Mega Thread Port Forum 'General AFL Talk' Thread Part 3

[PatientMental]

Absolute rubbish. Tape had a duty of care to keep his head up and be aware of his surroundings, especially as he was chasing our most valuable asset with an intent to tackle.

Hartlett stepped in, kept low, held his ground. Tape, who had his head down like a developmentally-delayed greyhound, ran into him at speed.

Tape gets knocked out and the pantswetters go mad.

Not. Low. Enough.

You cannot hit someone and knock them out and expect to be playing the next week.

This is not a sport where they can afford NFL style class-action law suits.

 

[tribey]

Not. Low. Enough.

You cannot hit someone and knock them out and expect to be playing the next week.

This is not a sport where they can afford NFL style class-action law suits.

You're being contradictory for the sake of it now.

Tape brought that on himself. Hartlett did nothing wrong. Seb got what he deserved.



Maybe he should've dropped his head lower so Hammer could've kicked it off.

 

[PatientMental]

View attachment 346999

Next time, Hartlett should either get on his knees or squib and allow his teammate to get tackled.

Why didn't he just shepherd?

Body between you and the ball carrier, wings out.

Edit: Found a better photo

That's a shepherd, Hartlett's was a bump

 

[TeeKray]

Not. Low. Enough.

You cannot hit someone and knock them out and expect to be playing the next week.

This is not a sport where they can afford NFL style class-action law suits.

It would be near on impossible for Hartlett to get 'low enough' to avoid any risk of high contact in that scenario. In fact, if he went any lower he probably risks having Tape make high contact on him. The solution is simple - don't bump, don't shepherd. And that's what the AFL wanted all along.

 

[tribey]

It would be near on impossible for Hartlett to get 'low enough' to avoid any risk of high contact in that scenario. In fact, if he went any lower he probably risks having Tape make high contact on him. The solution is simple - don't bump, don't shepherd. And that's what the AFL wanted all along.

Precisely.

By penalising Hartlett the AFL signalled that he should've let him just blow on by. In which case we would've treated him like Nathan Lonie and drummed him out of service.

 

[tribey]

Why didn't he just shepherd?

Body between you and the ball carrier, wings out.

Because he wasn't trying to prevent him from approaching a contest or loose ball.

He was taking emergency manouevres to prevent a player, running at speed, from tackling a teammate.

That doesn't call for a box out, that calls for having the courage to intercept a cannonball and he got low and braced himself accordingly.

If Tape didn't have the awareness of a turd racing sideways to Bolivar, he would've noticed Hartlett and taken evasive action. But nah, he's free to do whatever he likes because he ended up the victim.

 

[PatientMental]

Because he wasn't trying to prevent him from approaching a contest or loose ball.

He was taking emergency manouevres to prevent a player, running at speed, from tackling a teammate.

That doesn't call for a box out, that calls for having the courage to intercept a cannonball and he got low and braced himself accordingly.

If Tape didn't have the awareness of a turd racing sideways to Bolivar, he would've noticed Hartlett and taken evasive action. But nah, he's free to do whatever he likes because he ended up the victim.

You can bump, and it's up to you - not the person getting bumped no matter how poor their awareness is - to not concuss them.

 

[StrappingTape]

That incident Seb Tape literally ran into Hartlett he just stood his ground, he didnt go out of his way to hit him, didnt chase him he literally was run into head first.

 

[PatientMental]

That incident Seb Tape literally ran into Hartlett he just stood his ground, he didnt go out of his way to hit him, didnt chase him he literally was run into head first.

Yes, but Hartlett chose to bump, and when you do it's up to you to not put the person you're bumping to sleep.

 

[StrappingTape]

You can bump, and it's up to you - not the person getting bumped no matter how poor their awareness is - to not concuss them.

So how do you feel about suspensions for 'dangerous' tackles where the person is knocked out? We have seen non malicious but good tackles have an unfortunate end where a heads hit the ground a certain way anda concussion. Your logic all of those who chose to tackle are immediately wrong?

 

[tribey]

You can bump, and it's up to you - not the person getting bumped no matter how poor their awareness is - to not concuss them.

Hamish Hartlett valued Chad Wingard's health more than Seb Tape's.

So did Seb Tape.

They both paid a price in the end.

 

[StrappingTape]

Yes, but Hartlett chose to bump, and when you do it's up to you to not put the person you're bumping to sleep.

Actually I would argue he simply braced for contact as the **** Tape actually ran into him

 

[tribey]

Actually I would argue he simply braced for contact as the **** Tape actually ran into him

That's exactly what happened. But Hammer chose to stand there so derpity doo.

 

[PatientMental]

So how do you feel about suspensions for 'dangerous' tackles where the person is knocked out? We have seen non malicious but good tackles have an unfortunate end where a heads hit the ground a certain way anda concussion. Your logic all of those who chose to tackle are immediately wrong?

They usually classify the K.O.'s in tackles "one action", "accidental", "no other option" or "caused by the person with the ball" to get around it.

"After reviewing all available video, it was the view of the panel that Cockatoo’s tackle did not consist of more than one action, was not unreasonable in the circumstances and did not lift Gore off the ground," the Panel said in its findings.

Actually I would argue he simply braced for contact as the **** Tape actually ran into him

Bracing yourself and tucking your body into a hip and shoulder is classified as a bump. That's how the AFL sees it.

"Hartlett bumped Tape"

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

In a sport where concussions can happen in multiple non-intentional and even self inflicted ways we sellout to the bedwetters on the bump and take an aspect of the game we all grew up away. There's degrees and intent levels obviously which come into play in the odd bad incident but we've lost something here, what coach in their right mind would encourage the bump now in this climate.

 

[tribey]

They usually classify the K.O.'s in tackles "one action", "accidental", "no other option" or "caused by the person with the ball" to get around it.

"After reviewing all available video, it was the view of the panel that Cockatoo’s tackle did not consist of more than one action, was not unreasonable in the circumstances and did not lift Gore off the ground," the Panel said in its findings.



Bracing yourself and tucking your body into a hip and shoulder is classified as a bump. That's how the AFL sees it.

"Hartlett bumped Tape"

That verdict explanation was a stitchup. Even Gerard Whateley said he should've gotten off.

 

[Jason K]

Yes, but Hartlett chose to bump, and when you do it's up to you to not put the person you're bumping to sleep.

Tell us what Hamish was supposed to do then? Get out of Tapes way because of some right of way rule or something?

 

[StrappingTape]

That verdict explanation was a stitchup. Even Gerard Whateley said he should've gotten off.

Yep and you won't find a bigger pussy who wants everyone suspended than him and he thought it wrong

 

[PatientMental]

Tell us what Hamish was supposed to do then? Get out of Tapes way because of some right of way rule or something?

put his body between him and stick his arms up like a normal shepherd and he would have been fine to sit out his shoulder dislocation without the suspension as well.

In a sport where concussions can happen in multiple non-intentional and even self inflicted ways we sellout to the bedwetters on the bump and take an aspect of the game we all grew up away. There's degrees and intent levels obviously which come into play in the odd bad incident but we've lost something here, what coach in their right mind would encourage the bump now in this climate.

Except it's an extremely ugly and potentially very costly prospect for the AFL that they're trying their best to abolish.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

I can't wait for the future generations of 'duty of care' tacklers to come through yeehaw

 

[PatientMental]

I can't wait for the future generations of 'duty of care' tacklers to come through yeehaw

So you're completely fine with these.

 

[tribey]

I can't wait for the future generations of 'duty of care' tacklers to come through yeehaw

Putting your knee into the back of a defender's head - Schulz was a master at it - while going up for a mark is still legal.

It's the catch-all nature of this rubbish and the obvious contradictions that are a joke.

No-one wants to see a return to the old days of Buddha wiping unsuspecting finesse players out while they're standing under a bounced ball waiting to come down, or Long/Simmonds and King/Smart bumps to a defenceless player's head and neck as they're bending over a ball, but some freaking logic please.

Just as the AFL has belatedly made a move to crack down on the serial duckers who've relentlessly milked free kicks by taking advantage of the incessant desire to 'protect the head', so should they remind players that they should still be aware of their surroundings on the playing field.

It is still a full-contact sport and as much as players have been educated not to unduly pick players off, you're still on a wide open field where huge athletes are moving at breakneck speeds. Blindly ploughing about face first because "other guy has a duty of care" is a platinum pass to the Darwin Awards.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

So you're completely fine with these.

No but I can see it getting to the point of borderline cuddling

 

[Doctor Feel]

Putting your knee into the back of a defender's head - Schulz was a master at it - while going up for a mark is still legal.

It's the catch-all nature of this rubbish and the obvious contradictions that are a joke.

No-one wants to see a return to the old days of Buddha wiping unsuspecting finesse players out while they're standing under a bounced ball waiting to come down, or Long/Simmonds and King/Smart bumps to a defenceless player's head and neck as they're bending over a ball, but some freaking logic please.

Just as the AFL has belatedly made a move to crack down on the serial duckers who've relentlessly milked free kicks by taking advantage of the incessant desire to 'protect the head', so should they remind players that they should still be aware of their surroundings on the playing field.

It is still a full-contact sport and as much as players have been educated not to unduly pick players off, you're still on a wide open field where huge athletes are moving at breakneck speeds. Blindly ploughing about face first because "other guy has a duty of care" is a platinum pass to the Darwin Awards.

Hartlett should have announced loudly to everyone "Sebastian Tape, I am now going to commence the process of bumping you in order to protect the ball carrier, Chadley Wingard." just to make sure that everyone was aware of what he was about to do, so that Tape could protect himself.

 

[Trewth]

It's a contact sport, keeping your head on a swivel is essential.