-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Insightful Media Coverage
- Thread starter Wadsworth
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
King needs to get off his high horse, the incident they were discussing was as fair as it comes, McKay didn't even bump him, was just an unfortunate collision. Need to eradicate species and all sorts of other essential parts of the game with the same logic he's using.
He's playing devil's advocate and I get where he's coming from. Too many grey areas when it needs to be black and white, one way or another.
Nah he was just being a flog full stop, acting high and mighty calling for McKay to get banned for doing the exact same thing that hunter Clark did, going hard at it with nothing but eyes for the ball. It's a contact sport and someone got injured unfortunately and the only thing McKay could've done to avoid it was to just let Clark win the ball. Watch the replay again, he did nothing wrong and didn't even bump, just went straight at the ball. We need to start suspending players every time someone is injured if this is a suspendable offence, ban species, ban tackling too.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Matera92
Brownlow Medallist
Had a post about this in the other media thread but not sure what Kings point is here.
You can't legislate head knocks out of the game unless you take all contact out of the game.
How casual he is about suspending a player who's done absolutely nothing wrong is pretty disappointing.
You can't legislate head knocks out of the game unless you take all contact out of the game.
How casual he is about suspending a player who's done absolutely nothing wrong is pretty disappointing.
Genuine buffoon
- Apr 3, 2010
- 4,412
- 8,410
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Philly Eagles, Boston Red Sox
I will say coaches at lower levels my 16 year old nephews game a kid copped a knock to the melon it was the oppo coach who saw it and told the umpire to stop for our kid, both coaches and medical went out (kid was pretty bad ambos came in for a few nights)
larrikin
Moderator
- Moderator
- #3,208
Thought he was just talking about the impact of concussions in general, and Dan's example showed how it can impact life/footy. The fact that that particular contest was not one that would be resolved by any suspension or rule change I thought was pretty irrelevant and self-evident.
- Apr 30, 2015
- 15,781
- 28,294
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Revolutionary stuff from the Eagles. Allowing goalkicking practice!
www.afl.com.au
Eagles' accuracy no fluke, Tigers' season still 'spluttering'
Adam Simpson has praised his side after its thrilling comeback win over Richmond
www.afl.com.au
I think Kingy made a reasonable point that it's more about coaching. Mackay came in from a long way to contest the ball, but he could have pulled up & gone for a tackle instead.
It's really difficult one though because it was a great contest & fair imo.
But after watching DV's video it's clear the long lasting impact of concussions truly are brutal.
AFL360 did a pretty good job of the game and narrative from the Tigers game. My expectations were low, it has to be said, but the did ok all things considered - nice montage, Eagles back in the hunt, Kennedy best snap kick for goal in the game etc. They also put a full stop on the length of the kick debate - 14.5m - and said they wouldn't expect, nor want, that to be called as too short.
Last edited:
- Aug 16, 2009
- 721
- 1,175
- AFL Club
- West Coast
His point came across more that if we are serious about concussion then we have to coach and suspend some of the hardness out of the game.
We all love guys going in at full speed and never pulling out, in fact most of us would be on here calling for them to be dropped if they pulled out of a contest... but the long term impact is pretty huge for some of these guys and not just those at the top level. It's a worthwhile debate in my opinion from a player safety perspective - and a legal obligation perspective for the AFL.
I don't particularly like the concept as takes away from what is great about our game but understand why he's raising it.
Just grandstanding IMO, it was an unfortunate accident in a contact sport, you can't legislate things like that out of the game. Where was this discussion when English missed multiple weeks due to Naughton going for a speccie and taking out his jaw? If you want to eradicate that sort of potential for heavy high contact then he should've been arguing against doing that sort of thing as well. If Mackay is suspended it's not going to change how any players acts in a do or die situation for their team, particularly a final. No player is going to go 10% less when they're purely playing the ball just to mitigate any potential impact that they might have with another player when there is a free ball to be won. It's idiotic.
I think King had a perfectly valid point he raised and the discussion needs to be had. I completely disagree with his conclusion though and take the view it is a contact sport and it was a fair contest and if we take away that, we may need to take away pack marks (with knees into the back of the head), jumping too high, in case you do an Oscar etc. If two people fairly compete for the ball, accidents may happen and its the risk people take playing a contact sport. But it's a fair point to discuss because the implications of concussion can be catastrophic.
Fair enough to have the discussion but he's making the point for a blanket ban on any incident where someone is injured where 2 people fairly go hard at the ball. Mackay did nothing malicious or negligent, he was just beaten to the ball by a millisecond by someone who's head was lower than his.
I agree with your conclusion re the incident. Just not the criticism of King as he is just giving his view on it given the seriousness of the concussion issue. It’s a messy situation for all contact sports.
He was coming across as heavy handed and borderline rude the way he was talking down to the other hosts, one was montagna from memory, if they didn't agree that he should be banned.
- Thread starter
- #3,218
I think this is a really important discussion that needs to be had, and one that doesn't carry any easy or perfect answers.
The more we learn about collisions in sport (not even limited to concussions, but simply repeated collisions), the more it is important to consider to options to protect players' long term futures.
Being unable to legislate out of the game doesn't mean that we are unable to reduce the risk of certain events. We don't need to think about things in absolutes but can consider the nuances of probability. And again, I don't know what the right answers are, I don't know where we reach the right balance of trade-offs here. It's easy to take the view that players accept the risk of collisions by choosing to play the sport, but this is important enough to really consider every option to protect the players' long term well-being.
Where can we make worthwhile changes to the game to make material improvements in the players' level of risk? It's genuine question. And it's a lot more tricky to answer when we spend a bit of time considering all of the alternatives.
Matera92
Brownlow Medallist
I'm sorry but this smacks as a post written by someone who hasn't played this sport at a high level (this isn't a dig).
You can't ask players to pick and choose when they are going to commit 100% to a moment in a game when they are messaged all day every day that they have to give everything of themselves to their skills, training, work ethic, and buy in of the game plan. Its completely counter intuitive and just results in a player who's unable to be decisive and make the split second decisions required of an athlete at an elite level.
Hesitation gets you hurt more than anything in this game.
The only way to remove concussions from the game is to remove all physical contact. No bumps, no tackles, no high marks.
Nobody is forcing players to play AFL, everyone who pulls on the boots knows there's a chance they could get hurt and its something they have to take into account when pursing this game as a career.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
I'm not suggesting being indecisive at all.
He made the decision to charge in to contest the ball.
He quite as easily could have made the alternate decision to charge in to tackle & stop Clark advancing the ball.
Your post smacks of someone unwilling to let go of the past & how the game used to be played.
Seriously, watch DV's interview. It will change your whole view of the game & this contest in particular.
Matera92
Brownlow Medallist
I've watched his interview, it's heart breaking.
I've had at least four concussions during my playing days that I look back on that scare the hell out of me.
Two games I apparently played out, I cannot to this day tell you who I was even playing that day, they are complete blanks of time.
When I was 14 I was knocked out cold in a tackle where my head left a 3ft long divot from being tackled from behind and driven forward with my arms pinned while I was at full pace. I was stretchered off and remember waking up in the car park. I probably should have gone to hospital but different times and instead my Dad found me collapsed in the shower an hour later.
I understand full well the seriousness of the issue.
I am a massive supporter of getting rid of the behind the play hits, the shirtfronts designed to hurt players, sling tackles and the such.
However, there comes a point where you cannot remove all injuries to the head without irrevocably changing the fabric of the game and we are rapidly approaching that point.
If you start punishing players for playing the ball, and incidentally injuring another player in the process then you may as well do away with all physical contact because that's where that slope ends.
People get hurt playing AFL, it's a sad reality but it is the reality.
I've seen the interview and it's quite confronting, but that doesn't change the facts. When he decided to charge in towards the ball he didn't know clark would beat him by a millisecond to the ball, you have to make decisions in an instant and commit to them or that leads to indecisiveness, which in turn leads to hesitation, which in turn can lead to further injuries. It's asking too much of players when they're trained and conditioned for years to go hard at the ball, to then also consider whether if they think their opponent may beat them to the ball by a millisecond that they then have to change their course of action in an instant otherwise risk being liable for the other players injury. What if the top of Clarks head collected Mackays jaw and broke Mackays jaw instead and Clark was more or less unscathed? Does the argument flip to banning Clark instead, in this situation where the outcome was decided by hundredths of a second, and both players doing nothing illegal?
Huge fan of the Ask Simmo segment we have this year but do we really need Gossage for it?
Why can't Simmo just read the question and answer?
Why can't Simmo just read the question and answer?
- Sep 8, 2011
- 11,844
- 12,828
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The fox coverage after the game was really good. King, obviously Simmos mate went on to praise us and Simpson. How he don’t get enough credit and that we only talk about west coasts travel record. No one else’s. First time I heard sense in that argument
Bender_
X
This has put me off watching it. Even his input in the Coast to Coast pod makes me cringe.
