Preview Round 2 - Geelong Cats v Brisbane Lions Friday, 26th March GMHBA 6.20pm AEST

[jackess]

The Danger thing. I understand he went to bump. If an elbow or shoulder fair enough.
Head clash he was just as likely to end up like the other guy.
3 weeks stiff
On the other hand someone like Toby Greene gets away with eye gouging or Lynch crap which is pre meditated. I hate the snipers more.

Do we just stop the bump. Yes he could of tackled. What happens if someone goes for a tackle and clashes head.

Throwing your shoulder at someone the way Danger did was much more likely to create a whiplash effect and result in a head clash at high force rather than planting your feet and trying to apply a strong tackle.

Bumping is border line and if you do it you can’t jump into it like danger did.

This is more than just a bump

 

[Ralphy2017]

I can see Dangerfield was a bit stiff but in the circumstances about right. If the guy had got up and walked away we wouldn't have even heard about it.

As for banning the bump Ralphy if we ban the bump you may as well not play footy. In Dangerfield's case he kept going when he should've stopped in the Tribunal's eyes, it was nothing to do with the bump per se. The majority of head clashes occur when two players charge in for the ball on the ground or when a pack flies for a mark.

After last nights tribunal players are on notice now, that if they bump and there is a head injury then they will get suspended. Geelong coach stated yesterday, he is virtually instructing his players where possible to tackle instead of deliberately bumping. Williams was lucky a few weeks ago to only get a week for his deliberate bump on Hunter Clark. I believe the AFL is serious on this now, if not they could be looking at litigation in the future from past players suffering brain injuries, if it can be established that the AFL did not do everything reasonable to protect the head.

I also follow the NRL (although my side Manly look like having another poor season) and a few years ago the NRL outlawed the shoulder charge,
and although it was a part of the game, especially in the 1990's with Harrigan and Carrol and the early 2000's with Sonny Bill, duty of care by the NRL to protect the head was paramount. The NRL is still a tough contact sport without the shoulder charge.

 

[Monkey Daniel]

Re: sale of tickets, this is from Geelong Addy. Ticket sales on both Monday and Tuesday were at 10am
any remaining tickets on sale at 3pm for General Public
View attachment 1084550

Update, I've received email from club, only 125 tickets available for purchase at 3pm

 

[Dalions]

Update, I've received email from club, only 125 tickets available for purchase at 3pm

Only an extra 125 tickets out of an extra 9000 that have gone on sale?
That sux.

 

[davemc_lions]

Throwing your shoulder at someone the way Danger did was much more likely to create a whiplash effect and result in a head clash at high force rather than planting your feet and trying to apply a strong tackle.

Bumping is border line and if you do it you can’t jump into it like danger did.

This is more than just a bump

I do agree although if he did not clash heads or the crows player did not get badly injured it be a free or play on.
So even the 3 weeks will not stop 10 close calls next weeks footy round.
If you want to stamp it out should be more then the one week Zac Williams got on Hunter Clark a few weeks ago as well.
Which I thought was worse.
Willams 1, Danger 3 weeks next guy prob get off then someone else gets 2 weeks

Why not just make it illegal to leave the ground too bump. If both feet leave the ground then a free and a 50m. Even if no damage.
Players will then have to change their bumping style.. As you see multiple bumps a game that be close to taking the head.

Then we need to do something about players who lead with the head for a free as well.
Really dangerous and someone will get seriously hurt.

 

[martinson]

Danger's action was more a charge than a bump. If he had tried to tackle at the trajectory he was going it may not have stopped the head contact.

Anyone who bumps now and makes head contact should get freed. You bump to outmanouvre your opponent generally. If Danger gets 3 for last weekend Cameron should've got 20 for Harris which was downright reckless and potentially career ending.

 

[Kernel Kurtz]

Why not tackle the player? Or simply get in front of them and shepherd them rather than a bump? I don't see how the bump is such an integral part of football that AFL cannot exist without it. Rather it sounds like the logic raised for retention of NRL's shoulder charge, which has been banned and yet the game goes on.

This was wreckless at the very least.
The player hand balled and then Dangerfield went in.
copped a body charge or bump. The action was by all means preventable.
He was defenseless.
Deserves every part of 3 weeks.
will never be a fan of late tackles , bumps.

On another perspective if the ball was in contention .
Let's say the ball is in dispute and one player decides to bump the other away while they both go for the ball.
Inn this case I would have sympathy for any player getting weeks as hes just going in for the ball.
Again no sympathy for Danger at all, cop your penalty. He's better than that hopefully he'll take it on the chin and take the blame on himself.

 

[jjami15]

This was wreckless at the very least.
The player hand balled and then Dangerfield went in.
copped a body charge or bump. The action was by all means preventable.
He was defenseless.
Deserves every part of 3 weeks.
will never be a fan of late tackles , bumps.

On another perspective if the ball was not in contention .
Let's say the ball is in dispute and one player decides to bump the other away while they both go for the ball.
Inn this case I would have sympathy for any player getting weeks as hes just going in for the ball.
Again no sympathy for Danger at all, cop your penalty. He's better than that hopefully he'll take it on the chin and take the blame on himself.

Exactly, he wasn’t defending himself he initiated the contact. His access to media to communicate ‘his side’ and ‘how he felt’ is also quite damning about where our society sits. He was the aggressor and Jake Kelly the victim in this situation but that would be boring to hear his perspective I suppose. However the narrative is opposite with a weird tilt that Dangerfield is to be felt sorry for. He should of got more in my perspective.

 

[Son_Of_God29]

Only an extra 125 tickets out of an extra 9000 that have gone on sale?
That sux.

Sorry to intrude guys good luck Friday Night

RE: Tickets

The 125 left are for General Admission Only the extra 25% were released for Geelong Social club and reserved seat holders


Trust me the sooner we get back to 100% attendance in Victoria the better

 

[beardancer]

Anyway Danger is out for a while, so how are we going to beat Geelong?( PS I don't think we can)

 

[Dalions]

Anyway Danger is out for a while, so how are we going to beat Geelong?( PS I don't think we can)

If they get back to playing with some intensity and playing their roles defensively, we can beat Geelong.

 

[FLVanLandingham]

looking forward to this match. was impressed with Daniher in his first outing. a few tweaks in our forward and back lines, and a kick up the butt to our mids and we'll go alright.

 

[Dalions]

looking forward to this match. was impressed with Daniher in his first outing. a few tweaks in our forward and back lines, and a kick up the butt to our mids and we'll go alright.

Forwards need a kick up the butt too.
Can’t let the defenders to run off them to create uncontested run like they did on the weekend. Makes everyone else’s jobs so much harder further down the field.

 

[martinson]

Forwards need a kick up the butt too.
Can’t let the defenders to run off them to create uncontested run like they did on the weekend. Makes everyone else’s jobs so much harder further down the field.

A complete turn around in attitude, manning up ,and gut running to support your teammates and of course we can win. It's a shame they lost because they'll come out with the same thing in mind.

Danger's got form for the sort of thing he did last week but he had to knock someone out to cop a penalty. He was a real problem for us the last two times we've met and him being out should help our M/F immensely at centre clearances. And our backline as well.

 

[luthor]

For all those arguing that the "bump" that knocks another person out cold should be retained as part of the game, where have you been for the last decade or so?

Living under a rock?

There have been legal cases brought worldwide by players suffering the effects of concussions, for the governing bodies of their sports NOT providing a safe workplace. The NFL in the US is one that readily comes to mind.

I believe the settlements that the NFL has already paid out approach a billion dollars. That's with a "B,"

Dementia, memory loss, brain damage etc

The Afl laws are clear

If you choose to bump and cause injury to an opponent's head,you are gone.

If a one or more of the AFL'S pin up boys get rubbed out all the better.

Good on the Tribunal for having the guts to hit Dangerfield with a substantial suspension

On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Section 5]

My 2 cents worth on the bump that is still legal as long as it is used correctly

Any player in the modern game that uses the bump either side on or front on has only one intention.
And that is to hurt the opposition player. It may be a brain fade but that is their intention in that split second
Fans love it when it is done to the opposition but scream when it happens to our own players

However when tackling, the intention 98% of the time is to stop or interrupt the opposition going forward or earn a free kick
The other 2% do intend to hurt the opposition. Bad sling tackle, swinging arm. Often this results in a free.

 

[martinson]

My 2 cents worth on the bump that is still legal as long as it is used correctly

Any player in the modern game that uses the bump either side on or front on has only one intention.
And that is to hurt the opposition player. It may be a brain fade but that is their intention in that split second
Fans love it when it is done to the opposition but scream when it happens to our own players

However when tackling, the intention 98% of the time is to stop or interrupt the opposition going forward or earn a free kick
The other 2% do intend to hurt the opposition. Bad sling tackle, swinging arm. Often this results in a free.

It's a physical contact sport and the intention is always to hurt the opposition when physical contact is engaged.

Obviously the code needs to have a way of ensuring that that contact does not cause permanent damage so it's a difficult issue to manage.

Physical pressure and intimidation will always be there when we have players and coaches who want to win.

 

[BangyBangy]

For all those arguing that the "bump" that knocks another person out cold should be retained as part of the game, where have you been for the last decade or so?

Living under a rock?

There have been legal cases brought worldwide by players suffering the effects of concussions, for the governing bodies of their sports NOT providing a safe workplace. The NFL in the US is one that readily comes to mind.

I believe the settlements that the NFL has already paid out approach a billion dollars. That's with a "B,"

Dementia, memory loss, brain damage etc

The Afl laws are clear

If you choose to bump and cause injury to an opponent's head,you are gone.

If a one or more of the AFL'S pin up boys get rubbed out all the better.

Good on the Tribunal for having the guts to hit Dangerfield with a substantial suspension

On SM-G973F using BigFooty.com mobile app

If it wasn't for the bump being part of our game Alan Richardson would only be remembered as a failed coach of St Kilda rather than road kill for one of the greatest shirt fronts in living memory.

View attachment Vossy.mp4

 

[Section 5]

It's a physical contact sport and the intention is always to hurt the opposition when physical contact is engaged.

Obviously the code needs to have a way of ensuring that that contact does not cause permanent damage so it's a difficult issue to manage.

Physical pressure and intimidation will always be there when we have players and coaches who want to win.

Don't agree at all on this point.
If that were the case no parent would allow their kids to play AFL or AFLW
It is a sport first that has a physical aspect to the game.

 

[Dalions]

It's a physical contact sport and the intention is always to hurt the opposition when physical contact is engaged.

Obviously the code needs to have a way of ensuring that that contact does not cause permanent damage so it's a difficult issue to manage.

Physical pressure and intimidation will always be there when we have players and coaches who want to win.

The first intention should be to win the ball, I would have thought?

 

[dlanod]

It's a physical contact sport and the intention is always to hurt the opposition when physical contact is engaged.

Hurting might be a side-effect of actions like tackles (intended to win the ball by dispossessing the player of the ball and win a free kick), bumps (intended to stop the player obtaining the ball), or ruck contests (intended to win the ball for your team) but the AFL has always established that an act intended to hurt the opponent results in a higher grade of suspension.

 

[martinson]

The first intention should be to win the ball, I would have thought?

Of course . Everyone says that.

But when you play at elite level tackling is intended to slow and hurt the opposition as well as win the free. No one says it but you've only got to see the ferocity with which the players do it within the confines of the rules. And I think everyone playing the game is aware of that.

It used to be a violent game . The violence has been mostly eradicated but the physical intimidation is always there.

 

[iBeng]

Answerth has been given a 2 match suspension in the match he played, wont be eligible to play until Round 4...And if he isnt picked, he has to serve the two matches in the first 2 rounds of the VFL instead.

 

[jackess]

Answerth has been given a 2 match suspension in the match he played, wont be eligible to play until Round 4...And if he isnt picked, he has to serve the two matches in the first 2 rounds of the VFL instead.

Thats very poor from him.

 

[Lazza16]

Throwing your shoulder at someone the way Danger did was much more likely to create a whiplash effect and result in a head clash at high force rather than planting your feet and trying to apply a strong tackle.

Bumping is border line and if you do it you can’t jump into it like danger did.

This is more than just a bump

View attachment 1084582

It is a shirtfront nothing more nothing less.....2021......not acceptable......1986 we loved it. Part of growing up in footy we were encouraged to do it and congratulated when we did...times have changed for the better (having sons playing my view is very different now)