Is the hip and shoulder dead?

[blue_12]

No one, who is playing the game or has played the game, has a problem with getting hurt if it is within the confines of the 'rules'.

Making 'head high' contact is not, and it is a players duty of care to ensure this is the case. In Maxwell's situation, he made contact to the guys head and in the process broke his jaw. It has never been acceptable to make head high contact and used to be penalised with a free kick. Now it is reportable and every single player is aware of the rules and what is and isn't acceptable.

Executing the bump properly i.e. to his side or lower on his body, and Maxwell has no case to answer.

It is a contact sport so incidents like this where contact is unintentional are bound to happen. There was no malice intended, suspending maxwell will achieve nothing.

 

[Juddy88]

Agree with this. It was a good bump, he didn't throw the elbow out or anything and the only reason I think he should be suspended is that he got the guy in the head. If he hadn't have made high contact it would have been a case of "good hit...end of story"

But he did, and therefore it isn't.

 

[Seadog]

It's done. Maxwell executed a perfect hip and shoulder and will still get 2 weeks for it (3 with his bad record).

It wasn't perfect,he hit him in the head. If it was perfect he wouldn't have been charged.

 

[Juddy88]

The outcome was unfortunate..but imo that was a copybook hns and is a great attribute of our game. These AFL do gooders are ruining this game.

No it wasn't. It doesn't matter if you thought it was, by the rules, it wasn't.

It is a contact sport so incidents like this where contact is unintentional are bound to happen. There was no malice intended, suspending maxwell will achieve nothing.

Yes, contact is bound to happen. But when a player isn't going for the ball it is up to him to make sure there is no contact with the head/face.

Suspending Maxwell will stamp out illegal bumps like his, and force players to take more care in executing their bumps, which is a good thing.

 

[tigertiger]

I felt when i saw it that it was unnecessary the other collingwood player was behind the WC player and the ball was in front of them all. The bump looked like a cheap shot on a young player and totally unnecessary in the context of the play.

It was a cheap shot, it doesnt take courage to hit someone side on at full speed its no different to a sucker punch. I think the 3 weeks was justified.

 

[markr]

The hip and shoulder is being killed by the fact that in 95% of cases it's the wrong play. If the ball is lose go for the ball, if your opposition has the ball, tackle them and wrap them up. Maxwell should have shown some courage and put his head over the ball instead of taking the soft option.

As it is, he took himself out of the play, and impeded his teammate's run at the ball.

Someone mentioned Guerra putting on a hit in the finals. He went past the ball and laid a clean, legal bump on Higgins from the Dogs. The Dogs won the footy and kicked a goal. If he'd had the courage to win the ball himself that wouldn't have happened.

 

[magpie_militia]

It wasn't perfect,he hit him in the head. If it was perfect he wouldn't have been charged.

If Maxwell wasn't 10cm taller than McGinnity he wouldn't have been charged as he didn't leave the ground.

If McGinnity didn't receive a broken jaw, Maxwell wouldn't have been charged. If Maxwell had hit him with a full blown shoulder to the jaw, the kid would still be down (his head definitely wouldn't have snapped back as it did). This says to me that most of the contact was made to his chest.

Play on and harden up.

 

[kaij10]

Leigh Matthews suggested that the Hip and shoulder was slowing phased out by these new rules, he said this 10 years ago on channel Seven Tuesday footy shows.

How can you guarantee the safety of player when a hip and shoulder is executed?

Is Club teaching players on how to execute a hip and shoulder or brace themselves when a hip and shoulder is executed?

Does a player lack of awareness contribute to their injuries?

I hate to see the physical stuff taken out of our game. Is the duty of care clause is killing our game?

For God Sake! GET OVER IT. Mad Max copping 3 weeks is fair. This isn't the first time it's ever happened. The physical stuff is still there just the stupid stuff is being taken out. The rule is quite clear and contact was made to the head which resulted in a broken jaw. The way I saw it I felt contact was unnecessary. I find that is a major problem with Maxwell's game he goes to give a nice hip & shoulder but always end's up giving away a free kick and in this case given 3 weeks. So again get over it!

 

[krisholio14]

If Maxwell wasn't 10cm taller than McGinnity he wouldn't have been charged as he didn't leave the ground.

If McGinnity didn't receive a broken jaw, Maxwell wouldn't have been charged. If Maxwell had hit him with a full blown shoulder to the jaw, the kid would still be down (his head definitely wouldn't have snapped back as it did). This says to me that most of the contact was made to his chest.

Play on and harden up.

You may be coming from a one eyed perspective but I agree

 

[Gary7Ayres]

The ridiculous irony is in my son's Under 9's you're not allowed to tackle but you can bump. Where's the logic in that?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

There is no doubt that the front on, full forced hip and shoulder is all but dead.

It cannot be executed without significant risk of incidental head contact.

If you want to execute a hip and shoulder it will have to be side-on. If you are front on, it wont be worth the risk to lay a full forced bump, and the player will have to execute a block instead. In most cases, that will achieve the intended goal anyway of keeping the opponent away from the ball.

 

[magpie_militia]

...and the player will have to execute a block instead. In most cases, that will achieve the intended goal anyway of keeping the opponent away from the ball.

Except for when the oppposition steps around the block, and then the player is accused for squibbing the contest.

I hate footy getting this soft.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Except for when the oppposition steps around the block, and then the player is accused for squibbing the contest.

I hate footy getting this soft.

I didnt say I liked it either but clearly thats the way its heading.

However in a lot of cases, as I say, a full on bump is unneccesary. Generally you only need to do enough to buy yourself a second or two to ensure your team gets the ball. Upending an opponent and putting him on the deck might look great - we all love to watch good hard footy - but in a lot of cases a simple shepherd would achieve the same result.

 

[krustyman]

its alive and well, as long as they dont make any head high contact then nothing is wrong with the hip and shoulder.

 

[magpie_militia]

I didnt say I liked it either but clearly thats the way its heading.

However in a lot of cases, as I say, a full on bump is unneccesary. Generally you only need to do enough to buy yourself a second or two to ensure your team gets the ball. Upending an opponent and putting him on the deck might look great - we all love to watch good hard footy - but in a lot of cases a simple shepherd would achieve the same result.

Fair post, agree with that

 

[Nugget1985]

its alive and well, as long as they dont make any head high contact then nothing is wrong with the hip and shoulder.

Maybe someone has mentioned this...Running past the football and hitting the player is the problem as well.

As long as you are attacking the footy or have possesion of the ball a hip and shoulder has no problems in the game as long as it isn't high.

But once you start running past the football to hit a player that is where players get in trouble and fair enough. Players are bigger and move better than ever before, i don't know the stats but what would the average size of an afl player be now maybe 90kg and 188cm. That can do alot of hurt if you hit someone slighlty in wrong position with head down. We should always reward/protect the player who sole aim/eyes are the football.

 

[favourites]

The thing that got me is the umpire on the seen actually said good bump play on... its not until the blokes that sit in the chairs on Monday that it was deemed illegal.

Im not sure why we have umpires if we dont trust them even when they see the incident.

 

[magpie_militia]

The thing that got me is the umpire on the seen actually said good bump play on... its not until the blokes that sit in the chairs on Monday that it was deemed illegal.

Im not sure why we have umpires if we dont trust them even when they see the incident.

Agreed. It happened right in front of the umpire, and (according to the ump) it did not even warrant a free kick

Communication problems at the AFL? Surely not.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Some of the responses in this thread just show how soft the game, and society as a whole, has become.

If you don't like seeing blokes get sat on their arse by hard physical contact, take up knitting or lawn bowls.

As my dad once said to me, and as I found out later myself, if you don't want to get hurt, don't play football.

diablo, you are the only respect geelong poster on this forum, however, a fair majority have said he has been suspended because the eagle was hit in the head.

noone cares if a player gets laid out as long at they arent hit in the head (you know,this has been illegal for 101 years)

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Agreed. It happened right in front of the umpire, and (according to the ump) it did not even warrant a free kick

Communication problems at the AFL? Surely not.

and according to umpires, a player trying keep a ball in play is deliberate out of bounds (hawks fans, you know what im talking about)

Not one collingwood fan has even admitted that max hit the eagle in the head, accidently yes, but still hit him. it was nto a perfect bump, even 30 yrs ago. Only difference is, 30 yrs ago there wasnt enough good footage to have a player put out for questionable acts

 

[Tex_21]

If you watch AFL football, then watch country footy-its like watching two completely different games. While the AFL is doing its best to turn the game into basketball, country football has remained just that-football. Umpires will let the bumps flow, and even encourage proper physical contact.

Had one umpire give a free kick against me for a bump which hit a little high-he was apologetic and explained that it is supposed to be an automatic yellow, but he refused to apply those rules.

 

[greennick]

The thing that got me is the umpire on the seen actually said good bump play on... its not until the blokes that sit in the chairs on Monday that it was deemed illegal.

Im not sure why we have umpires if we dont trust them even when they see the incident.

Agreed. It happened right in front of the umpire, and (according to the ump) it did not even warrant a free kick

Communication problems at the AFL? Surely not.

Haha, so because the umpire didn't see that he copped on in the head it means it is OK? Are you both really that daft? Do you actually believe what you are saying?? Now that the umpire knows he copped one in the head, what do you think he will say? If he had his time over, would he still say fair bump, play on??? Of course he would not, because it is against the rules, he just didn't pick up on it the first time as it happend so fast!

 

[Consolaçao]

The guy's got his eyes for the ball, and Maxwell comes in makes contact with his head with such force that he breaks his jaw. And people want this in the game? Perhaps you people are also a fan of the king hit... i mean, what's admirable about seriously injuring somebody by hitting them when they aren't looking? I'm not saying that bumps should be taken out of the game, but if a player makes contact with another's head when he has eyes on the ball, the law should come down hard on him. Is not protecting hte player with his head over the ball one of the fundamental values of the game?

 

[magpie_militia]

If he had his time over, would he still say fair bump, play on???

I reckon he probably would, it was a free kick at best. The initial contact was to the chest, accidental contact was made to the head. You can't tell me that initial contact was made to the head, the kid would be still down.

Suspensions shouldn't be judged by how young or old a player is, or what injury they suffer as there are way too many variables.

 

[favourites]

What part of maxwell contacts his head?

Was it maxy's head?