Tackling the tackling issue, how do we resolve the issue?

Remove this Banner Ad

Carringbush2010

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Veteran 10k Posts
Jun 6, 2016
19,466
12,081
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Coaching panels coach players to pin the arms to disable disposal by the tackled player.

The issue though is if the tackled player is brought to ground there is risk of head contact with the ground, and by extension possible concussion. Seems now if you bring a player to ground with their arms pinned it's an automatic suspension, regardless if the tackle is a slinging motion or not.

IMO, the action should be judged and not the outcome, i:e if the tackled player is not deliberately slung in the tackle yet still hits head on the deck then it should be either ball up or free kick for htb. This of course assumes the prior opportunity rule is in play.

After all this is a full contact sport and players should and probably would know the dangers of participating in such a game, and should probably be signing a waiver.

Nathan Buckley has suggested we remove the prior opportunity rule (with support from other commentators) to encourage the umpires to blow the whistle before a player is brought to ground, i:e penalize the player with ball that do not dispose of the ball in a tackle. This obviously brings its own issues, i:e players will be discouraged to win the ball in congestion.

So if that is not the answer, how do we tackle the tackling issue?

Do we ban tackling altogether? Well then we may as well just make it touch footy, would instantly kill the game.

Do we ban pinning the arms? Well then that will enable the tackled player disposal, that goes against the idea of disabling the tackled player possession. Even if it were plausible, and given the speed of the game, trying to coach players to tackle without tackling the arms, well, yeah good luck with that.

I think we should go back to basics, if the tackled player is immediately tackled and has no option to dispose of the ball, then the umpire immediately comes in for a ball up, or, if the player has prior and is dispossessed or incorrectly disposes of the ball it's a free kick. Too often the ball is locked up after too much time before the whistle is blown.

Obviously this is easier said than umpired, would be extremely difficult for the umps to adjudicate correctly given the speed of the game.

So how do we tackle the tackling issue?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It's nonsense what the game is coming to. The reason alot of these tackles turn into what is now a dangerous tackle is because they let the play go on too long instead of either paying the free kick earlier or balling it up once the ball is pinned. Hearing Razor Ray trying to justify it on SEN just makes me more frustrated by it all. If you want to protect the head make it compulsory that all players wear helmets. Otherwise they need to accept that accidents will happen. Nobody is forcing these players to play footy. Everybody knows the risks involved. The AFL is only concerned with litigation here not for the well-being of the players. We are turning this game into a joke.
 
It's actually very simple. Reduce the (interpretation of) a tackle to be "complete", and Umpires blow the whistle immediately.

You can still have "prior opportunity" (players can still grab the ball in congestion and not dispose) - but the outcome is determined on the tackle commencing, not finishing. "Prior Opportunity" should be about opportunity prior to the tackle anyway.

No need to wrestle anyone to ground - as soon as you restrict the player in possession, that's a tackle. (Two hands, arm/ball pinned, etc).

Combined with correctly penalising incorrect disposal, and the problem will be (mostly) behind us.
 
Player being tackled has the onus on them to either break the tackle fully or go to ground. Try to break a tackle and immediately fail or incorrect disposal, holding the ball.

Go to ground immediately, Ball up. Play on if ball comes out on ground or during motion to ground, unless prior opportunity existed.

If prior opportunity to dispose of ball exists before a tackle is made.

A tackle is made where a player is restricted in their free movement by a legal grabbing motion. This may be by either one or both arms pinned in a bear hug, or jumper grab that visibly restricts movement.

Movement exists where.....


Opens a can of worms.

Make the teams wear opposite types of velcro.
 
Re the conversation on helmets, there's no evidence that I can find that it reduces the risk of concussion.

Re the conversation on player self responsibility, this I agree with. Players should not be completely absolved of responsibility for self wellbeing.
 
As previously stated blow the whistle earlier. In the past swinging a player 360 was enough to get a free. Now once you have swung a player 360 you are going to take them to ground to prevent disposal.

Also the loosening up on what a legal handball around the time the Dogs won their flag, allows players being tackled to connect up with teammates by throwing it around corners. Result is players have to tackle more forcefully to stop this.
 
There needs to be a proper holistic discussion about changes to tackling rather than simply identifying specific types of dangerous tackles. We already have three key rules that inhibit tackling options.

1. You can't tackle below the knees
2. You can't make any contact above the shoulder
3. You can't fall into their back

It's easy to say 'well, just don't sling', but the reality is that the sling exists in tandem with these constraints and is a reaction to them.

In my opinion, number 3 should have never been a sweeping rule and is part of the reason players sling. I've never heard anyone articulate why someone falling slightly forward in a tackle should be an automatic free kick. These can constitute dangerous tackles but usually aren't.

It makes no sense and never has made sense. People are just used to it.

The point is, if we are going to discuss tightening some rules about tackling, we need to think about loosening some others. The focus needs to be on danger and not technicalities.
 
Pin the arms but don't take them to ground. Simple.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

A lot of these dangerous tackles are resulting from players (no doubt being trained) to place their leg in between the legs of the person whom they are tackling. This limits the player in possessions ability to run/escape from the tackler. Once they are unable to move away, they are sitting ducks to be rag dolled to the ground.
 
It's bloody tough one and some of the bans are ridiculous because the AFL is not providing a pathway for alternatives. The Taylor Adams incident was a gang tackle so how was Adams the culprit.

Tackles like the Broad tackle where he clearly slings the player to the ground should be penalised, that was poor. But the Merret and Adams ones were good tackles where the player hit his head. BUT they didn't sling, they fell to the ground.

The AFL isn't distinguishing between a sling and a tackle where the players arms are pinned and they fall to the ground. There is a big difference.

If they want to penalise actions that have the risk of injury to the head then they need to ban the screamer as a knee to the head has serious consequences. Incidental I hear them say, well the player chose to jump (read chose to bump or tackle) so what's the difference???
 
They take too long to blow the whistle - which you can trace back to the mid 2000s when the AFL became obsessed with keeping the game/ball moving, all because of some bad publicity the game was getting re. tactics used to clog the game up and low scoring stoppage fests.
'In the back' - why isn't this paid anymore? Completely random application of a rule.
Keep it simple - no slinging/driving tackles.
Also, fine/suspend players who do what serial offender Spargo did on the weekend - stopped dead and dropped his head into his opponent, resulting in a concussion to himself. Some people need to be saved from themselves.
 
Simon_Nesbit said:
It's actually very simple. Reduce the (interpretation of) a tackle to be "complete", and Umpires blow the whistle immediately.

You can still have "prior opportunity" (players can still grab the ball in congestion and not dispose) - but the outcome is determined on the tackle commencing, not finishing. "Prior Opportunity" should be about opportunity prior to the tackle anyway.

No need to wrestle anyone to ground - as soon as you restrict the player in possession, that's a tackle. (Two hands, arm/ball pinned, etc).

Combined with correctly penalising incorrect disposal, and the problem will be (mostly) behind us.
Click to expand...
The trouble with this is that good players can break tackles and that particular form of contest is a great part of the game. It showcases a battle of strength between players.
 
It’s a joke tbh, and in typical AFL fashion, no one knows wtf is going on.

Is the MRO punishing the action or, the ever specific, potential to cause injury/damage? The only reason Oliver received no suspension because Parker landed on his shoulder then head, well what happens if Parker injured his shoulder?

Taylor Adams incident was harsh as there were multiple tacklers, so no idea how you determine that he is solely responsible.

As Jimmy Bartel said, it’s a battle of strength. You don’t want the opposing player to get a handball off, the umpire is giving the player opportunity to dispose of the ball, what else can you do other than get him to ground?

As usual it’s more questions than answers, and it’s comical that a player performing a footy act, misses more weeks than those who run past the footy with their elbows out.
 
iBeng said:
Just stop throwing people to the ground? Was this ever such an issue in the past? Wrap the body and drag them down, dont THROW them down?
Click to expand...

In the past the umpire blew the whistle much quicker. Watch games from the 70s and 80s. The whistle happens quickly and its either a free kick or a bounce.

Now the umpire waits for a while and the tackler either risks the tacklee breaking free or they bring them to the ground to ensure they cant escape.

This 2nd action is because of the AFL directing the umpires to wait and see what happens.
 
HairyO said:
In the past the umpire blew the whistle much quicker. Watch games from the 70s and 80s. The whistle happens quickly and its either a free kick or a bounce.

Now the umpire waits for a while and the tackler either risks the tacklee breaking free or they bring them to the ground to ensure they cant escape.

This 2nd action is because of the AFL directing the umpires to wait and see what happens.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you often see players praised for having the strength to get a disposal away while standing in a tackle so the obvious solution to that for players is to get them to the ground, unfortunately they've figured the fastest way to achieve that is to lift slightly and essentially throw the player into the turf...Its crept in as a technique to combat the delay given for tackled players.

Its tricky.
 
iBeng said:
Yeah, you often see players praised for having the strength to get a disposal away while standing in a tackle so the obvious solution to that for players is to get them to the ground, unfortunately they've figured the fastest way to achieve that is to lift slightly and essentially throw the player into the turf...Its crept in as a technique to combat the delay given for tackled players.

Its tricky.
Click to expand...

And the AFL can solve the problem it created by having the whistle blown quickly.

Get rid of nominated rucks, ball up immediately and play continues.
 
hawkman said:
And then you get incidents like Schultz did to the GC player where he was able to break free after a couple of seconds and then kick a goal
Click to expand...
Make sure they don't break free. Better than a suspension.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TY24
MRP / Trib. Charlie Cameron gets a week for dumping tackle on Lever - Tribunal = down to a fine.
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
288
Views
8K
Chief
Chief
Cleric
Time to change the tackling rules
Replies
12
Views
1K
RedV3x
RedV3x
RU_
MRP / Trib. Britney Gutknecht tackle on Paige Shepppard.
Replies
12
Views
1K
Mitchell Madness
Mitchell Madness
C
Daicos dangerous tackle on Daniel
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
245
Views
8K
Chronz
Chronz
My Tilly
Matthew Cottrell tackle
Replies
3
Views
390
Kanye West
Kanye West
Maddo11
Butler tackle on Blakey
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
252
Views
8K
Shinboner '07
S
sobrave
MRP / Trib. Jonas gets a week for a HTB tackle
Replies
24
Views
892
carloss
carloss

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top