL were quick to bring in the "diamond" to ease congestion at the centre bounces (and not long after that, the centre square was introduced) That sort of thinking is needed now. Ducking into tackles is a bit of a bi-product of congested footy.

[Waltham33 475]

I can remember a time not so long ago when players rarely, if ever, ducked into a tackle - and ... they got penalised when they did so. We need to get back to that type of adjudication with regards to the ducking of the head.

. Ducking into tackles is a bit of a bi-product of congested footy.

20 players total or 16 a side to please.

[sue 9,099]

20 players total or 16 a side to please.

hmm, that might also address the lack of talent spread over the now 18 teams which some have pointed to,

[daisycutter 29,605]

20 players total or 16 a side to please.

the vfl did this for a long time, though it was 18 players with 16 on field (no wingers)

didn't seem to have any major setbacks though the purists didn't approve

[Waltham33 475]

the vfl did this for a long time, though it was 18 players with 16 on field (no wingers)

didn't seem to have any major setbacks though the purists didn't approve

The game has changed, players are fitter, dont stay in the one position and can cover far more kilometers. Shake up the foundations to create more space and directly address congestion.

[Waltham33 475]

hmm, that might also address the lack of talent spread over the now 18 teams which some have pointed to,

I think so - also strengthens the second tier competitions.