On the couch

[Changa10]

I don't see a lot of difference between the two, I think Judd should have let go sooner than he did though. Media is blowing this out of proportion.

Really? I don't think it is that he didn't let go early enough, more that there was no need to reef his arm up and then back behind his back when Adams couldn't do anything to counteract the action.

Completely different circumstances IMHO.

 

[Gralin]

Just watched the video don't see too much wrong with it. They brought up Judds past history of questionable behavior and the fact that there were incidents of chicken wing tackles a couple of years ago
The vision of the Cyril tackle on Warnock was really hard to see, it looked like he was tackling Warnock by the arm, no body control so of course he is going to try to use the arm to bring Warnock down.

Where I see the difference is that there was no reason for Judd to be grabbing Adams arm the way he did

 

[Flukey!]

My interpretation of Cyril's tackle is he is trying to bring Warnock to ground.
There are similarities with the Judd tackle so I can understand the discussion.

In regards to OTC, I don't watch it any more because The good footy shows have become more that just opinion based discussion. And that is all that show is.

I enjoy the Fox shows with David King that are more analysis and insight.

 

[kolchak]

I reckon the clubs would instruct players to do that to stop the handball getting out, and Judd just took it a little too far. As far as his questionable behavior goes, the pressure point incident was in response to Richatelli not letting Grigg out of a headlock, and you got to ask why Brown defended Judd, maybe it was a square up for something else. Not saying those actions should be condoned but hardly the evil charchater people are painting Judd out to be. I think it's a lot worse to intenionally bump someone without going for the footy, looking at you Wellingham you gutless dog.

 

[NICE1]

Chip 'The bloke formerly known as Gerard Healy' is easily the most outdated footy host in afl right now. Imagine if he and KB started a radio program together. It could be called the Steve price hour. If text book tackling from rioli is similar to what Juddy did, it's time to stop the afl, call it TAFL (touch) and bring out the 'flags'

Our game is becoming so over scruitinised that, all jokes aside, I fear for where this game is heading. Bit by bit our game is being stripped away because just about every action or aspect of the game is "potentially dangerous" or "a bad look for the game"...the judd incident was a dog act, the rioli incident can not and should not be compared. Don't be suprised if the "rioli style" tackle is eradicated from the game because it has now been highlighted and labelled as dangerous....

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

You have to understand the media have turned Judd into a superstar. They have convinced many and themselves that Judd can do superhuman acts (which he can't) and have to do whatever they can to defend him, otherwise they lose credibility. Anyone who deliberately tries to inflict pain on another human being is scum, and the fact Judd did it comes as no surrprise to me.

 

[QuietB]

Just watched the video for the first time. It is a bit of a stretch. Judd has no right to do what he did to a guy defenceless and motionless at the bottom of a pack in what is almost certainly going to be a ball up or a HTB decision.

Rioli has every right to tackle and as soon as the ball come free he goes and tackles the next bloke.

This is all about intent and they are lightyears apart.

 

[savagelunchbox]

You have to understand the media have turned Judd into a superstar. They have convinced many and themselves that Judd can do superhuman acts (which he can't) and have to do whatever they can to defend him, otherwise they lose credibility. Anyone who deliberately tries to inflict pain on another human being is scum, and the fact Judd did it comes as no surrprise to me.

Wasn't it Leather Poisoning who asked when it was the last time Chris Judd did anything spectacular and the thread provided no evidence of anything spectacular?

BTW the Rioli tackle was nothing. Rioli pulled Warnock's arm down and his arm when a little back through Warnock moving whilst being tackled. Judd took the arm and thrusted back and up.

 

[Gralin]

Ok I've watch both lots of tackle footage a couple of times now and have come to the following conclusion.

Judd got involved in the tackle as Adams was going down which is when he got his hands on the arm. Nothing wrong with that, nothing wrong with holding the arm to stop Adams having any chance to get the ball out. There does seem to be 2-3 actions involved in what he does with the arm though and only lets go when the North players push him off. North players are obviously angry.

Cyril has hold of Warnocks arm and is using it to drag him to the ground, he falls over Warnock or is pushed hard to tell and still has hold of his arm, this is where I think the damage to Warnock was done. Cyril then comes up with the ball and is tackled by Carlton, no remonstration from Carlton players

I think the reaction of the team mates in both cases highlights the difference in the perceived intent even if both actions did result in a player with a sore shoulder

 

[Brishawk]

For anyone who doesn't know, Judd dislocated Adams's shoulder. So to say there was not much in it is a gross understatement.

The comparison to Rioli is laughable.

 

[djboonie]

Tackling a guy in a contest vs yanking an incapacitated player's arm in the direction it can't go.

Simple!

 

[Neville Bartos]

"On The Couch"??? More like...

You know what I mean???

 

[Dixie Flatline]

GTFO Roos. Carried a grudge against Hawthorn for years (probably dating back to the early 80s when Hawthorn routinely snuffed out Fitzroy's chances of winning premierships). In no way was Rioli lucky to escape scrutiny for his tackle on Warnock. Makes me very angry to listen to Roos pontificate about this.

 

[Cynic]

Has everyone here actually seen the footage? Just watched it myself and there really isn't much they said wrong. They criticized Judd, they showed footage of all his incidents, they compared it to a Rioli tackle where he did hold the arm and did appear to cause Warnock distress and then they dropped it.

I do agree they should've pointed out that Rioli's purpose was to prevent Warnock from disposing the ball, as opposed to Judd where they admitted it could only be to hurt.

 

[Hungry Hawk]

I dont think they should be comparing Rioli to Judd.
I think Ghandi to Judd would be more appropriate.

Even the buffoons on MMM on sunday were backing Dudd stating, "he would never intentionally cause harm".
I doubt the media would turn on him even if (fill the gap).

 

[philohk]

That OTC footage was hilarious.

Roos: I can't see Judd doing that deliberately.
Sheahan: He's done this kind of thing more than once.
Roos: Yes, he has.

 

[savagelunchbox]

I dont think they should be comparing Rioli to Judd.
I think Ghandi to Judd would be more appropriate.

Even the buffoons on MMM on sunday were backing Dudd stating, "he would never intentionally cause harm".
I doubt the media would turn on him even if (fill the gap).

The likes of Darcy, Lyon and the other MMM callers on Friday night were going to town on the dog act he did.

BTW 4 wks is not enough

 

[Lord_Espos]

The likes of Darcy, Lyon and the other MMM callers on Friday night were going to town on the dog act he did.

BTW 4 wks is not enough

The thing is the move by Judd is definitely deliberate and intended to maybe not hurt but discomfort the player.

It is the type of move you use in mixed-martial arts. I've trained for over 13 years in martial arts and that is definitely a move used to injure someone (or typically subdue them or incapacitate them).

Does anyone know if Judd trains in some type of martial art? It's just the pressure point stuff, eye gouging and arm bending stuff, I mean where does he get the ideas to do it? He seems to be the only player in the league doing all these non-footy moves.

I'm also confused why the media love him so much. He was the Captain of Carlton when Fevola went of the rails and when that Carltong rookie got hammered a couple of years ago on the booze cruize. He's a dark characater in my opinion.... and glad he's not playing for Hawthorn.

 

[Ram-Man]

I'm also confused why the media love him so much. He was the Captain of Carlton when Fevola went of the rails and when that Carltong rookie got hammered a couple of years ago on the booze cruize. He's a dark characater in my opinion.... and glad he's not playing for Hawthorn.

Perhaps he is using the old judi mind trick ??

 

[Off The Couch]

There were a lot of carlton supporters on SEN last night citing Cyril as a reason why Judd should have no case to answer - laughable to say the least. In the Warnock case he didn't remonstrate with Cyril and nor did any of his team mates. When Cyril engages this type of tackle on a player laying face first in the dirt I will be the first calling for a lengthy suspension until then Gerard, don't try and drag a quality, fair player into your sordid fantasies so that your love child could come out smelling of roses.

Seems i owe Healy an apology - it was actually Mike that introduced that segment. Doesn't change my opinion though.

 

[floki]

Cant watch "On the Couch" AFL 360 is the only footy show I can watch and Marngrook.

Two things i see out of this
1. As i've pointed out elsewhere Warnock isn't laying face down being mounted by Carrazzo when Cyrils tackling him.
2. Sheahan points out this was brought to their attention by an unnamed third person, whether the mystery sources existence is real or not the genital fortitude is sorely lacking here from mein hosts.

 

[Rioli2Gunstall]

Pathetic.

 

[mainehawk]

On the couch.....on the beach..... on the p**s.....who do they think they are ?

 

[NICE1]

i used to laugh when i saw threads claiming the panel had hidden agendas...but now im starting to realise the joke was on me. bu

 

[mrcurly]

What a steaming load of verbal diarrhoea, Juddy wouldn't do that hey? well it sure looks like he did! ..much like the eye gouging incident a few seasons back.
He has proven he is no Saint, so why do they try to perpetuate the legend of Judd with their drivel. The guy is just a very good footballer that has the occassional brain implosion, possibly because he is cursed with a Carlton side that are going nowhere, and a weekly close tag - just punish him (PROPERLY) and get on with it.
So whats with the 4 weeks? If Goo gets 3 weeks for sliding into Betts butt first, then how is this distasteful incident only worth one more week - that really sends out the wrong message. I expected they would give him 5 or 6 for that, its one of the most unsportsman like acts i have seen on the field.