Player Watch #50 Marlion Pickett

[Dr Tigris]

The problem is the AFL are never accountable. If they or the umpires are ever criticised they just whack the club with massive fines. We have already been hit hard by AFL fines with the COVID breaches last season which also affect our soft cap. Its a no win situation, the AFL are always right.

Yes. But right now it would be fairly straightforward to show that umpiring etc is all over the place.

It would be easy to do some research, if you were allowed to talk to the umpires, coaches and players to determine the state of play re the rules. I've done that sort of thing in other circumstances many times. A professional social science researcher would do this one quite easily. It's just that the AFL will not open up to scrutiny. All it takes is the first rock to dislodge and then an avalanche comes down. Seriously if a bunch of us nuffies got together and did some work, like I described, we could easily get the stats together to show the whole thing is a joke (Well I'm assuming the result - it may be that it's all just fairly random). Just have to work to a plan - triangulation of evidence and a serious thorough research plan and it'd be easy. Do it properly and the AFL couldn't shoot it down. Whether any journo would take it up, I don't know. But you want clicks then evidence that it's all badly out of whack would get you so many clicks.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Said it very well.

The situation is now ridiculous. Yes the Tigers are getting it worse than anyone. But it seems others are also getting crazy sh*t as well.

I really wonder what the umps think. They basically have to adjudicate to a set of rules that are constantly changing, in 1) the actual rules, what's allowed and what's not, and 2) how to interpret the rules that are in the book. And then not only on a yearly basis, but weekly and even within a particular week. You'd be basically guessing half the time as to what is legal and what isn't. And I guess trying to make the boss happy.

It would be quite easy to get footage of our KPFs and the oppo ones and pick all contests - cause they are all on the tv footage. Pick out all the potential frees and then ask the question. e.g. Balta hits someone's shoulder and it's a free. So why aren't the other 53 times the other KPFs have their shoulder hit not r=frees. And you'd be able to get quite clear stats as to the severity of each potential offence and the number of them. Easy to do analysis and ask the question.

The only reason you wouldn't do that is if you thought that the AFL would come down harder, and the other clubs wouldn't fight for fairness.

Once a club or two comes out I reckon that the floodgates will open and change will come. But who wants to be the first to be shot.

Well said DT.

To add, I think the great beauty of Australian Rules Football, unlike a lot of other sports, is that it was a sport that just evolved naturally, it wasn’t “designed.” From the first recorded contests in the 1850’s rules were implemented to refine the game, perhaps to help the game make sense and unfold fairly. So rule changes made sense for the sport. You brought people from overseas, they watched and loved it. You explained to them a player has to kick or handpass the ball, but it cannot be thrown, etc etc. These were some of the foundations of the sport and what gave it such great visual appeal. It was also a great sport to play. There weren’t a lot of highly technical rules. Certain rules have always been introduced to make the sport flow better, out of bounds on the full rule being one example or the introduction of the centre square. But the fundamental things never really altered, you have to dispose of the ball by kicking or punching it, and you could legally tackle above the knees and below the shoulders.

Now we have fundamental rules being changed on whims not because they are a natural evolution of the game, but in order to achieve specific commercial aims etc. So you are now allowed to throw the ball, so long as while you are throwing it it makes any contact with the fist of your opposite hand. In my opinion not enough has been made of this. With no open discussion this has just been changed because one or two people think it should be. The sport is worth more than that. It is worth more than Gil McLachlan telling Stephen Hocking we need to do whatever is required to speed the game up and Stephen Hocking saying I’ve got it, you don’t have to handball any more you can throw it, but you have to make the throw look vaguely like a handball. Gil: “yes, great, let’s run with that.”

That is making a mockery of what is a brilliant sport with spectacularly good fundamental elements that have stood the test of 170 odd years, just due to instant commercial pressures and issues with the flow of the game. Change things to enable the game to flow better, I have no issue with that. Do not sacrifice the great fundamentals of a brilliant sport to achieve it. When you start doing that you end up with things that don’t make any sense at all, like being allowed to throw the ball so long as you sort of make it look you have punched it. What the f*ck is that? That is not how Australia should operate. And I think this sort of reactiveness is now running through a lot of the AFL decision making, and Stephen Hocking seems to be at the heart of a lot of it.

Imagine trying to explain to someone from another planet it is fine to cause a severe facial injury by smashing someone with your forearm in certain circumstances, but it is not fine to apply a legal tackle if it results in someone accidentally hitting their head on the ground, partly as a result of their own actions. They would get back in their spacecraft and head back to their own planet and say “those campaigners on earth have gone mad."

 

[tiger_tough]

Blues are gonna appeal plowmans suspension. We should too. Then drop him anyway.

campaigners.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Blues are gonna appeal plowmans suspension. We should too. Then drop him anyway.

campaigners.

I agree we should appeal. I don’t agree Marlion should be dropped, though it would be a funny troll.

 

[Philth]

No surprises the arsewipes held up the decision.

F@ck the AFL is a crap organisation.

FFS you mob, read the part in bold above.
Did any of you SERIOUSLY think he was gonna get off?

I had a good look again at the incident yesterday and would have been ******* delighted if it got down graded.
There was always very little chance.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Well said DT.

To add, I think the great beauty of Australian Rules Football, unlike a lot of other sports, is that it was a sport that just evolved naturally, it wasn’t “designed.” From the first recorded contests in the 1850’s rules were implemented to refine the game, perhaps to help the game make sense and unfold fairly. So rule changes made sense for the sport. You brought people from overseas, they watched and loved it. You explained to them a player has to kick or handpass the ball, but it cannot be thrown, etc etc. These were some of the foundations of the sport and what gave it such great visual appeal. It was also a great sport to play. There weren’t a lot of highly technical rules. Certain rules have always been introduced to make the sport flow better, out of bounds on the full rule being one example or the introduction of the centre square. But the fundamental things never really altered, you have to dispose of the ball by kicking or punching it, and you could legally tackle above the knees and below the shoulders.

Now we have fundamental rules being changed on whims not because they are a natural evolution of the game, but in order to achieve specific commercial aims etc. So you are now allowed to throw the ball, so long as while you are throwing it it makes any contact with the fist of your opposite hand. In my opinion not enough has been made of this. With no open discussion this has just been changed because one or two people think it should be. The sport is worth more than that. It is worth more than Gil McLachlan telling Stephen Hocking we need to do whatever is required to speed the game up and Stephen Hocking saying I’ve got it, you don’t have to handball any more you can throw it, but you have to make the throw look vaguely like a handball. Gil: “yes, great, let’s run with that.”

That is making a mockery of what is a brilliant sport with spectacularly good fundamental elements that have stood the test of 170 odd years, just due to instant commercial pressures and issues with the flow of the game. Change things to enable the game to flow better, I have no issue with that. Do not sacrifice the great fundamentals of a brilliant sport to achieve it. When you start doing that you end up with things that don’t make any sense at all, like being allowed to throw the ball so long as you sort of make it look you have punched it. What the f*ck is that? That is not how Australia should operate. And I think this sort of reactiveness is now running through a lot of the AFL decision making, and Stephen Hocking seems to be at the heart of a lot of it.

Imagine trying to explain to someone from another planet it is fine to cause a severe facial injury by smashing someone with your forearm in certain circumstances, but it is not fine to apply a legal tackle if it results in someone accidentally hitting their head on the ground, partly as a result of their own actions. They would get back in their spacecraft and head back to their own planet and say “those campaigners on earth have gone mad."

I agree.

The only bright spot is that some of the media are starting to say similar things, but less eloquently and forcefully. Braking with the AFL is too hard. This crap can't go on ... can it?

 

[chriso11]

Marlion high tackle with accidental contact to the head. Starcevich joggs it off - 1 week

Dangerfield elbows Vlaustin face knocking him out - nothing to see here, move on

 

[Muddiemoose]

Another issue is match day reports from the umpires
When it happens it forces the mrp to look at incidents they wouldn’t look at otherwise

For whatever reason the umpire identified pickets incident that deemed reportable but not the incidents prior

They need to scrap match day reports all together and just leave it all for the mro to scrutinise because it’s to easy for umpires to get sucked in to players milking the contract or going off players reactions as to it’s actually a reportable incident

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I agree.

The only bright spot is that some of the media are starting to say similar things, but less eloquently and forcefully. Braking with the AFL is too hard. This crap can't go on ... can it?

I bloody well hope not DT. I am probably ranting a bit but some of this stuff from the AFL is really getting up my nostrils. I played a lot of local footy. We have all seen what Pickett did played out 100 times, a player cops a whack the ump doesn’t spot he fires up and takes it out on the next player he tackles. There is a bit of push and shove but deep down nobody minds because what they just saw happen they know makes sense. It is a natural instinctive human reaction. If Pickett maimed Starcevich, then sure, come down on him. He didn’t. Pickett did something that isn’t bad for the "look of the game” because even the proverbial *"smallest child on the Watershed” would see what happened and understand why it happened, and not be disturbed by it.

What is bad for the look of the game, is things that do not make sense.

And potential to cause injury shouldn’t be misused like this as a go to phrase to justify suspending anyone you want to suspend because they almost did something they might later regret. It should be reserved for cases where the act is truly dangerous.

*From the Banjo Paterson poem - How Gilbert Died.

"There's never a stone at the sleeper's head,
There's never a fence beside,
And the wandering stock on the grave may tread
Unnoticed and undenied;
But the smallest child on the Watershed
Can tell you how Gilbert died….."

 

[VB_longneck]

Blues are gonna appeal plowmans suspension. We should too. Then drop him anyway.

campaigners.

i read a blooze post last night that said pickett is a spud and will get off cos he plays for richmond and ploughedman is a star player and gets suspended cos he plays for carlton

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Another issue is match day reports from the umpires
When it happens it forces the mrp to look at incidents they wouldn’t look at otherwise

For whatever reason the umpire identified pickets incident that deemed reportable but not the incidents prior

They need to scrap match day reports all together and just leave it all for the mro to scrutinise because it’s to easy for umpires to get sucked in to players milking the contract or going off players reactions as to it’s actually a reportable incident

To be fair to the umps my first thoughts on seeing the incident live on TV were jeez Marlion hasn’t left much on the tee there, which is what the umps acted upon. But very quickly replays were shown which showed this was a much more benign incident than it first appeared.

But you are correct, scrap match day reports, and it removes thee optical illusion reports.

 

[Grrr]

To be fair to the umps my first thoughts on seeing the incident live on TV were jeez Marlion hasn’t left much on the tee there, which is what the umps acted upon. But very quickly replays were shown which showed this was a much more benign incident than it first appeared.

But you are correct, scrap match day reports, and it removes thee optical illusion reports.

Playing the devil's advocate, there used to be an 'unduly rough play' rule in incidents like Pickett's. You could argue he had only one intention, to hit him hard after he got rid of the ball. Pretty unnecessary regardless of the hit he copped a moment before, tribunerals don't take that into acccount. Yes he missed him, but I always thought he'd get a week for it.

 

[DickieKnee]

To be fair to the umps my first thoughts on seeing the incident live on TV were jeez Marlion hasn’t left much on the tee there, which is what the umps acted upon. But very quickly replays were shown which showed this was a much more benign incident than it first appeared.

But you are correct, scrap match day reports, and it removes thee optical illusion reports.

The fact Starcevich went to ground and played dead for 30 seconds didnt help Marlion.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Playing the devil's advocate, there used to be an 'unduly rough play' rule in incidents like Pickett's. You could argue he had only one intention, to hit him hard after he got rid of the ball. Pretty unnecessary regardless of the hit he copped a moment before, tribunerals don't take that into acccount. Yes he missed him, but I always thought he'd get a week for it.

In the world I inhabit Grrr, you get suspended for things you do that are across a certain line. You don’t get suspended for acts that appear at first glance to be across that line but weren’t. I would agree what Pickett did was somewhere near the limits of acceptability, but you don’t expect to get fined for going 100kph in a 100kph zone, just because it is near the limit of what is acceptable.

Even if the AFL argues it was just on the wrong side of the line, then they have a gaping hole in their system because one that was demonstrably worse happened to Pickett in the very same passage of play.

 

[smasha]

The way the media turned that incident into Everest shows how corrupt the footy world is now.

Short copped the same from the dirty Lions campaigner but NO talk from the media.

Uneffinbelievable.

Reminded me of that Caddy pre game when the media went all in,was a serial killer by the end of the week but that's the Richmond hatin' media for ya,they will never change,suck off oppos for a hundred years while trying to find ways to put down the Tiger.

Unshackle your clamps Tiger from the poachers(media)

 

[Philth]

Playing the devil's advocate, there used to be an 'unduly rough play' rule in incidents like Pickett's. You could argue he had only one intention, to hit him hard after he got rid of the ball. Pretty unnecessary regardless of the hit he copped a moment before, tribunerals don't take that into acccount. Yes he missed him, but I always thought he'd get a week for it.

Lions were playing like a bunch of dogs, Pickett had had enough and wanted to hurt someone.
He did. Like you I always thought he'd get suspended.

 

[Grrr]

In the world I inhabit Grrr, you get suspended for things you do that are across a certain line. You don’t get suspended for acts that appear at first glance to be across that line but weren’t. I would agree what Pickett did was somewhere near the limits of acceptability, but you don’t expect to get fined for going 100kph in a 100kph zone, just because it is near the limit of what is acceptable.

Even if the AFL argues it was just on the wrong side of the line, then they have a gaping hole in their system because one that was demonstrably worse happened to Pickett in the very same passage of play.

Agreed totally, but inconsistency is one of their more consistent maxim's so can't say I am surprised. Plenty of ammunition and points to prove next time we meet.

 

[tora tora tora]

As I watch replays to analyse free kicks in our games, I'm starting to wonder how 3 umpires CAN pick up Richmond infringements, RCD's infinitesmal contact in a ball up situation, always able to pick up jumper grabs but CANT see high contact to Pickett, a knee to Vlas head by Daniher while making no contact with the ball, CANT see that Dusty hasn't fended off Robinson, he's just been tacked without prior. This was right in front of the umpire who'd just bounced the ball.
Starting to get p'd off.
Adjudicate properly and Pickett aint getting frustrated & suspended.

 

[jesterx]

Pickett: Potential to cause injury = 1 week
Dangerfield: Actually causing an injury and knocking a bloke out for 2 mins = all good, not even a fine.

I've also got my hands on leaked footage of the tribunal deliberation process, please don't share around i could get in trouble:

 

[Sol23]

No way Pickett should have got anything for that. The AFL can’t even use common sense. One of the worst decisions.
On a side note blooze should be happy coz plowman is a DUD!!!!!!

 

[Not Important]

Blues are gonna appeal plowmans suspension. We should too. Then drop him anyway.

campaigners.

be surprised if the blues win that. plowman could easily have attempted to punch the pill as the great jack said on afl 360 last night.

 

[tiger_tough]

be surprised if the blues win that. plowman could easily have attempted to punch the pill as the great jack said on afl 360 last night.

Yeah but should that really be the difference between nothing and a 2 week suspension? The ball was his primary objective, we shouldn't be forcing that out of the game.

The notion that he shouldn't have braced for impact is laughable, would we prefer two blokes concussed rather than one? It was literally at the last split second he tucked in to protect himself, not to hurt O'Meara.

Hope he gets off.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Yeah but should that really be the difference between nothing and a 2 week suspension? The ball was his primary objective, we shouldn't be forcing that out of the game.

The notion that he shouldn't have braced for impact is laughable, would we prefer two blokes concussed rather than one? It was literally at the last split second he tucked in to protect himself, not to hurt O'Meara.

Hope he gets off.

I think you are spot on here. One week on no penalty. 50-50 in my eyes. He runs in a straight line for the ball and never deviates and at the very last minute he realises O’Meara is not contesting the ball the way he expected so he has to brace for the collision. It is not his fault O’Meara displayed no awareness of the looming contest(why I don’t know.). As I have written before, when bumping, lead with the hip but in this case it is debatable whether that was even possible at such late notice.

 

[chriso11]

If the AFL are so serious on head injury, why don’t they mandate that players wear a head guard ? The Caleb Daniel / rugby player style head guard. This won’t solve everything but could reduce severity of injuries. Certainly would be an easier fix than expecting players to lay the perfect tackle. Players wear mouth guards and sometimes shin guards already… woudl only follow that logic

 

[Bojangles17]

Blues are gonna appeal plowmans suspension. We should too. Then drop him anyway.

campaigners.

They’re a running joke with their appeals, remember the AFLW one with prepakis pile drives hosking head into the ground and the ********s appealed it , umm hello wtf for . Same same , NFI