Player Watch #50 Marlion Pickett

Remove this Banner Ad

Newsflash people. The AFL wants the bump GONE. Don't believe anything else. Unfortunately if you bump in 2022, you are making a poor decision in the current meta of the game and umpiring.

I dont agree with it, but that's the game the AFL has created that we continue to support.

The risk is not worth the reward. No more bumps unfortunately.

And the mark too.
 
Yes. The game only stops for free kicks and 50m penalties. The rest of free play happens until one of the above happens. Ideally the umpires would like both most of the time, resulting in goals to keep the advertising $$$ coming in.

I mean they are trying outlaw the speccie due to potential head injury
 

Log in to remove this ad.

What will the woke AFL want next for the players too strap on fake breasts? or for the players to have a sex change FFS this world is seriously ducked up.

next will be no high contact at all allowed in marking contests, then after that crowd will be kicked out for booing
 
Newsflash people. The AFL wants the bump GONE. Don't believe anything else. Unfortunately if you bump in 2022, you are making a poor decision in the current meta of the game and umpiring.

I dont agree with it, but that's the game the AFL has created that we continue to support.

The risk is not worth the reward. No more bumps unfortunately.
99.9% of the players in the future will
be soft non bumping shiel/cerra types
 
I mean they are trying outlaw the speccie due to potential head injury
that one started a few years back with the unrealistic attempt rule (no contact with ball)
then the studs up

can see the speccie rule being tightened up to (drop the speccie knee to back/shoulder-free kick any team cept richmond)
 
that one started a few years back with the unrealistic attempt rule (no contact with ball)
then the studs up

can see the speccie rule being tightened up to (drop the speccie knee to back/shoulder-free kick any team cept richmond)

Yeah. They seem to be tightening it up.

Not far off everything being an unrealistic attempt unless you grab it.

Riewoldt might as well stay in the ground
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

end of the day dimmer probably just showing some tough love to marls
with his comments as best he reigns it in NOW rather than missing a big final

 
G
Hypothetical

A player takes the mark of the century but in doing so badly concusses a player due to their knees smacking into the back of their direct opponents skull.

A 'mark' is in the rules, it's an integral part of the game of AFL and it why supporters watch the game and why it excites them. So how will an injury in such a hypothetical be viewed, I bet it will be called an unfortunate accident.

However if applying the same methodology as was applied in the Pickett incident, the player taking the mark had full intention of climbing onto the other players shoulders using his knees, more luck than good management if he didn't connect with the players head.

Isn't this the same as a bump, a bump is allowable within the rules, its an iconic part of AFL that makes it unique and in most cases at full speed in the heat of the moment it is definitely more luck than good management that it's executed without the opposition incurring an injury. In Pickett's case his direct opponent wasn't injured.

Ultimately the attraction to supporters is that AFL is a high contact sport. The intention to reduce head trauma is certainly a valid one but it's akin to boxing rules being changed that you can punch your opponent but not hard enough to knock them out, it becomes a different sport.

Players participate in a professional high contact sport fully understanding the physical risks to their bodies. If the powers that be want to change that then the sport involved is changed forever.

In my view if you are going to apply penalties to players and effectively say in the case of a bump that the player in question had the choice not to bump, surely if the health and safety of players is the ultimate factor then the AFL cant cherry pick here, the same application of the rules has to apply in a marking contest. If this is the case then RIP AFL as we supporters have always known it.
Great reply. You mentioned Cherry picking and that is exactly what the AFL do. No way Marion misses a final for that. I get duty of care and reckon the current era is much better than the dinosaurs of the pre 90s where it was seen as tough to clock a guy behind play so he could brag to his mates over 20 pots. Those days are thankfully gone but I think Marlion did all he could to protect Moore and himself. If that results in a week then the bump is done and dusted and who knows what next. Maybe the tackle.
 
A martyr is over the top as an analogy. But he will be in the rooms and I have no doubt all the players will emotionally be supporting him, as he them.
They can draw inspiration from him and the jumper and take it all out on the bummers from the first bounce.
The bummers should be all fired up with their own issue all week, so the first 15 mins should be hot in the kitchen. The boys will fire up for Marlion and the jumper.
Every Richmond player this weekend should run out in guernsey no. 50.
 
What I don’t get is why in the last 5 to 10 years just about every bump ends up with contact to the head. Especially since players are deliberately not targeting the head. They know the consequences.

Am I not remembering the past correctly? Was there predominantly high contact then as well?

And I’m not talking about Byron Pickett or Leigh Matthews bumps; just the run of the mill.
 
Which bum lawyer was Richmond using?

Not one of these mob

View attachment 1403292
images
 
Which bum lawyer was Richmond using?

Not one of these mob

View attachment 1403292

our team basically argued every point from the rule book about why it could be excused from being classified medium but the tribunal and MRO don't bother with their own rule book they just base it on the "look" of the 200x slowmo video that's it
 
What I don’t get is why in the last 5 to 10 years just about every bump ends up with contact to the head. Especially since players are deliberately not targeting the head. They know the consequences.

Am I not remembering the past correctly? Was there predominantly high contact then as well?

And I’m not talking about Byron Pickett or Leigh Matthews bumps; just the run of the mill.
It’s based on new rules/interpretations brought in this year, AFL trying to protect themselves from future litigation surrounding CTE and concussion
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top