MRP / Trib. Higgins - 3 weeks for Aliir tackle

[Obeanie1]

Not sure how there is any confusion or argument about this. Held his arm, slung him and regardless of if Aliir is trying to kick the ball, Higgins has the duty of care not to slam his head down once he’s initiated the tackle in that manner.

Could have just wrapped both arms around him but chose to sling.

Lucky it’s not 4.

196cm big man gets tackled by a midget.

Its a joke.

Id be asking the AFL how can a small guy tackle a CHB 196cm and how many kgs heavier?

He pinned one arm only and he was kicking the ball off balance. Is Higgins supposed to levitate Alir and hold him off the ground..

Its just getting stupid this game and its officiating.

I watch the NRL and every third tackle in that game would cop a week suspension in the AFL. A fair inidiction that the AFL has taken this too far.

 

[Obeanie1]

I don't understand people that voted 'no penalty'. it's a clear sling, with force, that resulted in an injury. such an easy decision. All of this talk about contributing is nonsense. The onus is on the tackler to not sling, bottom line.

So how do smalls tackle talls?

Physics cant be stopped.

 

[Obeanie1]

It's not a perfect tackle. It is a two motion tackle, grab the player first, then sling or use own body weight to manoeuvre player into the ground. Very very clear from the video footage that it is a sling tackle due to these exact moves, therefore an illegal tackle.

A perfect tackle would have involved Higgins dropping his knees and attempting to bring Aliir straight to ground or not at all if he was incapable of it, instead of wrestling him across his body using his lower centre of gravity to Aliir, aka the "sling".

Drop the hip tackle?

That causes more injuries and is banned in NRL because it ends careers.

Sure thats a great option.

 

[danster168]

So how do smalls tackle talls?

Physics cant be stopped.

Grab the body, wrap him up and take him to the ground. No excuses for grabbing his arm and pulling on it with all of his weight. The ultimate sling. Easy 3 weeks.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

It's not a perfect tackle. It is a two motion tackle, grab the player first, then sling or use own body weight to manoeuvre player into the ground. Very very clear from the video footage that it is a sling tackle due to these exact moves, therefore an illegal tackle.

A perfect tackle would have involved Higgins dropping his knees and attempting to bring Aliir straight to ground or not at all if he was incapable of it, instead of wrestling him across his body using his lower centre of gravity to Aliir, aka the "sling".

But you are allowed to tackle someone to the ground.

Not every tackle that brings someone to ground is a sling.

What made it a sling, was Alir's action.

 

[Powerade 08]

That's fine, but the same action with no concussion is leading to zero or 1 week. So the AFL has no issue with the action. They only care about the outcome.

2 weeks last year without concussion

Is Burton in trouble for this tackle on Elliott?

Ryan Burton is penalised for a dangerous tackle on Jamie Elliott

www.afl.com.au

 

[Obeanie1]

Grab the body, wrap him up and take him to the ground. No excuses for grabbing his arm and pulling on it with all of his weight. The ultimate sling. Easy 3 weeks.

You make it sound so simple.......when it isnt simple at all.

So many variables in a split second decision with your opponent attempting to evade, fend and kick the ball.

The way things are going we will end up like Galic football with little to no tackling or bumping.

The AFL being the joke its become will uphold.

The NRL are laughing at us for taking this so far. Absolutely pissing themselves at the AFL's knee jerk policy changes trying to soften a 360 degree high impact sport.

 

[PJays]

After reading this thread, all I can say is I'm glad I never played AFL footy.

The margin for error is so incredibly slim. It's a brutal, contact sport but increasingly they're penalising people excessively for split-second decisions where multiple factors are outside their control- the movement of their opponent and the extent of their opponents injury.

I thought similar after other recent suspensions- eg Toby Greene

4

Toby Greene

Age

30

Ht

182cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

22.7

5star

K

12.5

5star

HB

10.2

5star

M

4.8

5star

T

3.0

5star

G

1.2

4star

D

17.5

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

8.0

4star

M

4.8

4star

T

1.0

2star

G

2.3

5star

D

26.6

5star

K

12.4

5star

HB

14.2

5star

M

4.8

5star

T

3.6

5star

G

0.0

1star

last week.

The question around who has duty of care in some of these situations is murky.

The end result will be players taking less risks and changing the way they play. And gradually over a 10-20 year period, a less competitive, less physical game and a less enjoyable spectacle. That's already happening but how far could it go? Time will tell. But that's a discussion for another thread.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Kennedy did the same thing to Dangerfield on Saturday (5:44 left in the 2nd quarter).

And, I also saw Blakey do it to Chol yesterday (6:06 remaining in the last quarter).

Not even Free Kicks were paid. Blakey actually got the Free Kick.


The Dangerfield one was pretty much exactly the same as the Alir one. Kennedy tackled him and started the motion of bringing him to ground - and Dangerfield flung his boot at the ball which caused him to be upended and go head first into the ground.

The Chol one was a front on tackle, and he also attempted to get his boot to it which resulted in him face plantings into the turf.

 

[Hawks_4478]

Knock a bloke out in a sling tackle and you’re gonna get weeks. It’s pretty simple.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Knock a bloke out in a sling tackle and you’re gonna get weeks. It’s pretty simple.

I think the debate is whether it was actually a sling or not though.

 

[HairyO]

Kennedy did the same thing to Dangerfield on Saturday (5:44 left in the 2nd quarter).

And, I also saw Blakey do it to Chol yesterday (6:06 remaining in the last quarter).

Not even Free Kicks were paid. Blakey actually got the Free Kick.


The Dangerfield one was pretty much exactly the same as the Alir one. Kennedy tackled him and started the motion of bringing him to ground - and Dangerfield flung his boot at the ball which caused him to be upended and go head first into the ground.

The Chol one was a front on tackle, and he also attempted to get his boot to it which resulted in him face plantings into the turf.

And a Port player gave away a free for a dangerous tackle in this game with no mention by the MRO.

The issue is zero consistency. These tackles have to be stopped but ignoring ones which do no damage wont change behaviour. Hand out fines or 1 week for the ones with no injury, 2 or 3 or more for the ones with injury.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Saints are challenging this, as expected Problem is I don't love their chances but on principle St Kilda had to challenge

 

[danster168]

You make it sound so simple.......when it isnt simple at all.

So many variables in a split second decision with your opponent attempting to evade, fend and kick the ball.

The way things are going we will end up like Galic football with little to no tackling or bumping.

The AFL being the joke its become will uphold.

The NRL are laughing at us for taking this so far. Absolutely pissing themselves at the AFL's knee jerk policy changes trying to soften a 360 degree high impact sport.

This is the exact same thing. Trengove slinging a much stronger dangerfield and pulling him backwards and yanking on the arm. Trengove got multiple weeks. Higgins is the same.



Another smaller opponent slinging a bigger opponent. Getting a bigger opponent to the ground isnt hard when theyre off balance. Theyre trying to kick the ball, theyre on 1 leg!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The hard thing for Higgins is most people here and I'm the same probably feel a week is sufficient as it is a sling and the second motion is the issue.

However the concussion means it's going to be high impact, and he's very lucky it isn't severe impact.

So really it has to be 0 or 3 weeks, there is no wiggle room in the middle, and somehow I doubt it's going to be the 0. I get the appeal on principle but don't love the chances.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

2 weeks last year without concussion

Is Burton in trouble for this tackle on Elliott?

Ryan Burton is penalised for a dangerous tackle on Jamie Elliott

www.afl.com.au

The difference with this, and with the other two examples posted further on this thread, is that the way the tackles were executed meant that the player was always going to be dumped regardless of what they did. They are like judo throws where you purposely reposition your centre of gravity to upend your opponent. Burton's one is almost a judo trip

To my eye, that's not what Higgins did.

Higgins was pulling down on Alir, not swinging or slinging him.

Look at Alir's head and arm position in these stills. They go straight down because Higgins is pulling him downwards and not slinging him. Higgins' is clearly in a downward motion too - not a slinging one. It's not until Alir tries to kick the ball that changes his own trajectory.






Don't get me wrong, I think Higgins is a twerp and I couldn't really care less if he cops weeks (would be karma for all his staging over the years) and Alir is one of my favourite players in the comp - but I strongly disagree with this new concept that you get weeks just because someone got hurt.

It makes no sense to me. And I don't think Higgins did anything wrong here.

 

[westie]

The biggest issue is Michael Christian!

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

My issue is that surely the intent from the AFL here is deterrence, not punishment.

They need to make it safer for players, so they must deter players from doing stuff that can concuss people.

But they're not doing that. They literally let Kennedy do the same thing to Dangerfield, and let Blakey do it to Chol.

The act is not deterred one bit. So players are not safer.

Suspending someone because they did a legal act that incidentally hurt someone is nonsensical.

 

[PJays]

Kennedy did the same thing to Dangerfield on Saturday (5:44 left in the 2nd quarter).

Agreed. That's more akin to Higgins/Aliir than Trengove and Rioli

Charlie Dixon said on Triple M yesterday that its basically a raffle and the players don't know what's OK and what's not

 

[Vintage]

Hope he gets off.

Biggest contributor on all of this is umpires giving players too much time to dispose of the ball, effectively signalling to players they need to tackle harder / take the player to ground. In the Freo bulldogs game on the weekend Naughton was spun a full 720 by 2 players in a tackle but eventually got a handball out to a team mate - should have either been holding the ball (imo) or ball up at worst - ump might as well have been coaching them to tackle harder and do whatever it takes. Another example of afl not aligning itself properly.

 

[mad-saint-guy]

The difference between this and a classic sling tackle is that a sling tackle involves pulling a player into the air and across your body to then slam them into the ground. Higgins pulls Aliir down from the arm but the combination of Aliir's momentum and the swing at the ball high in the air results in him hitting the ground head first. It was a bit sloppy but I don't think that this is a suspension worthy act.

If Aliir was holding the ball at hip level as you normally would instead of up by his shoulder then he could have dropped the ball straight onto his boot and would have just been dragged to the ground normally in the tackle rather than having a wild swing at it, resulting in his lower body being up in the air as he's being dragged down by the arm (which happens dozens of time in every game).

 

[zyzzbruh]

But you are allowed to tackle someone to the ground.

Not every tackle that brings someone to ground is a sling.

What made it a sling, was Alir's action.

What made it a sling was basic body mechanics.. aslong as we live in this 3d world we all have a pretty good understanding of the basic laws of physics. If you pull on something that's moving in a certain direction in a certain way, you know for the most part how you're going to affect that things movement. Trying to dive into these complex nuances is nothing but pleading ignorance to how the world works.

The solution to all these incidents is simple - simplify it instead of trying to delve into the depths of complex nuances. Was it a slinging motion? yes. Did the player hit his head on the ground? Yes. That's it. It should end there.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

What made it a sling was basic body mechanics.. aslong as we live in this 3d world we all have a pretty good understanding of the basic laws of physics. If you pull on something that's moving in a certain direction in a certain way, you know for the most part how you're going to affect that things movement. Trying to dive into these complex nuances is nothing but pleading ignorance to how the world works.

The solution to all these incidents is simple - simplify it instead of trying to delve into the depths of complex nuances. Was it a slinging motion? yes. Did the player hit his head on the ground? Yes. That's it. It should end there.

I don't think it was a slinging motion though. I've explained why.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

I don't think it was a slinging motion though. I've explained why.

It doesn’t have to be a sling tackle for it to be a dangerous tackle according to the 2024 guidelines.

If a players arm is pinned, they’re rotated or the action includes more than one action, it’s classified as a dangerous tackle.

Higgins tackle meets all these criteria so doesn’t really matter if its not a “sling”.

 

[Mat Mann]

It doesn’t have to be a sling tackle for it to be a dangerous tackle according to the 2024 guidelines.

If a players arm is pinned, they’re rotated or the action includes more than one action, it’s classified as a dangerous tackle.

Higgins tackle meets all these criteria so doesn’t really matter if its not a “sling”.

It does not
Higgins has 1 motion, downwards, he doesn't rotate at all, Allirs kicking action is the rotation