Sling tackle fix

[flyinghi64]

With all this confusion with regard to sling tackles and suspensions, outcomes, techniques, force etc

Could it be as easy as this to fix?

If you pin both players arms in a tackle you can not sling them to ground AT ALL.

If you have a player around the waist you can sling them no problem.

You know when you tackle someone if you have them around the waist or arms, both arms. Particularly if you are a professional athlete that trains for this every other day.

Am i missing something? Is this to simplistic or dumb an answer?

 

[Great8]

I object to it being called a sling tackle. Neither Gibbs or Schulz performed a "sling tackle".
Media calling it a sling tackle doesnt mean its a sling tackle

 

[Belnakor]

Am i missing something? Is this to simplistic or dumb an answer?

the simple answer is to just police on outcomes and let the players work out how to tackle without knocking people out.

 

[mutecake]

I don't think that you can make a rule saying that if you have a hold of both arms you cant take them down. Given that the objective of a tackle is to halt the ability of an opposition player from progressing play, and the best way to do that is to get them on the ground, it would just be to hard. And that is without taking into account the speed and strength of the players.

That all sounds too much like corporate speak, but it wont work.

 

[TeeJay Blue]

If Buddy Franklin did a tackle like that. He'd be given the Brownlow medal immediately.
There goes Fyfe's chance.

If it was a Carlton player, they would be suspended for the rest of the season. The AFL have a thing for hating the blues. Gibbs was mistreated.

It is taking the attention off the inconsistency of the MRP, by talking about the tackle. Why worry about something that doesn't happen much? You simply get told to pin the arms to prevent the opponent from getting rid of the ball. Players have just got to be careful with the way they bring their opponent down.

 

[flyinghi64]

I don't think that you can make a rule saying that if you have a hold of both arms you cant take them down. Given that the objective of a tackle is to halt the ability of an opposition player from progressing play, and the best way to do that is to get them on the ground, it would just be to hard. And that is without taking into account the speed and strength of the players.

That all sounds too much like corporate speak, but it wont work.

I wasn't suggesting you can't take them to ground, just saying that with both arms pinged you cant fling them to the ground face first.
You should be able to drop your body weight to bring them down, go all octopus on them, even "push"/"pull" them sideways.
Just not a 180-360 degree fling/sling.
This isn't as hard to adjudicate as half of the other grey area rules the AFL is made up of.
But hey I am just throwing out an opinion i have thought about since Gibbs got 3 weeks for something you see every week.
Yes down to 2 weeks.

 

[Rustin Cohle]

If it was a Carlton player, they would be suspended for the rest of the season. The AFL have a thing for hating the blues. Gibbs was mistreated.

The same AFL who didn't suspend Judd for elbowing Pavlich in the face in his Brownlow winning year?

L-O-L

 

[mutecake]

I wasn't suggesting you can't take them to ground, just saying that with both arms pinged you cant fling them to the ground face first.
You should be able to drop your body weight to bring them down, go all octopus on them, even "push"/"pull" them sideways.
Just not a 180-360 degree fling/sling.
This isn't as hard to adjudicate as half of the other grey area rules the AFL is made up of.
But hey I am just throwing out an opinion i have thought about since Gibbs got 3 weeks for something you see every week.
Yes down to 2 weeks.

I get the theory, not so sure about the practice but that's fine.

The suspension though is a different issue. I am more concerned about suspensions being based on results not intent. In this case, Gibbs was hurt by the result of a tackle that you are right in saying happens every week without any scrutiny/suspension.

 

[Tiger7374]

I think it's kinda easy actually...if you have both arms...you have to drop your knees. Schultz could have dropped...there was zero need to roll through with his momentum.

There is no need to try to beat the shit out of another footballer...the game has wisely moved on from the old days.

 

[Roo Beauty]

If Buddy Franklin did a tackle like that. He'd be given the Brownlow medal immediately.
There goes Fyfe's chance.

If it was a Carlton player, they would be suspended for the rest of the season. The AFL have a thing for hating the blues. Gibbs was mistreated.

It is taking the attention off the inconsistency of the MRP, by talking about the tackle. Why worry about something that doesn't happen much? You simply get told to pin the arms to prevent the opponent from getting rid of the ball. Players have just got to be careful with the way they bring their opponent down.

Umm… no he wouldn't, you don't win Brownlows by tackling an opponent.

 

[Tiger7374]

I don't think that you can make a rule saying that if you have a hold of both arms you cant take them down. Given that the objective of a tackle is to halt the ability of an opposition player from progressing play, and the best way to do that is to get them on the ground, it would just be to hard. And that is without taking into account the speed and strength of the players.

That all sounds too much like corporate speak, but it wont work.

If you drop straight to the ground, you will halt momentum and with both arms pinned, if the ball come out it will predominantly be incorrect disposal or it stays in the hands and will be considered holding the ball.

 

[RUNVS]

What about a simple rule of

- Pin both the arms of an opponent and in the process of the tackle you knock them out then you are suspended.

Would be easy to understand for everyone involved.

 

[Armchair Critic]

A tackle is a tackle , sometimes arms get pinned, somtimes heads hit the ground, sometimes people get knocked out If you hit the person high , it's a free kick , if you leg someone it's a free kick and if someone's head hits the ground during the process of a tackle then it should be SHIT HAPPENS

 

[TeeJay Blue]

The same AFL who didn't suspend Judd for elbowing Pavlich in the face in his Brownlow winning year?

L-O-L

Still haven't got with the times have you?

- Bryce Gibbs is suspended while Jay Schulz who has applied a similar tackle is cleared of any charge.
- A Dylan Buckley goal on a tight angle with the non-preferred boot gets looked past for goal of the year contention, sparking fury amongst a majority of supporters.
- An experience player walks out of the club, and the AFL refuses with the compo pick and Carlton get nothing in return. (This can be argued)
- Carlton were guinea pigs for Sunday night matches (playing 3 of the 4 that were organised), which had seen poor crowds and huge amounts of money lost.
- Of all teams that have finished in the bottom 6 last year. Carlton are the only one scheduled to face the reigning premiers twice this year. Both matches still await.

Umm… no he wouldn't, you don't win Brownlows by tackling an opponent.

It is satirical humour, regarding the unbalance between the treatment of all clubs and players. Buddy and Tippett's sanctions for rough conduct were are farce given that Gibbs was handed a harsher punishment for an act that is part of the game. The AFL doesn't want to ruin any Sydney player's reputation of being the perfect role model in football.

 

[STFU Donnie]

Umm… no he wouldn't, you don't win Brownlows by tackling an opponent.

Oh dear.

 

[Portmanteau]

If it was a Carlton player, they would be suspended for the rest of the season. The AFL have a thing for hating the blues. Gibbs was mistreated.

Yep, spot on. Giving the Blues every Friday night this year was purely so they would be have maximum exposure to MRP scrutiny. Genius.

 

[Roo Beauty]

Still haven't got with the times have you?

- Bryce Gibbs is suspended while Jay Schulz who has applied a similar tackle is cleared of any charge.
- A Dylan Buckley goal on a tight angle with the non-preferred boot gets looked past for goal of the year contention, sparking fury amongst a majority of supporters.
- An experience player walks out of the club, and the AFL refuses with the compo pick and Carlton get nothing in return. (This can be argued)
- Carlton were guinea pigs for Sunday night matches (playing 3 of the 4 that were organised), which had seen poor crowds and huge amounts of money lost.
- Of all teams that have finished in the bottom 6 last year. Carlton are the only one scheduled to face the reigning premiers twice this year. Both matches still await.



It is satirical humour, regarding the unbalance between the treatment of all clubs and players. Buddy and Tippett's sanctions for rough conduct were are farce given that Gibbs was handed a harsher punishment for an act that is part of the game. The AFL doesn't want to ruin any Sydney player's reputation of being the perfect role model of the AFL.

Yes I know, just a poor attempt. Since when does Carlton get continually mistreated by the AFL?

 

[AM]

There is a remedy already. When a player is wrapped-up the tackler drops his knees becoming dead weight thereby dragging the ball carrying opponent to the ground. Free kick to the tackler. It's in the AFL tackling guide and taught at junior level.

Had Schulze or Gibbs done that they would not have been the centre of attention.

 

[Roo Beauty]

Oh dear.

A poor attempt at humour, and the poster is exaggerating when he says "the AFL have a thing for hating the Blues". Carlton are a big club, they get the prime time matches and they put bums on seats (although not as much this year), so I'm at a loss as to how the AFL hate the Blues.

 

[KissKiss]

What about a simple rule of

- Pin both the arms of an opponent and in the process of the tackle you knock them out then you are suspended.

Would be easy to understand for everyone involved.

What if you pin someones arms and are taking them to ground but a knee or boot from their team mate knocks them out accidently? It's not your fault but happens in the process of a tackle

 

[calaisking]

So much hype over this..

If there's clear malice and/or intention when the player lays the tackle then a report/suspension should be in place. There is no need to start changing rules over two incidents considering the amount of tackles that are laid in a game.

In my honest opinion, Gibbs should of got one week, not two and Schulz getting off was the correct decision.

 

[TeeJay Blue]

Yep, spot on. Giving the Blues every Friday night this year was purely so they would be have maximum exposure to MRP scrutiny. Genius.

Loving the exaggeration.

The reason why Carlton were given many Friday night games was because president Mark Logiudice made a statement to the AFL that the Sunday and Monday night games in 2014 had disadvantaged the club in terms of profit and attendances.

I'm just as pissed off with the number of Friday nights Carlton has. 2 or 3 at most. 6-7 is absolutely ridiculous.
The remaining ones under Barker might see a better effort, therefore little complaint.

Anyway, stick to the topic. Gibbs has a right to make to make a 'please explain' for what has taken place. He had intended to bring Gray down but he did not intend to concuss him. Whatever Gibbs receives = what ever Schulz receives (probably minus 1 week for the duty of care he shown by putting his hand up to inform the Sydney personnel).

The so-called 'sling' tackle is not the problem here.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

touch football

 

[El Topo]

How about players try to get rid of the ball when tackled? The reason guys like Gray are lauded for taking on the opposition is because this is what can happen if you challenge the tackler. IT'S PART OF THE GAME.

 

[Isosceles]

I object to it being called a sling tackle. Neither Gibbs or Schulz performed a "sling tackle".
Media calling it a sling tackle doesnt mean its a sling tackle

Sling tackle.

Three mentions of the term weren't enough.