- Sep 17, 2016
- 651
- 1,438
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Newcombe puts a guy on a stretcher. Nothing. Compare that to this. It's just a joke
-
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.
Preview R23: Changes vs. Collingwood
- Thread starter jamesclean
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Correct and Newcombe took his eye off the ball, it's lioterally just because they clashed heads rather than it being shoulder to head. Ridiculous.
What he was attempting to do prior to impact is irrelevant because at impact he’d adjusted to protect himself and delivered a textbook hip and shoulder. With the shoulder impacting the player’s chin.
So if he had just clashed heads with the player, probably doing even more damage to both, he'd have got off?
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Genuinely, yes.
If his body was still in a tackling position, arms out like the Hawks player, then yes, but Laird switched to a hip and shoulder to defend himself at the last second. That’s the difference. One is judged as an accident during a football action, the other is a hip and shoulder, regardless of initial plans.
The, ‘but what else was he supposed to do, he had to protect himself’ defence died years ago. Original intent doesn’t matter if the end result is that you executed a hip and shoulder to protect yourself.
I don’t like it, but it’s been like this for a while. And there’s numerous examples of it.
Meh I have no problem classifying it as careless etc, my issue is the grading of force.
He stayed on the ground, right? If you have a medium impact to the head the AFL should demand a HIA (through independent doctors). How can you say it’s medium but doesn’t even need be assessed? The doctor at the time doesn’t think it’s even worth checking.
Low impact - stays on ground
Medium impact - assessed HIA, passes to return
High impact - concussion
Severe impact - hospital
Of course, that would require independent doctors and would give the tribunal black and white criteria to work with.
He stayed on the ground, right? If you have a medium impact to the head the AFL should demand a HIA (through independent doctors). How can you say it’s medium but doesn’t even need be assessed? The doctor at the time doesn’t think it’s even worth checking.
Low impact - stays on ground
Medium impact - assessed HIA, passes to return
High impact - concussion
Severe impact - hospital
Of course, that would require independent doctors and would give the tribunal black and white criteria to work with.
Did we?
Samcro24
Covered by the Cape
- Oct 28, 2014
- 12,833
- 35,181
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
He diagnosed an acl
So did most of Adelaide. Oh well, I gather 20 years experience counts for sweet f all then. Maybe you’re right and rash prob is screwed.
I still don’t think it was a bump. A player is entitled to make contact to effect a kick. Still haven’t seen any evidence that he got him high, other than the accidental head clash. How else was he supposed to approach the contest? Not approach at all? He had to arrive at high speed or he wouldn’t have got there. I don’t think there was anything reckless or unreasonable about it at all.
Or is the rule that any body contact at speed is a bump now?
Or is the rule that any body contact at speed is a bump now?
Same guy who was very concern about how Thilthrope would recover from his knee injury????
Thought someone posted it went to the tribunal?
Duggan got 2 weeks for that, end of his season.
Walker and Dowling in for Burgess and Jones. Then would like Nankervis or Edwards in for Laird (suspended). They’ll probably put Smith back in…..
Nup. Try again
- Jul 8, 2016
- 4,459
- 5,770
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Good thing is we might get them all back for finals. Let's
no more injuries.🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Jul 14, 2012
- 8,864
- 13,722
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Agreed - Pies likely to have back in McCreery and Hill they said on Ch9 news here last night too.
Make no mistake, a win would be absolutely massive up against a bogey team of ours.
He did
Yeah. Collingwood should definitely also be very gettable though. They're playing pretty poor football, really. In a hugely polarised season between the top 9 and bottom 9 teams where almost all games follow that script (Sydney are the only bottom team to beat a top 9 team in the last 6 weeks), Collingwood haven't beaten a top 9 team since round 12, in late May. They're 0-4 against top 9 teams in that period with two close losses and two comprehensive ones, and 5-0 against the bottom sides. They're also struggling to kick goals at the moment with Elliot's drop in form.
Obviously a good and capable side who are also playing to secure their double chance, but Adelaide should definitely be favourites. Certainly an easier game on paper than recent wins we've had against Hawthorn, Gold Coast and Bulldogs.
No, but when you hit someone side on with your arm in tight and your shoulder collects their chin, it’s a hip and shoulder and also high contact. Argue force all you like, but it was a hip and shoulder with impact above the shoulders.
A few frames beforehand you could see Laird trying to smother the ball - the contact above was a consequence of that. He wasn't trying to bump the player at all. Ridiculous decision.
Similar threads
