Jump to content

So how pathetic is the AFL: Dangerfield.

Monbon
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Posted

Scotty's Bro, from the Bombers, ex AFL Official, has no problem with Mister Dangerf. escaping suspension. 

Sure, let's focus on May's Academy nomination, and accept that if  Geelong, Carlton, or Collingwood player commits a crime, why, ipso facto, they must be innocent.

Read this in relation to my post about the Real state of the Game...

  • Quote
    • Like 5
     

    So if Dangerfield is innocent, shouldn’t Walsh be cited for ‘acting’ ?

  • Quote
    • Like 11
    • Clap 4
    8 minutes ago, Monbon said:

    Scotty's Bro, from the Bombers, ex AFL Official, has no problem with Mister Dangerf. escaping suspension. 

    Sure, let's focus on May's Academy nomination, and accept that if  Geelong, Carlton, or Collingwood player commits a crime, why, ipso facto, they must be innocent.

    Read this in relation to my post about the Real state of the Game...

    I distinctly remember players being given a week(s) years ago on the grounds that ‘both arms were pinned’ and therefore players can’t protect their heads from hitting the ground. So it’s a ‘dangerous tackle’ categorically and one in which the AFL was super keen to get rid of because:

    The tackler has to take the health and safety on board of the oppo player. 
     

    But maybe only danger can do dangerous tackles. 
     

    No consistency yet again.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
     

    The problem is that the AFL did actually suspend the bloke. The tribunal is seemingly very easily swayed by the better players in our game.

    The AFL does also sometimes seem to operate like a bush league when it comes to punishments. They always make a scapegoat out of a lesser player or smaller club (ie Nibbler 4 weeks for a sling tackle) and usually find a way to get their golden boys at Collingwood/Carlton/Richmond off.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Clap 1
    • Vomit 1

    This thread prompted me to watch something I would have had no interest in otherwise.

    My observations are:

    1. The Essendon player hit his head on the ground as a result of the forward momentum of the passage of play; and,

    2. The Geelong player endeavoured to arrest the momentum and hold the Essendon player up.

    I'm prepared to suspend my conspiracy theory tendency. On this one.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    1 minute ago, BoBo said:

    I distinctly remember players being given a week(s) years ago on the grounds that ‘both arms were pinned’ and therefore players can’t protect their heads from hitting the ground. So it’s a ‘dangerous tackle’ categorically and one in which the AFL was super keen to get rid of because:

    The tackler has to take the health and safety on board of the oppo player. 
     

    But maybe only danger can do dangerous tackles. 
     

    No consistency yet again.

    'Dangerous tackle' is often heard in the umpires' mics as the reason for a free kick. Is it a basis for a financial or games penalty, however, without other criteria being met?

  • Quote
    1 minute ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

    'Dangerous tackle' is often heard in the umpires' mics as the reason for a free kick. Is it a basis for a financial or games penalty, however, without other criteria being met?

    I was going to write a whole thing to respond but I worked 13 hours today and I’m stuffed. Dangerous tackles are a category for suspension as far as I know (could be wrong).
     

    I don’t reckon Danger has a case to answer to be honest, but I’d bet a lot of money, that if this was a no-name player from say, St Kilda, that this 1 week suspension would be upheld. If nothing else, to show as an example. 
     

    It isn’t the rules I have a problem with, it’s the inconsistency of application. 

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1
    • Clap 1
     
    43 minutes ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

    This thread prompted me to watch something I would have had no interest in otherwise.

    My observations are:

    1. The Essendon player hit his head on the ground as a result of the forward momentum of the passage of play; and,

    2. The Geelong player endeavoured to arrest the momentum and hold the Essendon player up.

    I'm prepared to suspend my conspiracy theory tendency. On this one.

    While I'd concur with both your points here (though Kynan Brown showed that it is possible to do more to avoid a player pitching forward in a not dissimilar tackle), the compelling element for me was that Dangerfield locked both of the player's arms, so he couldn't protect himself from that forward momentum towards the ground.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    No way should Danger have been suspended

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    10 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

    No way should Danger have been suspended

    If I was arguing the AFL case at the Tribunal I would have showed the footage of a first gamer's tackle in the same round. Kynan Brown takes a bigger man down in a textbook tackle (pulling him back so there was no risk of the tackled player's head making contact with the turf). He showed a duty of care - and  received the free kick. That was the option open to Dangerfield, an experienced player, that he did not take.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    1 hour ago, Phil C said:

    Turn it up. Absolutely no case to answer. What else could he have done? 

    1. Held him up in the first place. Danger swung his legs under Walsh and was lucky not to swing right through the back of his ankles and give him a 6 week high ankle sprain. But at that stage he put all his weight on to Walsh who was then buckled forward. Chris Scott even said a few weeks ago he's telling players not take guys to the ground, why did Danger not heed that warning?

    2. Turned him. This is the big one. Any time you tackle a player from behind in a chase down scenario you try to turn them side on so they land on their hips and shoulders.

    3. Released him when it became inevitable that Walsh was going to fall forward and land at least part of his body face first in to the ground.

    This was a very ordinary tackle that's been reframed by people in the media saying things like 'what else could he have done' and 'he held him up' when the actual biomechanics of the tackle aren't true at all.

    Meanwhile Jack Higgins got 3 weeks for a gentle pull on Aliir's arm.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Haha 1

    if this isn’t a suspension i don’t know what is 

    head smashed on the ground, arms pinned

    staggering he got off

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    11 hours ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

    This thread prompted me to watch something I would have had no interest in otherwise.

    My observations are:

    1. The Essendon player hit his head on the ground as a result of the forward momentum of the passage of play; and,

    2. The Geelong player endeavoured to arrest the momentum and hold the Essendon player up.

    I'm prepared to suspend my conspiracy theory tendency. On this one.

    I thought he would get off and he did actually try to stop Walsh hitting the ground,  rather than driving him into the ground.

    I think it is a fair call.

    Agree with you, except he was a Carlton player.

  • Quote
    • Haha 2
    4 hours ago, HarpenDee said:

    Kade Chandler copped 2 weeks vs the Weagles for similar

    It was different in that Kade drove him forward in the tackle, into the ground.

    Kade's tackle could have been called perfect except, for the AFL wanting to stamp out head injuries.

    Kade was very unlucky, but as a player from a smaller club and thereby using us to set the example, he was the guinea pig.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    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...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREVIEW: West Coast

      It was bad enough that the Melbourne Football Club created yet another humiliating scenario inside its wretched season at Marvel Stadium last Sunday, but the final insult is that it has been commanded to return to the scene of the crime to inflict further punishment on its fans this week. Incidentally, if this match preview, of a game that promises to be one of the most unattractive fixtures in the history of the game, happens to cut out of your computer screen three quarters of the way through, it’s no coincidence. I’ll be mirroring the Demons’ lacklustre effort against St Kilda from last Sunday when they conceded the largest last quarter turnaround for victory in the history of the game.

        • Shocked
        • Thanks
      • 5 replies
      Demonland

    • REPORT: St. Kilda

      When looking back at the disastrous end to the game, I find it a waste of time to concentrate on the final few moments when utter confusion reigned. Forget the 6-6-6 mess, the failure to mark the most dangerous man on the field, the inability to seal the game when opportunities presented themselves to Clayton Oliver, Harry Petty and Charlie Spargo, the vision of match winning players of recent weeks in Kozzy Pickett and Jake Melksham spending helpless minutes on the interchange bench and the powerlessness of seizing the opportunity to slow the tempo of the game down in those final moments.

        • Clap
        • Like
      • 9 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Sandringham

      The Casey Demons rebounded from a sluggish start to manufacture a decisive win against Sandringham in the final showdown, culminating a quarter century of intense rivalry between the fluctuating alignments of teams affiliated with AFL clubs Melbourne and St Kilda, as the Saints and the Zebras prepare to forge independent paths in 2026. After conceding three of the first four goals of the match, the Demons went on a goal kicking rampage instigated by the winning ruck combination of Tom Campbell with 26 hitouts, 26 disposals and 13 clearances and his apprentice Will Verrall who contributed 20 hitouts. This gave first use of the ball to the likes of Jack Billings, Bayley Laurie, Riley Bonner and Koltyn Tholstrup who was impressive early. By the first break they had added seven goals and took a strong grip on the game. The Demons were well served up forward early by Mitch Hardie and, as the game progressed, Harry Sharp proved a menace with a five goal performance. Emerging young forwards Matthew Jefferson and Luker Kentfield kicked two each but the former let himself down with some poor kicking for goal.
      Young draft talent Will Duursma showed the depth of his talent and looks well out of reach for Melbourne this year. Kalani White was used sparingly and had a brief but uneventful stint in the ruck.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: West Coast

      The Demons return to the scene of the crime on Saturday to face the wooden spooners the Eagles at the Docklands. Who comes in and who goes out? Like moving deck chairs on the Titanic.

        • Haha
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 330 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

      This season cannot end soon enough. Disgraceful.

        • Clap
        • Like
      • 484 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: St. Kilda

      Captain Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year Award from Christian Petracca, Kozzy Pickett, Jake Bowey & Clayton Oliver. Your votes please; 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

        • Sad
        • Clap
        • Like
      • 27 replies
      Demonland
    View All