Collapsing, charging with your head - the AFL are to blame for this crisis

[Lunchlady Doris]

I remember this, Selwood charged headfirst straight into Bartel and got a "Too High" free, all the close by Roos players looked bewildered the free was paid. Was farcical

So, in your opinion, was this a poor umpiring decision, or Selwood trying to milk a free kick by running into a teammate?

 

[catters05]

Sorry Chewy that is a bad example but i get what you're saying.

It comes down to bad technique from players, they lead with their heads rather than go with their hips/shoulders to protect themselves from contact.
this is a better example, Selwood goes head first, Ray goes in sideways.

guess who comes off better.

the kids look up to Selwood too much so he needs to make a change because they go for the ball in the same stupid (sorry courageous) way. the sooner players start looking after themselves the better.

problem is that you get a free for going in head first and the other player gets a suspension for leading with a hip.

Go figure. . .

What the..... He wasn't going headfirst, he was on his knees trying to tap the ball on. Another accident.

Selwood was trying to drift to his left to avoid contact, but had no chance when Ray went sideways.

Not Ray's fault, again another accident.

The drop to the knees and raise arms, i can understand........but these two videos are a bit of a joke.

And again the big mistake is the rubbish kick by Harry.

 

[Jurgen]

Read what i said, he needs to protect his own head better.

Why go in head first, what was there to achieve? He could have gone in with his side, still tapped the ball out to his teammate, then taken the bump and continued to play the game. Not spend the night in hospital.

It comes down to technique, protect yourself, don't expect everyone else to look out for you.

 

[Lord Eddard]

This thread has gone off the rails a bit. Selwood getting knocked out in high impact collisions has nothing to do with the real problem which is players getting ticky tack highs in congested areas by keeping their head down after possesing the ball or dropping the knees.

The two are light years apart.

 

[E Shed]

Too many administrators and control freaks who can't just let it be. They always have to seem like they are doing something, anything, to justify there cushy jobs and big pay checks so they sit around thinking of things to change about the game and its gradually getting more and more overcomplicated.
Just L E A V E I T T H E F C U K A L O N E

 

[Jurgen]

This thread has gone off the rails a bit. Selwood getting knocked out in high impact collisions has nothing to do with the real problem which is players getting ticky tack highs in congested areas by keeping their head down after possesing the ball or dropping the knees.

The two are light years apart.

I was only trying to raise a point about attacking the ball.

I dont think that players are playing for frees as much as people think. the biggest problem is the way people attack the ball, they put their heads in an under a contest (when they shouldn't) get hurt, usually badly, then the AFL reacts and makes rules to stop head high contact.

If players starting looking out for themselves the problems will slowly stop.

I agree though that the rules have helped make more and more players put their head over the ball and not protect themselves. it seams the AFL would rather have head high collisions (like the one i posted) and punish players for being in the way!

 

[jezaroo]

So, in your opinion, was this a poor umpiring decision, or Selwood trying to milk a free kick by running into a teammate?

Very poor umpiring and also an example of the technique used by Selwood to draw free kicks. Mind you he has plenty of mates these days but he's probably one of the best at it.

 

[catters05]

Read what i said, he needs to protect his own head better.

Why go in head first, what was there to achieve? He could have gone in with his side, still tapped the ball out to his teammate, then taken the bump and continued to play the game. Not spend the night in hospital.

It comes down to technique, protect yourself, don't expect everyone else to look out for you.

Head first? That isn't head first.....if you want head first i think this one you might be able to class the below as head first.



At the end of the day, it comes down to the umpires in what they want to pay.

 

[Chewy]

Nope Cyril ducks with the best of them.

Cyril is way more focused on avoiding the collision if he can. He will gather the hard ball and duck out of the way at the last split second, so it's not really the best example to bring his name up in this thread

 

[Lord Eddard]

Cyril is way more focused on avoiding the collision if he can. He will gather the hard ball and duck out of the way at the last split second, so it's not really the best example to bring his name up in this thread

I didn't say he was the worst he was just the last one I saw. The post wasn't meant as a sledge. On the other hand Hodge, Puopolo, and worst of all Jordan Lewis are much worse.

 

[Jurgen]

You cats fans need to stop taking it so personally

I wasn't having a go at Selwood, i was just trying to raise a point about attacking the footy.

That image is a great example because two players went for the ball, one got hurt the other didn't.

Anyway, back to the thread, players are also dropping at their knees when they get tackled to win in the back free kicks.
it could be down to coaching as its a great way to win a free kick.

If you've watched many games this season its clear that the players look confused when they go in for a tackle, players just dont know how to tackle anymore, due to the rule changes. To me its seams smarter football to stand back, put a bit of pressure on and let the player make a skill error rather than try to tackle.

I think putting all the blame on the umpires is unfair too. they get one quick look at the contest, then need to figure out which of the encyclopedia of rules was involved and whether any were broken and then pay a free kick. sometimes they blow their whistle in anticipation of the free then make something up.

 

[Chewy]

I didn't say he was the worst he was just the last one I saw. The post wasn't meant as a sledge. On the other hand Hodge, Puopolo, and worst of all Jordan Lewis are much worse.

The longer he plays AFL, the more likely it is he will become more "professional" and develop these bad habits. It's kind of sad. He came into the game as a lightning quick 18yo with incredible reflexes and evasive moves and over time, he do less of these and play more for free kicks.

It's partly why I prefer to watch the younger players. They play more honestly and pure. They haven't learned all the tricks.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

If you won't take it form me, Timmy, who is no fan of Geelong or Selwood, has explained it for you:

Actually I have no issue with Geelong. Or Selwood...although he ducks too much...but in that case he didnt.

 

[Chewy]

Selwood vs Ray is a bad example. Selwood was brave in the way he attacked that contest and foolish in the way he did not protect himself. But this isn't the type of high contact or collision being discussed. That was simply one of those accidental 50/50 collisions that can't be avoided.

Selwood vs Whitecross is a better example because Selwood takes possession first, keeps his head low and runs straight into Whitecross. This cannot be disputed. It's what happened.

I don't think it was intentional by Selwood. More of a bad habit. I say "bad" because you don't want your players knocking themselves out like this. It's a good habit when he sticks his head down to get the ball, but once he has possession, he should endeavour to straighten up and get his melon out of harm's way.

If Selwood played like this in the era of the shirtfront, he would not have made it past 50 games. In the older days, players had to protect themselves. Rovers like Skilton and Platten got in and out of harm's way and dodged the bullets.

The onus also has to be on players to protect themselves. I disagree with the AFL's mentality that the tackler has all the responsibility. In reality, it's a 2 way street.

I never said Selwood vs Whitecross was the greatest example, by the way. I would much rather embed a youtube clip of all the little ticky-tack free kicks he gets for incidental high contact, but nobody bothers to make those clips, do they? It's only the big hits which get remembered and replayed.

 

[Chewy]

Where in the rules does it state players have to avoid getting hit? Surely a player's responsibility is to get the footy and use it as best he can to the advantage of his team? Why does Selwood have to endanger that goal, to avoid contact?

No, you're just being obtuse about it (as usual)

The issue being discussed is when a player such as Selwood uses his head as a shield and runs into someone.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Selwood had no choice to do anything else in the the 2 metres at full pace he had. Didn't notice Whitecross had freed himself from the contest with Christensen because he was looking inboard, and ran into a bloke. Nothing to do with Selwood at all, could have been any player.

Try picking up a footy at pace and see how quick you can be standing upright - it's like you don't know how the human body and balance works.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

I never said Selwood vs Whitecross was the greatest example, by the way. I would much rather embed a youtube clip of all the little ticky-tack free kicks he gets for incidental high contact, but nobody bothers to make those clips, do they? It's only the big hits which get remembered and replayed.

This is understandable, it's more the vibe of the thing.

I have no problem admitting he uses the arm raise technique to try and break tackles, which often results in stupid incidental high contact free kicks. Though I haven't really seen him doing that this season.

I don't believe he does anything with the intention of milking a free kick, but to avoid/break a tackle, much the way Rioli doesn't duck to get a free kick, but to evade.

The arm raise is now emulated by Pendlebury, Puopolo, half the Eagles side and many, many more. I mainly blame the AFLs endorsement of the Eagles tactics over the preseason. It's given everyone the green light.

 

[utility]

Joel Selwood created this monster. His is the biggest cancer on the game possibly ever.

My old man played with a guy who used a similar technique in the 70s. It ain't new.

 

[Chewy]

This is understandable, it's more the vibe of the thing.

I have no problem admitting he uses the arm raise technique to try and break tackles, which often results in stupid incidental high contact free kicks. Though I haven't really seen him doing that this season.

I don't believe he does anything with the intention of milking a free kick, but to avoid/break a tackle, much the way Rioli doesn't duck to get a free kick, but to evade.

The arm raise is now emulated by Pendlebury, Puopolo, half the Eagles side and many, many more. I mainly blame the AFLs endorsement of the Eagles tactics over the preseason. It's given everyone the green light.

Do you remember a few years back when we first started debating the Selwood high contact frees? I said back then if it wasn't eradicated immediately by AFL, other players would be quick to copy Joel's methods, it would catch on across the league and become a plague. I guess I was right about that, hey?

The AFL (and their embedded media sycophants) are idiots. Instead of nipping the probem in the bud, they blindly defended Joel Selwood. They defended him as though people were attacking his character, instead of realising that many people are footy purists at heart and they just want the GAME to be properly maintained.

This current AFL administrtion has a lot to answer for, IMO. They are far too concerned with trying artificially tamper with the game around the edges by making various rule changes,. But they've taken their eye off the ball in many respects. They've allowed fundamental aspects of the game to corrode, in particular the CONTEST, which is what all of us pay our money to see.

The coaches have removed 70% of contests from the game. The umpires are determined to remove the remaining 30% with unnecessary free kicks. That's the modern AFL. Players are scared to go in nowadays. Not because they might get hurt. They're scared of giving away a free kick! That's what we've reduced the game to. It's also why people love Joel and Lenny so much because among the few who do crash in and never ease up.

Nobody was ever really knocking Selwood. That's just fan frustration with the UMPIRES who give him free kicks and and frustration towards Jeff Gieschen & AFL for giving it the green light.

 

[CatFan79]

Very poor umpiring and also an example of the technique used by Selwood to draw free kicks. Mind you he has plenty of mates these days but he's probably one of the best at it.

The form of Lindsay Thomas and Scott Thompson on the weekend is worse than anything I've ever seen Selwood do..

 

[Underdog]

My old man played with a guy who used a similar technique in the 70s. It ain't new.

The whole notion of drawing a free kick is not new. People carry on as if it is.

Hell, it's even called 'clever' or 'smart' by Bigfooty in some instances like when it comes to a key forward drawing a contact free kick.

People are not very reasonable or logical with this 'issue'.

 

[Looney]

I'd posted a perfect solution for this problem in a thread last year but i was ridiculed as a moron. Have the match review panel examine all the free kicks paid during the game and if they find an obvious staging or diving which resulted in a free kick, then the player would be penalised or suspended. Then the players would think twice about staging.

 

[Agent93]

Off topic: Interesting in that Selwood v Ray clip, Ray showed the type of behaviour the AFL wants instead of players 'sliding' in to the ball. I'd argue in that situation if Ray had 'slid' in, Selwood would not have been injured in the collision.

On topic: The sad thing is, no matter what the rules, players will adapt to exploit them. Obviously we want to curtail the 'coat-hanger' tackle so conceivably the rule could state something like 'a legal tackle must between the shoulders and the knees' which would allow arms to slip up if the player tackled tries to break the tackle. However, the adaption comes from the defensive side, the tackler can then start the tackle low, and then slip in order to more easily bring down the tackled player.

The downside, which we see now, is that the rule is not the preferable black and white. You can't simply say any contact on the shoulders and up is high because firstly players will do anything they can to shift or take the tackle high, and secondly it would outlaw pretty much all spoiling from behind in packs.

A possible solution is saying if the tackled player makes an evasive motion of a tackle in progress (see, another grey area, what constitutes an evasive motion), the tackler no longer can infringe.

 

[Underdog]

I'd posted a perfect solution for this problem in a thread last year but i was ridiculed as a moron. Have the match review panel examine all the free kicks paid during the game and if they find an obvious staging or diving which resulted in a free kick, then the player would be penalised or suspended. Then the players would think twice about staging.

Staging is not really a problem.

Drawing a free kick is NOT staging.

 

[Two Eyes]

Drawing head high frees is nothing new, its just that its a bit easier to execute these days due to umpiring interpretations. Hird was a past master but he did it by dropping his knees a split second before the tackle came in. Very hard to pull off.