Jump to content

Featured Replies

It's an interesting one, he has his biceps wrapped up but not his forearms.

The fact the tackle comes from the side and unbalances him seems to also be an important factor. 

Apart from all that, Foley has zero awareness. More experienced players would have sensed the heat coming and braced themselves, diverted, or tried to fend off.

 

I think he will be suspended and I don’t think it’s right but the MRO is about results and having the perception of protection players (despite several questionable decisions to the contrary). 

It looked bad on the day, I know Simpson and the medico’s are saying he doesn’t appear to have concussion but he looked pretty out of it in the immediate aftermath. I can’t imagine how that doesn’t translate into concussion. 

Did Chandler do much wrong? No, the only thing he did, not so much wrong but a contributing factor, is he came at such pace and pinned the arms thus making Foley helpless. 

For me I feel what Zack Jones did to Langdon was far more dangerous and deliberate, but I feel this is something the MRO is targeting. 

Might come out of it with a fine. 

 

The tackle was correctly applied. However the WC player lacked situational awareness and lost his balance because he was not braced for contact. No case to answer.

Edited by John Crow Batty

He will get suspended.

But if it was a more well known player or someone in Brownlow contention like Cripps he wouldn't be because the AFL is an amateurly run organisation.

2 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

You can't cherry pick 2 frames out mate.

And what you've shown there is if there's any 'turning' it's turning his head towards the ground.

Have watched the replay a fair few times now in the meantime and those frames you've picked out are not indicative at all of the whole incident IMO.

To contrast your two frames, here's another two:

FAV6tnS.pngFBNFVDE.png

If you want to look at the whole incident, as you've done, go look at the video.

Your stills don't change my view that Foley's shoulder hits the ground at least at the same time as his head, if not before. My first still shows Chandler tries to turn him side on. My second still shows him getting to ground level side-on. Both of your stills show the aftermath, in which clearly Foley's head hits the ground. Which is not disputed. But as I said at the start, I cannot see how Chandler's tackle is materially different to Hawkins'. 

 
15 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

If you want to look at the whole incident, as you've done, go look at the video.

Your stills don't change my view that Foley's shoulder hits the ground at least at the same time as his head, if not before. My first still shows Chandler tries to turn him side on. My second still shows him getting to ground level side-on. Both of your stills show the aftermath, in which clearly Foley's head hits the ground. Which is not disputed. But as I said at the start, I cannot see how Chandler's tackle is materially different to Hawkins'. 

Your stills are tiny fractions of a second, that was my point in showing you alternate stills. They don't represent the incident as a whole, as you said yourself at the start of your post.

Sure, he turns him slightly - but he turns him towards the ground, not away from it.

Hawkins turns his opponent away from facing the ground. It's borderline, probably could have been a suspension, but that's the main difference between that one being borderline and Chandler's likely resulting in a suspension.


1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Given our players were continually slipping, I wouldn't imagine it was a rock hard deck.

It’s slippery largely in part because it’s so hard, there’s no traction when players change direction. It looks like wearing footy boots on green painted floorboards 

The issue with the tackle is Chandler being a lefty he wants to take him down on his natural left side, he jumps and puts a lot forward momentum in to the tackle. It takes a long time for Chandler to come down and that makes it really driving. Chase down tackles really need to pull a player back and down rather than drive them forward. Combine that with the rotation back towards front on as Foley attempts to brace himself and it’s a bad result. 
 

The big contributing factors are the rock hard turf that they slide along and the fresh player coming on full of running due to the sub rule. 

the McGovern elbow into Viney was so extremely light, nothing will happen. It wasn't anywhere near as forceful as Viney's elbow in the past. 

I feel like Chandler will cop a suspension. I don't particularly agree with or like the decision. I wished the afl would start suspending guys that stage for frees but that's the story for another day. Guys like Hawkins, Weightman etc.

Ironically, if Chandler had of turned the tackler after he'd already hit his head he'd probably get off because it would look like an attempt to protect the head. I reckon he could get 1 or even 2. Which I don't agree with. Not for accidents.

Edited by Deedubs

No idea how anyone can say he won't get suspended. He tackles him, his head makes heavy impact with the ground after being driven downwards and he was concussed.  Chandler didn't do much wrong but no way he gets off

According to Fox Sports, Foley is set to miss Round 10 due to concussion. Pretty much guarantees Chandler will cop a suspension, probably 1 week after early plea.


I feel for Chandler as it was almost a perfect tackle, but his momentum and the direction of the tackle instigated the WC player being driven into the ground. Although he let go before impact unfortunately it was too late and the bloke just wasn't aware the tackle was coming, which made the chance of head impact more likely

When you tackle a player from behind, you have 2 options. First option is to go to your knees so the tackled player is held upright with his armed pinned. Second option is to turn the player in the tackle without letting go, so it's not deemed a sling.

Unfortunately for Chandler, he chose neither, so his actions were reckless/dangerous. 

He'll cop a week with an early plea.

4 hours ago, Demons1858 said:

It's an interesting one, he has his biceps wrapped up but not his forearms.

The fact the tackle comes from the side and unbalances him seems to also be an important factor. 

Apart from all that, Foley has zero awareness. More experienced players would have sensed the heat coming and braced themselves, diverted, or tried to fend off.

The speed at which Chandler ran down Foley from behind (so unless he had eyes in the back of his head…), meant that Foley had no chance to do any of what you are suggesting he should have done. It was a great tackle until the last part where Chandler ‘flips’ Foley to his left and that causes Foley’s head to take the full force of the impact with the ground.  

If it had been the other way around and Chandler was the victim, I’m sure we would all have been calling for blood. I honestly can’t see him getting anything less than one week.


 

Lynch getting off...again. That's also a disgrace


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 23 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 232 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
    • 47 replies