The ban stands thank god
MRP / Trib. Pickett elbow on Soligo
- Thread starter Kreuuuzeurns
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Oh no, not the 'Kosi Tax'
You don’t need him to take on the lions Toump. You’ll flog them regardless.
Should have copped an extra week for wasting everyone’s time, with a totally baseless appeal. Only a matter of time before he does it again. Can’t help himself.
I also miss the good old days when you could elbow a bloke in the head without punishment. We used to be a proper sport!
- Apr 29, 2016
- 11,166
- 9,775
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Like I said, the bump is dead and it's disappointing. Players got rubbed out with punishment when the bump was alive.
The bump is not dead. The bump to the head is. Which is a shame for Kosi Pickett, evidently.
- Apr 29, 2016
- 11,166
- 9,775
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
players get instructed to avoid bumping. so it's definitely dead. When is the last time you saw a really well executed hard hitting bump?
I'd argue the speccie is on the way out as well.
The bump isn’t dead, bumping like a tool is.
- Apr 29, 2016
- 11,166
- 9,775
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Coaches instruct their players not to bump because bumps can go wrong. or can slip high. How anyone can say that the bump isn't dead is mystifying when coaches have actually come out and said that they instruct their players to tackle instead. And I don't recall any decent bumps in the last couple of years really.
I'm not arguing that big bumps are not far rarer than they were, given how often they do collect the player high and also often result in concussion. You take the risk, prepare to pay the consequence if it goes wrong. The point is that a bump doesn't need to be one which flattens the opposing player and comes with great risk to be called a 'bump'.
Liam Duggan on Jacob Wehr from last year is probably the best recent example of an actual big, clean, well executed bump that is not outlawed by the AFL.
- Mar 21, 2016
- 4,517
- 4,791
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- ColoradoAvalancheLiverpoolFCGrenobl
Didn’t you say you also missed tackles?
- Apr 29, 2016
- 11,166
- 9,775
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Yes, I don't like seeing tough afl players having to place their opponents on the ground, stopping short of singing lullabies to them.
- Mar 21, 2016
- 4,517
- 4,791
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- ColoradoAvalancheLiverpoolFCGrenobl
A lot more front on tackling these days pretty heavy impact. Harder than back in the day.
- Apr 29, 2016
- 11,166
- 9,775
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
what makes you say there are more front on tackles? Like, how is that even measured?
- Mar 21, 2016
- 4,517
- 4,791
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- ColoradoAvalancheLiverpoolFCGrenobl
More congested, better organised team defences, fitter stronger players. It’s happening in all contact football codes
- Apr 29, 2016
- 11,166
- 9,775
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
yeah I agree with most of that. I wouldn't say that they're stronger, but probably fitter for sure. Perhaps the more congested it is, then the less space the players are getting which means the tackles are less impactful.
Overall, I think we've all sort of been gagged and having to conform to this 'avoid the head' movement. But why? Because of CTE etc? There's a lot of combat sports where violence is celebrated like MMA, boxing, ice hockey, etc. Sport that don't seem to have to change their rules to fit the concussion movement so why does the afl? Why can't they just keep the same rules and give bigger suspensions for crude hits to the head?
Hopefully people can have the common sense and not misinterpret what I'm saying. But I wish we didn't change so many rules to protect the head. it's a rough, contact sport.
Happy for Pickett to be suspended. But if he wanted to hurt Soligo, Soligo wouldn't even be playing this week. It was incredibly soft.
We now see far less bumps, tackles are much less aggressive because players have to place them on the ground, or roll them to protect the head, and now players can't jump to smother in case they hit a player high (i.e. Maynard). Soon the mark will be outlawed because knees can knock someone out or spoils will be outlawed because that could hit someone high.
The AFL is not a combat sport, it's a ball sport.
Rules of this sport change frequently for many reasons, and this is probably the most valid reason there is. Have you completely missed all of the concussion lawsuits coming the way of the AFL, which will only grow? Without mentioning the impact on player's lives, such as the tragic Nigel Kellett story the other week.
There will always be an element of risk in a contact game like Australian rules football but no one deserves to have their life ruined due to playing a sport which decided not to act to deter the effects of concussion because certain people prefer it to stay like the good old days of Biffs, Bumps and Brawlers.
- Mar 21, 2016
- 4,517
- 4,791
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- ColoradoAvalancheLiverpoolFCGrenobl
The front on contact stopping someone in their tracks is far more violent than the majority of the tackles from yesteryear.
Comparing our sport to the shambles that is professional boxing, or to MMA is not really helpful. NFL, NRL, Rugby Union are all trying to stamp out the same things, Union in particular is really struggling with the front on nature of hits due to much better, more organised rush defence - impact injuries are a huge issue for them.
