Head High Contact - Worth it for a Free Kick?

[matthew_s]

Has the bar for umpires really sunk that low where a correct call is celebrated due to how unexpected it is.

Have you been watching?

It has absolutely sunk that low.

 

[Sully111]

The only way to fix it is after the game.

Players who have clearly ducked to milk frees are suspended and fined.

The afl is either going to get serious about this or it will continue to spiral out of control.

It's the biggest problem in the game.

Coaches actually saying it's a skill.

 

[Wargreymon90]

I thought the umpires in the north/Collingwood game did a great job. Exactly what we want.

The whole “tacklers need to change their approach” is dangerous. Everyone will start doing it and will make the game unbearable

 

[HairyO]

I thought the umpires in the north/Collingwood game did a great job. Exactly what we want.

The whole “tacklers need to change their approach” is dangerous. Everyone will start doing it and will make the game unbearable

Dylan Moore had been doing it a bit for us too but yesterday didnt do it once. So maybe he watched the Pies game and thought it wasnt worth risking getting pinged.

What we need is umpires now doing it consistently and the AFL saying they want this happening. My fear is in 2 weeks we will be back to ducking and raising the arm and lowering the knees.

 

[Couch Coach]

Yeah poor form from Duckingwood today, even Pendles lowered himself and joined in.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Love the comments from Geelong supporters.

Joel Selwood was one of the earliest high profile shoulder shruggers, arm raisers and it's all fine for 15 years but when the next generation of players advance the technique to include hip drop / knee drop to get the body in a lower position it's suddenly poor form and needs to be stamped out.

The AFL should have sorted this out years ago and also players who "drive with the head".

The AFL needs to ensure rules are in place that encourage players to protect their head and discourages tacklers from deliberatly or via poor technique target the head.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

We can piss and moan about this forever and a day.

As long as umpires don't call ducking & diving, than players will keep on doing it.

This whole player honor system is a crock of s**t. I have seen players give an earful to someone who they think has dived on the field, than 30 mins plater do the exact same thing.

 

[perplexed]

Ginnivan and Pendelbury are just doing what the rules encourage them to. If it was Lindsay Thomas doing it, they would have changed the rule already.

The AFL claims to want to protect the head then rewards players who play for high contact. If you play for head high contact you shouldn't get a free. The AFL could fix this rule today.

 

[Engimal v3]

It's like eyepokes/nutshots in the UFC. It's technically illegal, but the ref never penalises it so you may as well take advantage and get a couple in

 

[hawkman]

Dylan Moore had been doing it a bit for us too but yesterday didnt do it once. So maybe he watched the Pies game and thought it wasnt worth risking getting pinged.

What we need is umpires now doing it consistently and the AFL saying they want this happening. My fear is in 2 weeks we will be back to ducking and raising the arm and lowering the knees.

He actually did it once and umpire called play on. Hopefully that happens more often going forward to all teams.

The only way to fix it is after the game.

Players who have clearly ducked to milk frees are suspended and fined.

The afl is either going to get serious about this or it will continue to spiral out of control.

It's the biggest problem in the game.

Coaches actually saying it's a skill.

It can be hard to differentiate between the players ducking for frees (Ginnivan) and those ducking to break tackles. Selwood for example is generally in the latter but then will play for a free occasionally

 

[HirdsTheWord]

The only way to fix it is after the game.

Players who have clearly ducked to milk frees are suspended and fined.

The afl is either going to get serious about this or it will continue to spiral out of control.

It's the biggest problem in the game.

Coaches actually saying it's a skill.

I 100% agree with this. Expecting an umpire to address it in real time is not going to happen, game is too fast.

Its so annoying because its so easy to fix. All the AFL has to do is review footage, like it already does. Issue $1,000 fines to people staging & ducking. If you get 2 x $1000 fines in the same season you automatically get suspended for 1 x game. Every further $1,000 there in is another game.

I mean the AFL already has the rules in place to actually officiate this. They just turn a blind eye to it which either means they don't care about playing for free kicks, or they don't have the balls to act on it.

 

[HairyO]

He actually did it once and umpire called play on. Hopefully that happens more often going forward to all teams.


It can be hard to differentiate between the players ducking for frees (Ginnivan) and those ducking to break tackles. Selwood for example is generally in the latter but then will play for a free occasionally

Either of those is still play on because the player with the ball did something to cause the tackle to go high.

Its then a matter of whether the player with the ball disposes of it, or the tackle sticks.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

He actually did it once and umpire called play on. Hopefully that happens more often going forward to all teams.


It can be hard to differentiate between the players ducking for frees (Ginnivan) and those ducking to break tackles. Selwood for example is generally in the latter but then will play for a free occasionally

Ducking to break tackles is a terrible skill, at least in the modern game. It invites head high contact at the players action and should not be rewarded. I cant fault the umpires because the games so fast but if the AFL wants to be serious about removing concussion type incidents from the game they need to punish poor skill post game.

The AFL cant have their cake and eat it too.

 

[Kwality]

Love the comments from Geelong supporters.

Joel Selwood was one of the earliest high profile shoulder shruggers, arm raisers and it's all fine for 15 years but when the next generation of players advance the technique to include hip drop / knee drop to get the body in a lower position it's suddenly poor form and needs to be stamped out.

The AFL should have sorted this out years ago and also players who "drive with the head".

The AFL needs to ensure rules are in place that encourage players to protect their head and discourages tacklers from deliberatly or via poor technique target the head.

Joel is such a prolific ball winner, he got more 'frees'.

 

[JyeDye]

I 100% agree with this. Expecting an umpire to address it in real time is not going to happen, game is too fast.

Its so annoying because its so easy to fix. All the AFL has to do is review footage, like it already does. Issue $1,000 fines to people staging & ducking. If you get 2 x $1000 fines in the same season you automatically get suspended for 1 x game. Every further $1,000 there in is another game.

I mean the AFL already has the rules in place to actually officiate this. They just turn a blind eye to it which either means they don't care about playing for free kicks, or they don't have the balls to act on it.

Actually disagree with this. It's very obvious in real time if the player is lowering his knees and ducking in. I can see it from 200m away. You're going to tell me an umpire 10m away can't? I get that they will make some mistakes but it's not that hard to see them. And as you said, they are already meant to be calling play-on so the AFL already expects the umpires to be handling this. Needs to be a new directive from the umpires boss for next year I think.

 

[Sully111]

I 100% agree with this. Expecting an umpire to address it in real time is not going to happen, game is too fast.

Its so annoying because its so easy to fix. All the AFL has to do is review footage, like it already does. Issue $1,000 fines to people staging & ducking. If you get 2 x $1000 fines in the same season you automatically get suspended for 1 x game. Every further $1,000 there in is another game.

I mean the AFL already has the rules in place to actually officiate this. They just turn a blind eye to it which either means they don't care about playing for free kicks, or they don't have the balls to act on it.

I think they need to go harder. It could be fixed in a month. Do it... get 2 weeks, plus at least a 5k fine. It they want to fix it, fix it. They have grounds because of the issues relating to concussion.

I'm talking blatant. People will say it's not black and white but that's rubbish. We know when people are doing it.

 

[Sully111]

Actually disagree with this. It's very obvious in real time if the player is lowering his knees and ducking in. I can see it from 200m away. You're going to tell me an umpire 10m away can't? I get that they will make some mistakes but it's not that hard to see them. And as you said, they are already meant to be calling play-on so the AFL already expects the umpires to be handling this. Needs to be a new directive from the umpires boss for next year I think.

Agree with this too. But if the excuse is it's too hard then footage needs to be looked at and players punished after the game. The odd free against won't stamp it out. It won't get the job done. This way there are no excuses. If the umpire spots it, pay a free against, but if they don't, at least there's still consequences.

It needs to be sorted, whatever it takes.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Actually disagree with this. It's very obvious in real time if the player is lowering his knees and ducking in. I can see it from 200m away. You're going to tell me an umpire 10m away can't? I get that they will make some mistakes but it's not that hard to see them. And as you said, they are already meant to be calling play-on so the AFL already expects the umpires to be handling this. Needs to be a new directive from the umpires boss for next year I think.

mate umpires get way too much wrong already in the game, i don't think we need to overburden them further. Do we have an issue with umpiring yes, but that's a whole different discussion.

I think this specific issue can be addressed post match.

 

[JyeDye]

mate umpires get way too much wrong already in the game, i don't think we need to overburden them further. Do we have an issue with umpiring yes, but that's a whole different discussion.

I think this specific issue can be addressed post match.

Of course the umpires will get some calls wrong, but it is literally their job to adjudicate the game. What’s the point of going and fining players for it post game when the damage is done? Are you saying they should still be paying them high, the player then gets to kick three goals from it and then after the game cops a fine? How’s that help the team actually playing the game. It’s simple, call it play-on, nothing more is needed.

 

[Couch Coach]

Joel is such a prolific ball winner, he got more 'frees'.

Current greats (300+ games)

D Mundy 368 games, 249 Frees for average 0.68 per game
S Pendlebury 349 games, 451 FF ave. 1.29 pg
J Selwood 347 games, 875 FF ave. 2.52 pg
L Franklin 332 games, 429 FF ave. 1.29 pg
T Boak 321 games, 327 FF ave. 1.02 pg
J Riewoldt 319 games, 305 FF ave. 0.96 pg
T Hawkins 318 games, 278 FF ave. 0.87 pg
S Hurn 314 games, 142 FF ave. 0.45 pg

Career Possessions
D Mundy 7,848
S Pendlebury 9,095
J Selwood 8,583
T Boak 7,738

If frees for had a correlation to "ball winner" then you would expect Pendlebury to have more frees then Selwood and Boak and Mundy to be closer.

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

A few things that haven't been mentioned here so far.

In recent years the umpires have extended prior opportunity so long that tackling a player around the hips is no longer and option because they get so long to dispose of the ball they will just give a handball eventually.

I've always though the high contact needs to be changed to forceful or dangerous high contact, so when Selwood does his shrug and the arm glances him it should just be play on.

Any contribution to a dangerous high tackle where the arm goes up(obvious cue) should be a free kick against. We need to protect the players from themselves. If they lower their body too much it's a kin to ducking and counts of prior opportunity and no head high should be paid. We've done well with stopping players ducking and charging into contact to protect players form themselves, no reason the same logic can't apply here.

 

[kozi]

Have you been watching?

It has absolutely sunk that low.

I think most would have read that as the rhetorical question it was.

 

[Kwality]

Current greats (300+ games)

D Mundy 368 games, 249 Frees for average 0.68 per game
S Pendlebury 349 games, 451 FF ave. 1.29 pg
J Selwood 347 games, 875 FF ave. 2.52 pg
L Franklin 332 games, 429 FF ave. 1.29 pg
T Boak 321 games, 327 FF ave. 1.02 pg
J Riewoldt 319 games, 305 FF ave. 0.96 pg
T Hawkins 318 games, 278 FF ave. 0.87 pg
S Hurn 314 games, 142 FF ave. 0.45 pg

Career Possessions
D Mundy 7,848
S Pendlebury 9,095
J Selwood 8,583
T Boak 7,738

If frees for had a correlation to "ball winner" then you would expect Pendlebury to have more frees then Selwood and Boak and Mundy to be closer.

My reference to 'frees'/Selwood is specific to the context, head high contact/shrugging off a tackle. Your numbers are irrelevant to that discussion.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Wow the game has really changed and now the supporters have as well.
The sport lost me when they decided to start blaming the player with the ball for head high contact.
I have the ball and I should be able to shrug, drop my knees, raise my arm and pretty much other than duck my head do anything I want. You the tackler have one job, don't get me high, if you do then that is a free kick. Never been complicated and players are doing what they have done for 100 years.

Rewarding the weak as piss tackler who has tackle raised by an arm lift is just pathetic, the tackle ended up high because your tackle was weak. Selwood as has been mentioned gets tackled 20 times a game, only one or two of those tackles (the weak ones) can he push up as high tackles, the rest are strong tackles that end up either with a stoppage or holding the ball. The ones ending up high are rightfully a free kick to Selwood. Don't reward the weak.

Now Ginnivan is now copping it for absolutely nothing, he is entitled when he goes for the ball to lower his body to get it, it is on the tackler to go even lower to make sure no high contact happens, the tacklers keep failing.

Ducking your head is something completely different to bending over to pick up the ball, people need to stop confusing these two things. You cannot pick up the ball without bending over and having your head low to the ground. It is on the tackler to not get him high in this instance.

I have been watching footy since the mid 70's and I cannot for the life of me see how the bloke with the ball should ever get blamed for high tackles. Rewarding the weak as piss tacklers is clearly what the fans want now. God help the game.

 

[Sully111]

Now Ginnivan is now copping it for absolutely nothing, he is entitled when he goes for the ball to lower his body to get it, it is on the tackler to go even lower to make sure no high contact happens, the tacklers keep failing.

He drops the knees when he already has the ball and is about to be tackled. Completely different thing.

 

[JyeDye]

Wow the game has really changed and now the supporters have as well.
The sport lost me when they decided to start blaming the player with the ball for head high contact.
I have the ball and I should be able to shrug, drop my knees, raise my arm and pretty much other than duck my head do anything I want. You the tackler have one job, don't get me high, if you do then that is a free kick. Never been complicated and players are doing what they have done for 100 years.

Rewarding the weak as piss tackler who has tackle raised by an arm lift is just pathetic, the tackle ended up high because your tackle was weak. Selwood as has been mentioned gets tackled 20 times a game, only one or two of those tackles (the weak ones) can he push up as high tackles, the rest are strong tackles that end up either with a stoppage or holding the ball. The ones ending up high are rightfully a free kick to Selwood. Don't reward the weak.

Now Ginnivan is now copping it for absolutely nothing, he is entitled when he goes for the ball to lower his body to get it, it is on the tackler to go even lower to make sure no high contact happens, the tacklers keep failing.

Ducking your head is something completely different to bending over to pick up the ball, people need to stop confusing these two things. You cannot pick up the ball without bending over and having your head low to the ground. It is on the tackler to not get him high in this instance.

I have been watching footy since the mid 70's and I cannot for the life of me see how the bloke with the ball should ever get blamed for high tackles. Rewarding the weak as piss tacklers is clearly what the fans want now. God help the game.

Possibly the worse take I've seen on this. Congrats.

If the tackles were 'stronger' they'd probably take Ginnivan's head off. Also most of these high free kicks are not when he's got his head over the ball. He gets the ball and then runs around for a second and then performs his technique. Good for him, he get's the free kick and goal, but it needs to be stamped out.

By your logic a player could pick the ball up and just straight headbutt someone and it should be a high free kick.