Why is there such an uproar about this? Doesn't anybody remember a VERY young Jack Trengove tackling Patrick Dangerfield at the MCG and because Danger's head hit a stray knee and he got knocked out, Jack got suspended. Is my memory wrong? I'm struggling to understand all the conjecture. Why the love for Carlton all of a sudden?

I liked the comment from Titus O'Reilly, who tweeted that despite the 2-week ban, "Gibbs says he'll still give tackling another try."

It's a contact sport, accidents happen, blokes might as well be wrapped in bubble wrap

Hahaha... I think that this tackle has to be eradicated. It is dangerous and leaves the head exposed. There were 2 motions. Comfortable with the decision.

Difference between the two was that trengove had hold of one Dangerfields arms and slung him more...Gibbs was actually holding the ball into Gray ...Gibbs should get off that

Needed to go, just like his pathetic little man bun. Glad he was rubbed out. Need to stamp that stuff out. That was clearly two motions.

Difference between the two was that trengove had hold of one Dangerfields arms and slung him more...Gibbs was actually holding the ball into Gray ...Gibbs should get off that

The Trengove one came out of the blue, the kid set up.

With AFL constantly evolving (or changing...) I don' think you can really compare the two penalties (4 years apart).

Needed to go, just like his pathetic little man bun. Glad he was rubbed out. Need to stamp that stuff out. That was clearly two motions.

Agreed - I actually think Trenners was more one motion and he couldn't see that Danger had dropped the ball.

I love aggression but there is aggression and playing to hurt (if someone does get hurt then your in trouble)

the problem is not that he has been rubbed out for this - its that because the player has been injured he has been rubbed out.

how many times have we seen tackles exactly like gibbs only to see the player get up and walk away?

if the afl wants to get rid of the sling tackle, then make it a free kick every time it happens, and not just suspend a bloke when someone gets hurt.

With AFL constantly evolving (or changing...) I don' think you can really compare the two penalties (4 years apart).

i think you can

both very similar

same penalty 3 down to 2

no rule change in between

seems fair to me

With AFL constantly evolving (or changing...) I don' think you can really compare the two penalties (4 years apart).

Has anyone been rubbed out for a sling tackle since Trengove...cant think of any of the top of my head..

I thought that Gibbs' tackle was far more aggressive and aimed to injure - two motions and a definite thrust downward, whereas Trengove dropped him almost in a continuous motion.

But I agree with whoever above posted - if they want to rub this out then pay a free every time not just when there is an injury.

It's the right penalty. For perhaps the first time since it's inception the MRP has shown consistency. This is a textbook example of a dangerous tackle and they gave him 3, same as Trengove. The fact that in this case he can get it reduced to 2 is a function of the system, not the penalty imposed.

The AFLPA have come out and said they wanted Gibbs banned on behalf of the players.

SOURCE: On the Couch.

Edited June 22, 201510 yr by AdamFarr

Love the consistency between the Trengove and Gibbs decisions. Makes a good change for once. For those knuckleheads like "Duck" Carey out there that think banning Gibbs is turning our sport into soccer and getting rid of physicality, you can get your fill of neanderthals trying to hurt each other in a vast number of other sports like Boxing, MMA, and the rugby codes.

Edited June 22, 201510 yr by leucopogon

the problem is not that he has been rubbed out for this - its that because the player has been injured he has been rubbed out.

how many times have we seen tackles exactly like gibbs only to see the player get up and walk away?

if the afl wants to get rid of the sling tackle, then make it a free kick every time it happens, and not just suspend a bloke when someone gets hurt.

Don't know about the free kick part, just adding more grey area.

But I agree it's only because he got injured. I've watched all the footy shows tonight and they seem amazed that Carlton laid some tackles in a game. As part of the tackle highlight package they show one almost identical to the Gibbs one only no one was hurt so it's just another tackle.

Legend has it that Robbie Grey actually knocked himself out once he realised the shame of being the first player tackled by Bryce Gibbs.

Edited June 22, 201510 yr by Deestroy All

As part of the tackle highlight package they show one almost identical to the Gibbs one only no one was hurt so it's just another tackle.

I didn't see all the shows last night but from what I saw no one mentioned this.

Needed to go, just like his pathetic little man bun. Glad he was rubbed out. Need to stamp that stuff out. That was clearly two motions.

I agree Adam - he was lucky to get only two.

I believe Trengrove's penalty was a crock. It was all in one motion.

Gibbs's penalty is just. It was two distinctly different motions. He didn't have to commit to the second motion.

The two incidents are not the same.

Love the consistency between the Trengove and Gibbs decisions. Makes a good change for once. For those knuckleheads like "Duck" Carey out there that think banning Gibbs is turning our sport into soccer and getting rid of physicality, you can get your fill of neanderthals trying to hurt each other in a vast number of other sports like Boxing, MMA, and the rugby codes.

even the nrl has banned the shirt-front (they call it something else) and the lifting tackle

the lifting tackle is effectively the same issue as the sling tackle where the trapped player's head is driven into the ground when he is defenseless

the problem is not that he has been rubbed out for this - its that because the player has been injured he has been rubbed out.

how many times have we seen tackles exactly like gibbs only to see the player get up and walk away?

if the afl wants to get rid of the sling tackle, then make it a free kick every time it happens, and not just suspend a bloke when someone gets hurt.

Dangerfield kicked 6 goals the week after he played us after he was tackled by Trengove. The doctors report being the determining factor in the 3 weeks JT got. I am forever dirty on Adelaide for that and the system. It is yet again rules on the run and made after an event.

I didn't see all the shows last night but from what I saw no one mentioned this.

Spoken about in detail on 360 and On the Couch.

The problem with this though is that if he wasn't knocked out, he wouldn't have been banned. That is the only difference. If he had tackled a bigger bodied person he would be playing next week.

I agree Adam - he was lucky to get only two.

Very undisciplined act.

Surely the worst number 1 draft pick in history.