Head High Contact - Worth it for a Free Kick?

[greatwhiteshark]

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.

I said you cannot duck your head, but I have no problem shrugging, dropping your knees, pushing the tackle high if you can against the weak tackler.

I take it you have been watching footy for not that long, you think the player should stand up rigid and let the tackler tackle him?

You want it stamped out, then tackle lower. Just unbelievable the coaches are not training their players to tackle lower.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

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

And why can't he do that? He has the ball. Don't tackle him high. You need to drop your tackle lower.

 

[Sully111]

And why can't he do that? He has the ball. Don't tackle him high. You need to drop your tackle lower.

They are tackling him lower mate. He drops down so it connects with his head. That's his sole intention. This really isn't that difficult to understand.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Add Zac Fisher to the list.

It was a shocking look to see him start to do it yesterday. Most Blues supporters I've seen have been condemning him for it too, but happy to give him the benefit of the doubt this week, because he hasn't been doing it prior to now. See what happens next week. Hopefully the players/coaches have a word to him during the week and he stops, but he's on the radar now.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

They are tackling him lower mate. He drops down so it connects with his head. That's his sole intention. This really isn't that difficult to understand.

Great play from him, he has the ball and the one with the ball gets the rewards. Don't tackle him high. Stop rewarding the s**t tacklers.

 

[Sully111]

Great play from him, he has the ball and the one with the ball gets the rewards. Don't tackle him high. Stop rewarding the s**t tacklers.

I'll say it again. They aren't tackling him high.

With all the talk of concussion and protecting players heads, having players intentionally draw contact to their head is ludicrous.

Players come in to tackle and wrap the ball up... part of the game... these cheating maggots fall to their knees so that a tackle that would have connected to their body, hits their head.

Your logic is prehistoric. Head trauma in sport being a huge issue isn't going away.

They're not sh*t tacklers. They're tackling legally. The cheats are milking it.

Tackling is part of our sport.

Go watch soccer if you want to watch a bunch of divers.

 

[Couch Coach]

I'll say it again. They aren't tackling him high.

With all the talk of concussion and protecting players heads, having players intentionally draw contact to their head is ludicrous.

Players come in to tackle and wrap the ball up... part of the game... these cheating maggots fall to their knees so that a tackle that would have connected to their body, hits their head.

Your logic is prehistoric. Head trauma in sport being a huge issue isn't going away.

They're not sh*t tacklers. They're tackling legally. The cheats are milking it.

Tackling is part of our sport.

Go watch soccer if you want to watch a bunch of divers.

What rule are these players breaking?

Players should be encouraged via the rules to protect their heads. Unfortunatly most players are worried about winning a game or getting a new contract rather than their quality of life post AFL.

 

[Sully111]

What rule are these players breaking?

Players should be encouraged via the rules to protect their heads. Unfortunatly most players are worried about winning a game or getting a new contract rather than their quality of life post AFL.

Staging

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I'll say it again. They aren't tackling him high.

With all the talk of concussion and protecting players heads, having players intentionally draw contact to their head is ludicrous.

Players come in to tackle and wrap the ball up... part of the game... these cheating maggots fall to their knees so that a tackle that would have connected to their body, hits their head.

Your logic is prehistoric. Head trauma in sport being a huge issue isn't going away.

They're not sh*t tacklers. They're tackling legally. The cheats are milking it.

Tackling is part of our sport.

Go watch soccer if you want to watch a bunch of divers.

They are not robots, tackle lower. you go in for the perfect tackle and the player with the ball drops his knees then it's no longer a good tackle.

Yes tackling is a part of the sport, learn to do it properly. Know your opponents and how they move. FFS these guys are suppose to be professionals.

The bloke with the ball can't be the cheat. He dictates the play. You have no idea. Typical of AFL (Auskick Footy league) supporters.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

What rule are these players breaking?

Players should be encouraged via the rules to protect their heads. Unfortunatly most players are worried about winning a game or getting a new contract rather than their quality of life post AFL.

Not breaking any rules. They have the ball. Tacklers are breaking the rules and then crying because they are no good at it.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

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.

that's just unrealistic. if your view is if it cant be adjudicated in the game than ignore it why even have a tribunal? or a match review committee?

Umpires will never officiate the game 100% as ruled. They make mistakes, more than we would like usually.

The only way staging/ducking is going to be phased out of the game is to rule on it via fines and suspension post game. it is utterly simple to do,if someone cared enough to do it.

You cannot expect an umpire to officiate it on the heat of the moment. they do not have the benefit of camera angles and slow mo replays.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

I said you cannot duck your head, but I have no problem shrugging, dropping your knees, pushing the tackle high if you can against the weak tackler.

I take it you have been watching footy for not that long, you think the player should stand up rigid and let the tackler tackle him?

You want it stamped out, then tackle lower. Just unbelievable the coaches are not training their players to tackle lower.

dropping your knees is literally the same thing as ducking your head.

 

[Couch Coach]

that's just unrealistic. if your view is if it cant be adjudicated in the game than ignore it why even have a tribunal? or a match review committee?

Umpires will never officiate the game 100% as ruled. They make mistakes, more than we would like usually.

The only way staging/ducking is going to be phased out of the game is to rule on it via fines and suspension post game. it is utterly simple to do,if someone cared enough to do it.

You cannot expect an umpire to officiate it on the heat of the moment. they do not have the benefit of camera angles and slow mo replays.

What happens when a player wins a free in the GF and kicks a goal. They win the GF by 5 points or less and then is fined/suspended after the match?

I would rather that decisions that impact the game be made during the game.

 

[matthew_s]

What happens when a player wins a free in the GF and kicks a goal. They win the GF by 5 points or less and then is fined/suspended after the match?

I would rather that decisions that impact the game be made during the game.

I would pay to see that and given how the eagles are travelling wont be them impacted!

 

[Outback Footy]

Ginnivan and Weightman won’t have AFL contracts though after that, that’ll be a massive loss to the game

Theyre in different categories, Flea stages at times, which should always be penalised but rarely is, if the AFL started retrospectively fining players for diving through the MRO (mostly happens too quick for the umps) itd stop. Probably wont happen though, imagine if the MRO fines a forward for staging after the game where his dive drew a free, he kicked a goal from it and his team won by less than 6? UPROAR!

Fleas also brilliant in the air (remember that hanger over the top of max last year?) and his defensive efforts are second to none. And hes infectiously happy out there. We absolutely love him.

Ginnivan has one trick, drop the knees and raise the arm, if the umps interpret that raised arm as prior, and cost him a free, or as the sign to not give head high, itd soon stop. Seems to do that every time, its a total tell. Toby and Joel and others drop into tackles, they dont always raise the arm like Ginnivan so might still sometimes get away with it but Hes made it a speciality

 

[owen87]

They are not robots, tackle lower. you go in for the perfect tackle and the player with the ball drops his knees then it's no longer a good tackle.

Yes tackling is a part of the sport, learn to do it properly. Know your opponents and how they move. FFS these guys are suppose to be professionals.

The bloke with the ball can't be the cheat. He dictates the play. You have no idea. Typical of AFL (Auskick Footy league) supporters.

Solution; tackle players around the knees, get pinged for tripping free kicks.

If a players sole intention is to draw a free kick, not to carry on the play, like Ginnivan and Weightman do (they'd fall flat on the ground if you don't tackle them) then it shouldn't be encouraged via a free kick.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Solution; tackle players around the knees, get pinged for tripping free kicks.

If a players sole intention is to draw a free kick, not to carry on the play, like Ginnivan and Weightman do (they'd fall flat on the ground if you don't tackle them) then it shouldn't be encouraged via a free kick.

I agree there has to be a limit but FFS some of you guys get upset for every head high contact these days and always blame the player who had the ball. 99% of the time it is a crap tackle. Concentrate on the poor tacklers and not on the odd 1% that might try and milk a kick.

 

[owen87]

I agree there has to be a limit but FFS some of you guys get upset for every head high contact these days and always blame the player who had the ball. 99% of the time it is a crap tackle. Concentrate on the poor tacklers and not on the odd 1% that might try and milk a kick.

It's definitely not 99% to 1%

Most AFL players know how to tackle, sometimes it's clumsily executed, or a situation where a ruckman is tackling a small forward. But there's a lot of players that deliberately drag tackles high, when they drag it high with 0 intention of attempting to continue the play then that's where they should be pinged.

Ginnivan and Weightman are the two most obvious examples lately where they drop at the knees and throw their head at the tackler such that they'd simply fall over if they weren't tackled.

Sure, maybe there's a 'skill' in the sense of having the timing to do it consistently, but there's also a skill in punching a bloke correctly, neither of which are football actions.

 

[The Devils Advocate]

What rule are these players breaking?

Players should be encouraged via the rules to protect their heads. Unfortunatly most players are worried about winning a game or getting a new contract rather than their quality of life post AFL.

They're not breaking rules, they're flaunting them, and risking their safety in the process.

 

[TheWeapon]

Ginnivan is a real headache for the rule makers. If he knows he is going to get tackled he basically dives forward with his head towards the ground or an opposition arm making it impossible to legally tackle him. He is also really trusting the opposition not to crash through him with his head in such a vulnerable position. I think if he gets the ball from upright position and chooses to then intentionally faceplant that should be his prior opportunity (second action) and holding the ball regardless of tackling technique. If players are upright trying to pick up the ball with their head low this is different from Ginnivan.

 

[Rob]

I said you cannot duck your head, but I have no problem shrugging, dropping your knees, pushing the tackle high if you can against the weak tackler.

I take it you have been watching footy for not that long, you think the player should stand up rigid and let the tackler tackle him?

You want it stamped out, then tackle lower. Just unbelievable the coaches are not training their players to tackle lower.

What's the difference between ducking your head and dropping the knees, lifting the arm, etc? Both are acts that have the sole purpose of trying to get a free kick for head high contact. Why is one (according to you) not OK, yet the others you encourage?

 

[greatwhiteshark]

What's the difference between ducking your head and dropping the knees, lifting the arm, etc? Both are acts that have the sole purpose of trying to get a free kick for head high contact. Why is one (according to you) not OK, yet the others you encourage?

So you think if I have the ball and you are about to tackle me then I should stand upright and let you tackle me? If I want to avoid you tackling me the only way is side stepping, shrugging, manoeuvre your body in anyway shape or form to avoid the tackle. Been that way for 100 years. If I want to lower myself to avoid you so what, don’t tackle me high.

No one has an answer why Selwood gets tackled 20 times a game, yet only two of them he pushes up high, they are weak tackles and great play by Selwood. The other 18 tackles are tough strong tackles that stick.

It is not about encouraging, don’t tackle me high. I have the ball and I decide the play not the tackler.

 

[wcv1475]

Haven’t read this whole thread, so if it has been asked before I apologise.



But the media have made a massive thing out of Ginnivan, but correct me if I am wrong didn’t Selwood make a career out of the head high with his dropping or raising of his arm to push the tackle up? I am guessing he is a 300 game legend now so it is not mentioned?



It is frustrating to listen to 360, On the Couch etc and Selwood and his head high controversy is not mentioned, it is as if Ginnivan pioneered it.

 

[Rob]

So you think if I have the ball and you are about to tackle me then I should stand upright and let you tackle me? If I want to avoid you tackling me the only way is side stepping, shrugging, manoeuvre your body in anyway shape or form to avoid the tackle. Been that way for 100 years. If I want to lower myself to avoid you so what, don’t tackle me high.

No one has an answer why Selwood gets tackled 20 times a game, yet only two of them he pushes up high, they are weak tackles and great play by Selwood. The other 18 tackles are tough strong tackles that stick.

It is not about encouraging, don’t tackle me high. I have the ball and I decide the play not the tackler.

I don't think you should do that, no. I just don't think you should be rewarded, as the bloke being tackled, if you choose to put your head in dangerous situations.

I think it's pretty simple: If you cause the high contact you should not get a free kick for high contact. I don't distinguish between ducking, dropping the knees, lifting the arm, or no doubt other techniques employed by players to draw the free. It's all stuff that players can do and that's their call. But they shouldn't be rewarded for it.

 

[Rob]

Question for those in the know:

In 2017 the AFL changed the rules to say that if a tackle is reasonable and the ball carrier is responsible for the high contact via a "shrug, drop, arm lift or duck, play on should be called".

Such a rule would condemn Ginnivan (and Weightman, and Selwood to be fair) to rarely getting a free kick.

I just had a look at the latest version of the rules and it's not there, so someone at the AFL decided to get rid of the rule. Why was that? And why not just bring that rule back?

This is the sort of stuff a barely competent journo should be asking the league.