Rohan dangerous tackle

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Pedlar 1 week.
Rohan 1 week.
Day 2 weeks.
Burton 2 weeks.

All pretty similar and nil resulted in injuries. The chook lotto continues!

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

Much like kneeing someone in the ruck with no intent for the contest

Go back and have a look at the incident again mate. With the blinkers off this time. Blicavs crossed the centre line no eyes on the ball himself. Meek initially was looking at the ball than looked at Blicavs coming towards him than raised the knee. Doesn't matter if he was walking he had encroached onto Meeks side of the circle. I had a discussion with your mob on your board yesterday and I've changed my tune rewatching it. A fine is enough of a penalty.

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

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.

You need to look at the contributing factors around it like I have rewatching it over again. Blicavs has no need to encroach into Meeks space the way he did. Sure kneeing him in the guts was silly but maybe next time he makes an effort to go for the ball instead of focusing on what Meek was doing.

 

[SSSSSS]

You need to look at the contributing factors around it like I have rewatching it over again. Blicavs has no need to encroach into Meeks space the way he did. Sure kneeing him in the guts was silly but maybe next time he makes an effort to go for the ball instead of focusing on what Meek was doing.

Absolutely. Cats need to ask why it's happened to them twice.

Cats ruckmen have no desire to contest aerially. They illegally cross the line, eyes on the ruckman only to impede their run.

If the umps weren't so gutless to penalise them it would nip it right in the bud.

 

[domin8]

Absolutely. Cats need to ask why it's happened to them twice.

Cats ruckmen have no desire to contest aerially. They illegally cross the line, eyes on the ruckman only to impede their run.

If the umps weren't so gutless to penalise them it would nip it right in the bud.

It’s a ploy and one Richmond used in 17 with Grigg (geelongs assistant) to outnumber the oppo at ground level. Creating a 4 on 3.

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

Absolutely. Cats need to ask why it's happened to them twice.

Cats ruckmen have no desire to contest aerially. They illegally cross the line, eyes on the ruckman only to impede their run.

If the umps weren't so gutless to penalise them it would nip it right in the bud.

That's exactly what happened but seems like the supporters and Chris Scott don't want to hear it. There's a reason ruckman meet in the middle to contest the centre bounce and start from either side of the circle. It's not a free for all to do what you please. Chris Scott seems to think it is.

 

[kidkenobi]

Go back and have a look at the incident again mate. With the blinkers off this time. Blicavs crossed the centre line no eyes on the ball himself. Meek initially was looking at the ball than looked at Blicavs coming towards him than raised the knee. Doesn't matter if he was walking he had encroached onto Meeks side of the circle. I had a discussion with your mob on your board yesterday and I've changed my tune rewatching it. A fine is enough of a penalty.

You’re allowed to cross the centre line once the ball has been bounced so Blicavs did nothing wrong. You’re not allowed to drive your knee into someone when you’re just standing on the ground. Considering Meek had to backtrack and reach back over his head after kneeing Blicavs to even get a hand on the ball, you can’t even say Blicavs was trying to block him either and it was him that was actually blocked from the ball drop

 

[SSSSSS]

It’s a ploy and one Richmond used in 17 with Grigg (geelongs assistant) to outnumber the oppo at ground level. Creating a 4 on 3.

David Hale was a master at it as well. Used it very effectively against Sandilands in the 2013 GF.

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

You’re allowed to cross the centre line once the ball has been bounced so Blicavs did nothing wrong. You’re not allowed to drive your knee into someone when you’re just standing on the ground. Considering Meek had to backtrack and reach back over his head after kneeing Blicavs to even get a hand on the ball, you can’t even say Blicavs was trying to block him either and it was him that was actually blocked from the ball drop

Go back and read the rules of ruckwork on the MRP page.

 

[kidkenobi]

Go back and read the rules of ruckwork on the MRP page.

Yep Blicavs broke none of them. And Meek broke the newest one by leading with his knee

 

[Stamos]

Has anybody in history been able to hold such a high profile job for so long while being so demonstrably incompetent as Michael Christian as the MRO?

How on earth did Day get more weeks than Rohan?

 

[radiojake]

How on earth did Day get more weeks than Rohan?

the same way McAdam got more weeks that Pickett

 

[catters05]

imo… I still think if Meek actually jumped into the contest then this would have been a non issue.

older ruckmen would have jumped straight through him, I believe the knee up stuff is with the jumping, not feet on the ground.

just my opinion….it’s all history now.


also Is it just me or does it feel like the afl uses a bingo machine with numbers 1 to 5 in it when deciding how many weeks for players. Doesn’t seem like any consistency.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

imo… I still think if Meek actually jumped into the contest then this would have been a non issue.

older ruckmen would have jumped straight through him, I believe the knee up stuff is with the jumping, not feet on the ground.

just my opinion….it’s all history now.


also Is it just me or does it feel like the afl uses a bingo machine with numbers 1 to 5 in it when deciding how many weeks for players. Doesn’t seem like any consistency.

If blicavs (and Stanley?) Jumped at the contest instead of blocking its also a non-issue

 

[catters05]

If blicavs (and Stanley?) Jumped at the contest instead of blocking its also a non-issue

Meek had feet on the ground and just kneed him, that was not a football action. That’s what he got done for. Doesn’t matter what blitz was doing at The end of the day and all I am saying is that I still believe that if Meek went through ruck centre bounce process and “jumped” with his knee out to protect himself then I believe there would be no issue imo, and if Blitz stayed on the ground and copped it then that’s on him for not jumping.

again all imo.

 

[Walter H White]

Am I missing something? Why is Rohan being suspended?

He didn't injure anyone. Jiath's head didn't hit the ground. He didn't pin arms. Looked like a great tackle to me that shouldn't have even been a free. Is he being suspended because of "the potential to cause injury".

No idea how many weeks Day should have got, but he did drive Close head first into the ground so he has to get something.

 

[HairyO]

Meek had feet on the ground

Because Blicavs ran straight at him. He didnt have time to jump.

Also, this is the Rohan thread. Rohan should have got a fine. As should Day. I'd love for someone from the AFL to show all the players how to tackle safely. It would for sure be better than anything ever seen on any of those funniest home videos shows.

 

[Generalissimo]

At first glance it looked week-ish. But it's been pointed out that Rohan was actually off the ground for a lot of it, and I think you can legitimately ask how much someone can contribute to a slinging action if his feet aren't planted. It'll be interesting to see how it turns out.

 

[Elixuh]

At first glance it looked week-ish. But it's been pointed out that Rohan was actually off the ground for a lot of it, and I think you can legitimately ask how much someone can contribute to a slinging action if his feet aren't planted. It'll be interesting to see how it turns out.

This happened to Cam Rayner last year and it didn't matter.

Rohan's tackle was probably the worst of the bunch on the weekend and was very lucky the Hawthorn player was able to brace with one arm.

 

[The A Team Van]

Looked like a great tackle to me that shouldn't have even been a free.

Rohan tackled Jiath after he lost the footy, and also after the whistle had been blown several times because a free was paid to Sicily for being interfered with in the previous marking contest. At no point did the umpires call advantage because Jiath never really got clean possession.

And that's not even a free kick to you? Really?

 

[STPer18]

Both clubs challenging the bans.

Hawks, Cats head to Tribunal to challenge suspensions

Hawthorn will attempt to reduce Will Day's two-match ban, while Geelong is hoping to free Gary Rohan

www.afl.com.au

 

[Stamos]

Both clubs challenging the bans.

I can understand Hawthorn challenging, but Rohan was lucky to only get a week.

 

[Elixuh]

I can understand Hawthorn challenging, but Rohan was lucky to only get a week.

Yes, if Hawthorn player is concussed it would have been 4.

 

[Romeoh1]

Both tackles worth of a week off.

 

[Walter H White]

Rohan tackled Jiath after he lost the footy, and also after the whistle had been blown several times because a free was paid to Sicily for being interfered with in the previous marking contest. At no point did the umpires call advantage because Jiath never really got clean possession.

And that's not even a free kick to you? Really?

Hard to hear at the ground and Jiath was clearly attempting to play on so I can see why Rohan tried to stop him. Not really concerned about the free or 50 now, but still confused why Rohan was suspended for what I thought was a safe tackle. Happy for someone to enlighten me.