nutbean

In fact there is the contradiction - I want to tackler to pin the arms so the tackled opponent cannot get the ball away and even better if you can bring them to ground as that hopefully takes them out of the contest - the AFL do not want the arms pinned and player brought to ground as they cant protect themselves - there's the dilemma. Whilst I agree with your sentiment - you rarely get concussed in a tackle if you are not brought to ground - the AFL wants head injuries and concussions out of the game. Make no mistake players brought to the ground with force with no real chance of protecting themselves will get looked at.

I posted this in the Clayton Oliver thread and will repost here - it seems I am in the minority on this - I am shocked that so many see nothing wrong with the tackle ( when I say wrong I am mean on how the AFL are looking at these types of tackles - not my opinion on what should and shouldn't be legal). Again for the record - I dont want Oliver to stop tackling - I just want him to work on his technique. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The AFL wants to encourage more and more kids to play the game - they are trying to remove anything that results in head injuries/concussions and the most obvious area is tackling. I think the way it is heading is any tackle where the player can't protect himself from hard contact with the ground will more or less be rubbed out ( and yes there will be inconsistencies) . Oliver swung Young around - there was force in the tackle - Young could have been hurt. Had he bounced and hit his head he would have been suspended. The new tackling technique will be to pin the arms so the ball drops but not bring them to ground. The old message of make a tackle "hurt" is a thing of the past - the AFL wants you to tackle to make your opponent drop the ball and nothing more. The real inconsistency to me is the tackle on Tyson - tackle and fall backwards. Too many times you see the tackled player get his leg caught and hyper-extend. I held my breath when Tyson went over backwards, leg trapped and grasped his knee. It seems that this is ok because it is the knee not the head.

The AFL wants to encourage more and more kids to play the game - they are trying to remove anything that results in head injuries/concussions and the most obvious area is tackling. I think the way it is heading is any tackle where the player can't protect himself from hard contact with the ground will more or less be rubbed out ( and yes there will be inconsistencies) . Oliver swung Young around - there was force in the tackle - he could have been hurt. Had he bounced and hit his head he would have been suspended. The new tackling technique will be to pin the arms so the ball drops but not bring them to ground. The old message of make a tackle "hurt" is a thing of the past - the AFL wants you to tackle to make your opponent drop the ball and nothing more. The real inconsistency to me is the tackle on Tyson - tackle and fall backwards. Too many times you see the tackled player get his leg caught and hyper-extend. I held my breath when Tyson went over backwards, leg trapped and grasped his knee. It seems that this is ok because it is the knee not the head.

As said earlier - they are targeting this sort of slinging tackle so I was not surprised. If it caused damaged it would have been weeks. Check back on his highlight reel - he does a few of these tackles in the TAC and I am pretty sure that the coaches will be onto him about it. I love the fierce desire to tackle - i just dont want him rubbed out.

you are welcome - can you please knit two as i would dearly love one as well....

As I said....showing your age... It is generational thing - when you go out and see how many of the younger generation now are sporting tattoo's from all walks of life it is obvious it is not confined to any one demographic ( excepting of course youth) and in that generation has no connection to poor decision making.. ( darn fool whipper snappers)

You are showing your age. Having a tattoo/tattoo's is the equivalent of having your ears pierced now. I draw zero inference from a person having a tattoo.

I like the idea of capping the interchanges during the season proper to 90 for everyone except us - for some reason we look a lot fresher with 130 interchanges so I think we should stick to that...

I have a tattoo of snoopy dancing on my left buttcheek and I run with the chickens - I am not sure of the relevance......

It is not even that - I say don't flirt with structure. Hogan didn't have a great game but will take the best defender each week. So you leave Hogan out and we can all say "let someone else step up" but I would rather we see two or three defenders be drawn to Hogan leaving someone else free ( or more like Hogan beating two opponents !) . The same with Gawn - we have the likes of Viney having an armchair ride from Gawn - so we don't play Gawn and Viney then changes his game to sharking the taps from the opposition ruckman, We want our players practicing a game plan that revolves around our best players playing.

You can disagree with the direction of the AFL and slinging but unless you havent been watching for the last two years - it is pretty simple - the tackle Oliver did, had it resulted in an injury to Young would have cost him a suspension. You can suggest "we are in trouble" all you like - the reality is the reality. It's been mentioned before in his TAC highlights that it was evident that he sometimes slings in his tackles. He doesn't need to stop tackling but he does need to improve his technique or he will get rubbed out. ( as much it would hurt , I prefer a footballer with a desire to tackle that may on occasion earn the wrath of the MRP rather than a footballer who has no appetite for the physical aspect of the game)

Three important words.... Keeps his feet...

We are not far enough evolved to be able turn on form at will like a Hawthorn. As Dunstall said, we need to get used to winning. spot on - we need to expect to win be it a training drill, a practice match or the real season.

What ? The umpires have made no secret that they are going to come down heavily on slinging. It was slinging and dangerous. As I said in the Oliver thread, he does this tackle in his highlights. He looked so good and very comfortable - just needs to keep tackling but improve the technique. If you sling like he did, you are risking suspension.

I critiqued him a week or so ago and my only small knock on him was his tackling technique. I applaud his desire to tackle but he needs to rid himself of the "sling" - no matter how innocuous a sling tackle may be , if the opponent bumps his head on the ground, you are looking at a suspension. His tackle was borderline. on a positive note, he does not look at all out of place in the heat of the centre square.

So which one is it ? In the first post you condemn the Catholic church behavior for it's deflection and throw focus on the other and in the second post - you do exactly the same that ! The Middle East problems date back to 1948 with the formation of the State of Israel but historically goes back centuries. I absolutely acknowledge some of the repugnant behaviors of the Israeli Government but the above comments shows a complete disregard for what has transpired over the past 50 odd years and the failings of leadership by both sides to work towards to a peaceful resolution. I condemn the series of right wing Israeli Government for their provocative actions and heavy handed treatments and I condemn the Palestinian leadership for failing their own people and in the words of Golda Meir " never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity". To condemn one side for disproportionate behavior without examining how it got to the place it is now is like reading the last chapter of a 40 chapter book without bothering to read to the first 39 chapters. Happy to take this offline as this is as complex an issue as will ever be discussed.

I note your first point and the answer to your question is absolutely. To me whether the coverage is lopsided or not is irrelevant anyway. The argument of "why aren't you also looking at XYZ as they are doing it to " is deflection and and repulsive deflection at that and nothing more. I want everyone and I mean everyone who commits these hideous crimes ( or aids,abets or covers up) brought to justice.

For every Mitchell and Jordan Lewis you need an Bradley Hill and Isaac Smith - the difference is that whilst Mitchell and Jordan are size and grunt and Hill and Smith are not, all 4 are competitors....

I dislike the argument "but hey, look at what the others are doing" or "why are we being singled out when others are doing the same". There is accuracy in in the statements as there is not equality in coverage or the spotlight does not fall in equal proportions. But to use this approach to try and downplay ones actions I find abhorrent. We kill but what about others who kill ? We may have sexually abused children but what about others who have done the same ? This doesn't sit with me at all.

Just to correct some fairly obvious errors.... - It is not just Austen Tayshus and Julie Szego - they are not telling the world to turn a blind eye - they are not saying Israel is saying it's critics aren't focusing on all the other atrocities in the world. The general thrust of the argument is that much of main stream media is not reporting with the same frequency or emphasis the atrocities being committed by the Palestinians. They highlight the imbalance in the reporting - which I agree with. Before you jump on me I will state categorically that in my opinion an atrocity cannot be waved away by the argument that "the other side are doing it too". I am highly critical of some of the actions of the Israeli Government (especially the land grab in the West Bank and East Jerusalem) and army as I am of certain elements of the Palestinians.

You can be a competitor without being a monster or an extraction machine like a Viney. 1/ When it is you turn to go - you go 2/ Keep putting in for the full 4 quarters. To me this is the big one - Everyone "competes" but 4 quarter efforts need to be the benchmark. I don't want hear our coach say - "we played so well for 3 quarters but we started poorly/ faded out/ had a bad 30 minutes and that one quarter cost us".

edited for accuracy -

great pics ! (From my very distant vantage point, Max Gawn comes across as a ripping bloke)

I'm an MCC member and have no knowledge whatsoever...

Not guilty .....