Rohan dangerous tackle
- Thread starter SellarStardom
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I'm actually gobsmacked. Rohan's looked way worse
- Feb 12, 2017
- 16,614
- 43,545
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Feb 12, 2017
- 16,614
- 43,545
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Dirty Hawthorn ruck fined too.
- Jul 13, 2015
- 36,539
- 40,733
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Geelong discount applied. Rohan slung a player into the ground after the ball was gone, Day was a single motion. If day got two, Rohan should have gotten four to six.
Sent from my SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
The AFL has been clear both types of tackles are suspension worthy I’m not fussed about that.
I’m dumbfounded how MRO decides which one is medium impact & which is high impact?
Does he use forces generated on GPS devices or pull it out of thin air/his own ass?
On the MRO thing - who decided and why that he could make all these decisions? What in particular was his quality that gives him this role?
I’m dumbfounded how MRO decides which one is medium impact & which is high impact?
Does he use forces generated on GPS devices or pull it out of thin air/his own ass?
On the MRO thing - who decided and why that he could make all these decisions? What in particular was his quality that gives him this role?
It's where the player lands apparently (this week anyway), Rohan used a lot more force and intent in a much worse act but luckily for him, Cj landed mostly on his shoulder.
Sent from my SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
The difference in the finding were that Day's tackle was considered high impact and Rohan's medium impact. I'm assuming that's due to Close landing head first into the ground with both arms pinned compared to Jiath landing body/arm first with one arm free
Am I seeing things or did Brad Close contribute towards the second action for him "whiplashing" into the ground?
Live it looks like Close was trying to draw a free kick, and many other players are doing the same.
Live it looks like Close was trying to draw a free kick, and many other players are doing the same.
Neither of which define “impact”.
Rohan would have generated more force as he tackled Jiath 180 degrees to sling him.
If anything it was all on Jiath & not Rohan that he got an arm free - Rohan was prepared to sling him arms pinned. Should he be discounted because Jiath took evasive action to get his arm free?
Jiath also didn’t have the ball.
Photo showing ball not in frame and arm pinned by Jiath who managed to get it free as he was slung.
Attachments
I just think it’s ridiculous that you can do a heavy handled tackle that was still legal right up until it became too heavy, and get more weeks than the tackle that was never legal and was never allowed.
Rohan is pure luck he didn’t get a Broad suspension. If Jiath went limp to play it up like some players do Rohan would have had a month off.
Rohan is pure luck he didn’t get a Broad suspension. If Jiath went limp to play it up like some players do Rohan would have had a month off.
- Jun 19, 2006
- 10,050
- 18,459
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I would've thought 1 week each for Rohan, Day and Meek. Rohan the worse tackle but lower impact compared to Day. Deliberately kneeing a guy in the ruck is very lucky not to cop a suspension.
I don’t think that matters though. That will be governed on-field with free kicks.
Same goes with Day. And if Broad didn’t knock that guy out he wouldn’t have gotten 4 weeks. That’s just the way it is.
But the impact is affected by how the guy is landing on the ground, head-first impact is obviously worse than body/arm first. There's obviously a lot of grey area such as players able/unable to get arms free etc. which does make the whole thing a bit of a lottery though.
Jiath freed his arms himself, just in time - not due to Rohan releasing his arm.
And the Geelong discount gets applied.
Cats may be the most suspended team, but it's always 3 weeks down to 1
Cats may be the most suspended team, but it's always 3 weeks down to 1
- Sep 26, 2017
- 26,720
- 44,019
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Your thug ruckman should of got two weeks
I wouldn’t go sooking too much all thing by a considering
Actually Blicavs was trying to legally compete, Meek used an illegal knee and rightfully got paid a free kick against and fined today so all of the correct decisions were made
Two weeks for his opponent trying to block his rub. Good one.
Suggest you look up the rules.
Centre bounces a player cannot initiate cross the line and initiate contact. It's been a block since the introduction of the second circle (John ceglar always gets penalised for it as an example)
You're allowed to cross the centre line once the ball has been bounced or thrown up. And considering where the ball actually came down the only one who could be penalised for blocking was Meek
- Thread starter
- #49
Right decisions to keep it consistent, although the high impact grading on Day is still confusing
- Feb 5, 2018
- 14,119
- 34,054
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Chicago Blackhawks Melb Renegades
Absolutely dumbfounded. If you told me in advance that the outcomes between Day and Rohan would be 2 weeks and 1 week you could have knocked me down with a feather if you said it was Day copping the two.
We notoriously never appeal but we absolutely must on this one. Even if we can't clear Day entirely he shouldn't get more than a week for it. I genuinely thought he was looking at a fine or a week at a stretch.
In the interest of fairness, I'm pretty shocked Meek got off his kneeing charge. That looked worse than what Daysy did IMO.
We notoriously never appeal but we absolutely must on this one. Even if we can't clear Day entirely he shouldn't get more than a week for it. I genuinely thought he was looking at a fine or a week at a stretch.
In the interest of fairness, I'm pretty shocked Meek got off his kneeing charge. That looked worse than what Daysy did IMO.
Similar threads
