Butler tackle on Blakey

[Stumpy Pete]

If Butler gets weeks for this then the HTB rule needs to be completely overhauled. The second a player is touched after ignoring an opportunity to dispose of the ball then it should be HTB. Asking players to tackle someone to the extent that they cannot dispose of the ball but also release their arm so that they can protect themselves as the tackle brings them to ground is just too much.

Those posting in this thread that a tackle needs to be “completed” - is it HTB of a player release an arm for duty of care and the tackled player the uses this as an opportunity to get of a dribble kick?

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Maddo11]

I don't think that you do.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

I also love watching the game. I love watching the best players play

But if players are missing weeks from concussions from dangerous tackles, then they've got to be stamped out.

There have been 19ish citations from dangerous tackles this year so far. Once the players adjust that number will drop to the roughly as many as players are getting done for bumps these days.

AFL actually being consistent with a plan for once and everyone is losing their minds.

The game will be fine. This is the same hand wringing from the "ban the bump" days

In the absence of changes to the HTB rule they have only half implemented the rule.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[cowboy18]

I thought it was a good and fair tackle, but once news of Blakey's subbing owing to an unrelated toe injury came out Butler's cards were marked. As was made perfectly clear by the AFL at the start of the season, in the modern game the toe is sacrosanct.

 

[Munga]

I thought it was a good and fair tackle, but once news of Blakey's subbing owing to an unrelated toe injury came out Butler's cards were marked. As was made perfectly clear by the AFL at the start of the season, in the modern game the toe is sasacrosanct

Rumour has it the AFL are about to really crack down on "this little piggy". Butler would be lucky to play again this season.

 

[Maddo11]

How long do the saints have to decide if they're going to challenge?

 

[Young Gun #6]

Disgraceful under any footy rules including the current laws that that is suspension worthy.

No sling
No double motion
No additional pull down
Arm released in the tackle
Didn’t raise him off the ground

Just a clean perfectly executed chase down tackle.

Blakey having the ball can not be in a ‘vulnerable’ position. Lack of awareness isn’t the same as being vulnerable off ball or unable to protect yourself.

Shocking decision.

Should certainly be overturned on challenge.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Hard to see how he avoids 2+ weeks for dumping Blakey in a tackle. Blakey subbed out.

this is bullshit by the afl. plain and simple. what is he supposed to do, not ******* tackle

* you afl

* you

 

[Crankyhawk]

Or with the amount of prior Blakey had, he could have just held him until the ump blew the whistle for htb, instead of dragging him down.

The afl do not want you bringing players to ground that can't protect themselves

how the hell does he just hold him, hes chasing full tilt, if he tries to brake momentum he doesn't catch blakey.

 

[Crankyhawk]

They're not my rules, it's what the AFL wants, it's how they've instructed umps to adjudicate tackles.

Yes it's cooked but that's how they want it done. Adapt or cop suspensions

or get the *ers in charge sacked.

 

[Fadge]

this is bullshit by the afl. plain and simple. what is he supposed to do, not ******* tackle

* you afl

* you

Yep, if he gets a week for this, players henceforth are meant to see a player running away from them and not bother to chase, because if they do chase and tackle, they'll both fall to the ground and have a 1% risk of getting suspended (reliant upon how the ball carrier falls), despite applying a perfect tackle.

 

[Fadge]

How long do the saints have to decide if they're going to challenge?

Of course they will challenge.

You're very outspoken on this - what should Butler have done in this scenario?

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Let's just ban the bump and the tackle, let's have touch football. What an exciting spectacle that would be.

 

[Maddo11]

Of course they will challenge.

You're very outspoken on this - what should Butler have done in this scenario?

I was genuinely asking, like, I don't know how long clubs have to decide whether to challenge or not.

Not taken Blakey down head first with enough force to make him need a hia

 

[Fadge]

I was genuinely asking, like, I don't know how long clubs have to decide whether to challenge or not.

Not taken Blakey down head first with enough force to make him need a hia

Except for the fact he didnt take him down head first.

 

[naysayer]

I also love watching the game. I love watching the best players play

But if players are missing weeks from concussions from dangerous tackles, then they've got to be stamped out.

There have been 19ish citations from dangerous tackles this year so far. Once the players adjust that number will drop to the roughly as many as players are getting done for bumps these days.

AFL actually being consistent with a plan for once and everyone is losing their minds.

The game will be fine. This is the same hand wringing from the "ban the bump" days

You're going to look stupid when this is thrown out at the tribunal in record time.

 

[tigerwill]

Bullshit report

 

[Tulip]

I was genuinely asking, like, I don't know how long clubs have to decide whether to challenge or not.

Not taken Blakey down head first with enough force to make him need a hia

So a player "needing an HIA", never mind passing it as Blakey apparently did, is now evidence enough for a charge?

 

[Maddo11]

So a player "needing an HIA", never mind passing it as Blakey apparently did, is now evidence enough for a charge?

There have been 18 suspensions for dangerous tackles this year, I'd bet half of them the player tackled played out the game.

From just last round, Taylor Adams played out the game, Duggan suspended. Walsh played out the game, Parker suspended.

Maybe read the thread first champ

 

[OnTheRocks]

This thread must be a joke?

/thread

In all seriousness its the op that is. It has form.

 

[naysayer]

Maybe read the thread first champ

Yeah it's been thrilling. I'll sum it up:

Upset Sydney fan argues run-of-the-mill tackle was inherently dangerous.

 

[westie]

Where are the AFLPA in all of this, sitting on their arses gazing at their navels? They are the ones that should be speaking up on behalf of all players who are watching the great game go down the drain. We are lemmings, faithfully turning up or tuning in every week to watch the contrived s**t that AFL football has become, only to go back and vent on BF. I can see that ex-AFLPA members would get a retirement gig in ASSIC, another collection of toothless tigers.

 

[Maddo11]

Saints to challenge Butler ban as Tribunal cases stack up - Saints to challenge Butler ban as Tribunal cases stack up

To the suprise of few.

 

[Paul Kersey]

How does the Merrett tackle get a pass in light of this and Sicily? Worst of the lot IMO.

 

[naysayer]

How does the Merrett tackle get a pass in light of this and Sicily? Worst of the lot IMO.

How? How? HOW?

I'll tell you how. Because Cincotta got back up unharmed. That's how. Tackling technique has nothing to do with it. If he'd been knocked out then Merrett is straight to the tribunal as well.