- Apr 10, 2013
- 7,092
- 18,089
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- East Fremantle
I absolutely hte Danger, but I'm happy her got off, for the long term nature of the game.
Players who openly play a contact sport, do so knowing the risks of injury are there, even if the game is played corectly and legally.
They should even sign a waiver as part of their playing contract acknowledging this to some degree.
To try and stop injuries by outlawing legal footbal acts, based simply off the outcome of the receiving players is simply ludicrous.
Dangerfields tackle was one action, one motion, no driving motion (more of a 'falling' motion) and there is no law against a tackle going to ground.
Everything about it was a legal tackle, and HTB should have been awarded.
What people don't realise, the more we continue to suspend and penalise the tackling player, the more incentive their is for the ball carrier to continue to take on the tackle. I can gauruntee you, if those tackles were called HTB (along with all the others that should be), the player with the ball wouldn't be so incline to take on the tackle, and therefore, wouldn't find themselves in a position of being hurt so regularly.
The lack of rewarding the tackler with HTB is encouraging the ball carrier to take on the tackle at all costs, PUTTING THEMSELVES IN DANGEROUS POSITIONS more often than not, IMO the duty of care has to sit with the player with the ball as much as it sits with the tackler!
Players who openly play a contact sport, do so knowing the risks of injury are there, even if the game is played corectly and legally.
They should even sign a waiver as part of their playing contract acknowledging this to some degree.
To try and stop injuries by outlawing legal footbal acts, based simply off the outcome of the receiving players is simply ludicrous.
Dangerfields tackle was one action, one motion, no driving motion (more of a 'falling' motion) and there is no law against a tackle going to ground.
Everything about it was a legal tackle, and HTB should have been awarded.
What people don't realise, the more we continue to suspend and penalise the tackling player, the more incentive their is for the ball carrier to continue to take on the tackle. I can gauruntee you, if those tackles were called HTB (along with all the others that should be), the player with the ball wouldn't be so incline to take on the tackle, and therefore, wouldn't find themselves in a position of being hurt so regularly.
The lack of rewarding the tackler with HTB is encouraging the ball carrier to take on the tackle at all costs, PUTTING THEMSELVES IN DANGEROUS POSITIONS more often than not, IMO the duty of care has to sit with the player with the ball as much as it sits with the tackler!
