Autopsy Round 13, 2021: St.Kilda v Adelaide

[kernelT]

What happens if roo goes for that amazing mark he took and instead of just hitting Milne knocks him out. Does he get suspended because we don’t want concussion.

Yep maybe we’ll look back at that mark one day and say “that was a really dangerous scenario that we won’t encourage with the hindsight of ex players suffering head trauma”
Accidental collisions will always happen, mitigating the amount and circumstances will absolutely be part of the rule planning going forward.

 

[plugger66]

Yep maybe we’ll look back at that mark one day and say “that was a really dangerous scenario that we won’t encourage with the hindsight of ex players suffering head trauma”
Accidental collisions will always happen, mitigating the amount and circumstances will absolutely be part of the rule planning going forward.

If we look back at that and rules have changed all we would be doing is watching old games because footy as we know it wouldn’t exist.

 

[kernelT]

It wasn’t a bump. What your solution is, is to remove any competition for a loose ball. One player must concede to another to avoid making contact with them in case it leads to an accidental injury.
You want to change the rules so players avoid going for a mark unless it is uncontested.

Maybe Aussie Rules just isn’t for you?

The simple point (yet obviously lost on you) was that you are still allowed to bump, but have to choose when and how you deliver it.

This liability form bumps will cross over to contests, maybe Aussie Rules just isn’t for you any more if you don’t like protecting heads?

 

[jwikked]

The simple point (yet obviously lost on you) was that you are still allowed to bump, but have to choose when and how you deliver it.

This liability form bumps will cross over to contests, maybe Aussie Rules just isn’t for you any more if you don’t like protecting heads?

I like protecting the head just fine, but it shouldn’t be used to needlessly punish players for accidents that happen during a contest for the ball.

 

[bird_man]

I'm not biased. I have no problem with Clark, Long, Mackay or any body else getting 4 weeks for exactly the same thing.

Evidence is undeniable - repeated head knocks leads to brain damage. AFL has a duty to protect players playing the game - the Tribunals decision tonight undermines the AFL's efforts to protect players from head knocks.

The AFL must either appeal the decision or change the rules or risk further litigation down the track.

But more importantly, to help reduce early onset dementia and other brain damage related issues in players.

And surely no one wants that to continue to happen.

The AFL won't appeal the decision because Mckay didn't break the rules by contesting the footy.

That's exactly why Christian didn't suspend him in the first place.

Maybe they will look at changing the rules but that is a completely different discussion.

 

[pebblesofsand]

The one thing I still can't understand is how come David Mackay isn't a multiple Brownlow Medallist?

I mean any player who reckons he can collect a bouncing ball while coming from a diametrically opposed angle and running at absolute full tilt must be one of the most skilled players ever to have played the game.

Should have played for us against Geelong in 2009 - would never let that bounce get away like Milney did - would just pounced and gathered it and goaled without even breaking stride.



One positive - at least there will be no mention of Seb tomorrow!!!

 

[kernelT]

If we look back at that and rules have changed all we would be doing is watching old games because footy as we know it wouldn’t exist.

Evolution… it's not for everyone.

The game is not even remotely similar to when it started 150 years ago, it's not even recognisable to 50 years ago.

 

[Hubnester]

Going for the contested ball has never been reckless.

So it would seem. No matter how you throw yourself at the ball, regardless of the consequence, the outcome is that it's not classed as reckless - which is the precedent that concerns me.

 

[kernelT]

So it would seem. No matter how you throw yourself at the ball, regardless of the consequence, the outcome is that it's not classed as reckless - which is the precedent that concerns me.

I think there's only a few months left of that loophole.

You will be responsible for the consequences of your attack on the ball.

 

[EWarren2017]

I'm a parent. I love the game, but wouldn't encourage my sons to play it, it's way too dangerous, severe injuries are way too common. I mean sure you do get plenty of paternity leave but it's just not a career I'd be happy they chose, especially considering there is a 17 out of 18 chance that they'll end up playing in a team that is beating the Saints, and that's if they even get drafted, and if they do play for the Saints you'd be torn between supporting them and booting them up the arse when they cost us a win.

Still with my skrawny-arsed genes, the only way they are getting into an AFL team us with a mountain of steroids, so I needn't worry.

No chance my kids play footy.

 

[EWarren2017]

What happens if roo goes for that amazing mark he took and instead of just hitting Milne knocks him out. Does he get suspended because we don’t want concussion.

If he took his eyes off the ball, looked at the Sydney player and didn't touch the football, absolutely.

 

[CursingFijian]

Pack marks can (and have) led to all those outcomes. Paddy was concussed in a marking contest, an amateur footy player James Macquillan was left as a paraplegic after a collision (not an elbow to the head). These things happen, it's a risk all players take in competing in sporting contest.

Unless you want to watch tag footy with no contact, there will always be risks that can't be removed. Even touch footy comes with a risk of accidental injuries. That's life.

I agree with Whately.

There is another option that McKay could have executed which is to lay a strong tackle and still contest the footy.

However only McKay could have implemented this option because both the ball and Clark were in his line of vision. This is also the reason why only McKay is able to brace safely for contact…because he is the only one of the three players (if you also count Berry who was in close proximity) in the contest that could see the unfolding contest in its entirety.

McKay clearly has the highest degree of duty care and was solely responsible for the events that unfolded.

As plugger and yourself alluded there are always going to be injuries in contact sport. Unavoidable, for sure. But we are seeing a higher incidence of ‘innocuous’ injuries because we have been able to clean up the game to a large extent by holding the players to a higher standard in how they make contact.

In another universe McKay crafts a solid but safe tackle, shakes Hunter to his core, dislodges the ball and Berry is able to take it away.

 

[KingsRansom]

Even with the ruling, my kids will still pay footy. I played footy to a reasonable level until only a few years ago and never got concussed. Had some other injuries like an ACL and broken wrist, but also had similar injuries playing cricket and basketball.
I've seen some players cop heavy knocks, seen one bloke get tackled and thrown into a concrete into a concrete coaches box and split his skull.
The AFL will act no doubt and put the onus on the person late to the contest, same as when they stopped dangerous tackles and the likes, its evolution. The game is safer than it ever has been

 

[MrBarry]

I’m sure this decision plus all the commentary and opinion around this incident is of great comfort to Mr and Mrs Clark.

If your going to take that position, then Mr and Mrs Clark shouldn't have a son playing the sport.

You simply cannot remove all risk from the game, otherwise it's a totally different sport.

 

[sunny3193]

This thread is a monster.
It needs a change of focus.
On last weekend, when St Kilda was playing Adelaide in Cairns, Bing got pinged for striking. Copped a fine.

 

[Hayes4PM]

This thread is a monster.
It needs a change of focus.
On last weekend, when St Kilda was playing Adelaide in Cairns, Bing got pinged for striking. Copped a fine.

Can he teach Billings to box..?

 

[gringo2011]

Same thing said about the bump, if you choose to make contact with an opponent you’ll be liable for the potential damage. I think negating head injuries is the #1 priority, the game and players will adjust.

Blighty said you can always pull out when it's a team mate which is a pretty good point too. If he was about to run into Rory Sloan he would have softened the hit at the very least. They need to have players choose to bump as an absolute last resort in the future. It will be tackle first unless you want to risk suspension long term.

 

[gringo2011]

If we look back at that and rules have changed all we would be doing is watching old games because footy as we know it wouldn’t exist.

I used to have a DVD of the 1966 GF. It was like a different sport to what footy was like in the 1990s. It's been 20+ years since I watched it but if I remember correctly there was no out on the full or was it free kick off last kick. They seemed to have no real system and the ball pinged around. I also watched some footage someone put up of a 1920s game and it was even more insane. They just seemed to roost the ball as high as they could in the air with no direction and then all leaped at it like under 9s. There was no order and free kicks looked like random calls.

Footy is constantly evolving and with brain studies it will get further and further from that head bashing style of the 1970s and 1980s. Old guys will have to adjust like they did with zones and uber defences.

 

[gringo2011]

I'm a parent. I love the game, but wouldn't encourage my sons to play it, it's way too dangerous, severe injuries are way too common. I mean sure you do get plenty of paternity leave but it's just not a career I'd be happy they chose, especially considering there is a 17 out of 18 chance that they'll end up playing in a team that is beating the Saints, and that's if they even get drafted, and if they do play for the Saints you'd be torn between supporting them and booting them up the arse when they cost us a win.

Still with my skrawny-arsed genes, the only way they are getting into an AFL team us with a mountain of steroids, so I needn't worry.

My son played footy but moved over to soccer. He'd already had a couple of concussions and I had plenty of them when I was young. Small brains and big heads must run in the family. I was kind of pleased he changed in the end. He loved the bravery aspect of footy growing up watching Lenny as a little kid, he played mid and played with his head over the ball. Coaches used to try to train it out of him because they were worried he was being reckless but watching footage of bandaged up footy players gave him a weird idea of glory. I was always a self preservationist and thought pain was for idiots. Possibly why I was an average footballer.

 

[tomjoad]

Think you're forgetting who we currently have representing our club onfield. Might be a terse Instagram post about it and then on with the game

Yes this was not lost on me as I wrote it...funnily enough, I couldn't think of any names that would be intent on backing up a team mate. Still...I can dream (knowing full well that it is only that)

 

[bird_man]

Blighty said you can always pull out when it's a team mate which is a pretty good point too. If he was about to run into Rory Sloan he would have softened the hit at the very least. They need to have players choose to bump as an absolute last resort in the future. It will be tackle first unless you want to risk suspension long term.

Yeah but you don't contest a footy against your team mate so it's completely different

 

[plugger66]

Evolution… it's not for everyone.

The game is not even remotely similar to when it started 150 years ago, it's not even recognisable to 50 years ago.

Totally agree. I hardly ever whinge about rule changes. Most work out. The bump rule makes sense but that doesn’t mean they all do. Trying to stop concussion through marking and telling a player to slow down and not try to get to the ball first completely changes the game It’s a contact sport thus concussion. Change as many rules as you can to limit it but not 2 that make footy great. The bump to the head never made footy great.

 

[plugger66]

So it would seem. No matter how you throw yourself at the ball, regardless of the consequence, the outcome is that it's not classed as reckless - which is the precedent that concerns me.

That again isn’t true. Why do those who think he should have been suspended don’t argue the incident and come up with over emotive statements He went for the ball like everyone has forever. He got there 4 hundreds of a second late. He ran hard at the ball. He didn’t jump into the contest. He turned his body at contact. Everyone of those things are taught from a young age. There was unavoidable contact and sadly Clark got badly injury. That’s footy. That’s a contact sport

 

[plugger66]

I used to have a DVD of the 1966 GF. It was like a different sport to what footy was like in the 1990s. It's been 20+ years since I watched it but if I remember correctly there was no out on the full or was it free kick off last kick. They seemed to have no real system and the ball pinged around. I also watched some footage someone put up of a 1920s game and it was even more insane. They just seemed to roost the ball as high as they could in the air with no direction and then all leaped at it like under 9s. There was no order and free kicks looked like random calls.

Footy is constantly evolving and with brain studies it will get further and further from that head bashing style of the 1970s and 1980s. Old guys will have to adjust like they did with zones and uber defences.

Yep already answered that. Rules change every year or nearly every year. The game is better for it. That doesn’t mean you change the game completely to avoid injuries because that would the high mark goes running against the flight of the ball like roo goes and I this case attacking a loose ball from further back than an opponent goes even though you think you could maybe get there first or the ball that can bounce anywhere ask Milne bounces towards you but you have slowed down to make some imaginary tackle.

 

[plugger66]

No chance my kids play footy.

Is cricket ok? Footy is a very safe sport. Look at all the girls who play it now. The only real danger for girls that started late is they haven’t learn to protect themselves as good as guys. My daughter played school footy. She was useless but I did not give the danger or lack of a second thought. More dangerous going to a nightspot and popping pills and unfortunately most will do it and as a parent you can’t stop it. I know which one I’d rather they do.