Pearce V DBJ collision

[Bicco]

goes to show the AFL make it up as it goes along..

Always have, always will.
I love the game but hate the competition. What other major competition changes rules( mid season in some cases) as often as the AFL?
It's a joke.
The litmus test for me is how would you go explaining the rules to someone who'd never seen the game before? It's almost impossible.
The ball carrier gets a free kick if you push them in the back, but not if they have prior opportunity to disposeof the ball, but they do if you drive them into the ground (dangerous tackle) but don't if they collapse and draw the free kick.
IMO the introduction of 'prior opportunity ' in the late 90's was the start of the nonsense.
Early 90's football was the best football I've seen in my lifetime.
End rant.

 

[Bigger]

Very, very lucky to get off!

Get off what though. He didn't hit DBJ in the head. He was trying to mark the pill. He collided with someone in a collision sport. When two blokes are running from opposite directions for the same ball, there is every likelihood of a collision.

There is even the likelihood of both being concussed. What happens there?

 

[DazalenkoUBewty]

Get off what though. He didn't hit DBJ in the head. He was trying to mark the pill. He collided with someone in a collision sport. When two blokes are running from opposite directions for the same ball, there is every likelihood of a collision.

There is even the likelihood of both being concussed. What happens there?

DBJ is looking back at the ball, he can't see your boy, but your boy, even though he mainly has eyes on the ball, is aware that there is a player in front of him so I think there's probably a duty of care to be shown there. He could've avoided the hit.

 

[LongSerong]

DBJ is looking back at the ball, he can't see your boy, but your boy, even though he mainly has eyes on the ball, is aware that there is a player in front of him so I think there's probably a duty of care to be shown there. He could've avoided the hit.

Pearce is allowed to contest the ball and not avoid the collision however. He's not meant to avoid the hit and let DBJ take the mark uncontested. If this was the case then players would run back with the flight of the ball for every contest.

 

[LOLchie Schultz]

No, it's the correct call. You're allowed to take a mark running back with the flight. You're allowed to attempt a mark running back with the flight.

What you're not allowed to do is make front on contact that affects your opponent's ability to mark the ball when you're not making a reasonable play on the ball yourself. DBJ was looking back at the ball the whole time and got to it first. Are you arguing it should have been a free kick against him?

Ever heard of "PLAY ON"?

DBJ is looking back at the ball, he can't see your boy, but your boy, even though he mainly has eyes on the ball, is aware that there is a player in front of him so I think there's probably a duty of care to be shown there. He could've avoided the hit.

Your boy knew there was a chance a player was coming the other way and had a duty of care to look and pull out of the contest. He could have avoided the hit.

 

[radiojake]

Reminds me a bit of Brodie Martin

Brodie Martin

Age

37

Ht

180cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.7

4star

K

10.0

4star

HB

3.7

3star

M

4.7

4star

T

4.0

5star

CL

1.0

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.7

4star

K

10.0

4star

HB

3.7

3star

M

4.7

5star

T

4.0

5star

CL

1.0

3star

and Luke Breust

22

Luke Breust

Age

35

Ht

182cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.6

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

6.7

4star

M

3.4

3star

T

4.0

5star

G

1.9

5star

D

10.0

3star

K

6.0

2star

HB

4.0

3star

M

1.3

1star

T

4.8

5star

G

1.5

5star

D

9.8

3star

K

6.0

3star

HB

3.8

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

1.8

5star

all the way back in 2012


Martin came off the interchange bench and bee lined for the ball that had been kicked over Breust's head and he was running with the flight of the ball with no idea Martin was coming the other way

Martin got to the ball first but totally cleaned Breust up in a pretty sickening hit

Umps called play on, as was the style back then

Can't find footage of it from a cursory google search

 

[Rabish Binney]

Pearce is allowed to contest the ball and not avoid the collision however. He's not meant to avoid the hit and let DBJ take the mark uncontested. If this was the case then players would run back with the flight of the ball for every contest.

Interesting to take the comments of Port OP's on here in relation to this bump and compare it to what they thought and wrote about Houston's bump on Rankine last year...

Chalk meet cheese....

 

[Spook]

It's certainly not full no contact, you can make contact if you've only got eyes for the ball and you're reasonably contesting the ball.

True. Good point