Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. Taylor Walker

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

spexau said:
Anyone got any footage of the Nahas and NLM tackles? I need a comparison!
Click to expand...

I tried to have a look, but couldnt find it. The AFL usually releases a video complilation with all the incidents that are cited by the MRP, but they might not do it this week until after tonight's game.
 
Absolute Bullshit and should challenge.

Wouldnt surprise me if its one of the few cases upheld this year though.
 
absolute crap you can be guaranteed franklin would get off but because hes not victorian he gets suspended. Was a perfect tackle he cant help being strong should challenge
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Wouldn't be surprised if they introduce the '3 feet' rule, like they have in netball, into the NAB cup next year the way things are going
 
relapse said:
I tried to have a look, but couldnt find it. The AFL usually releases a video complilation with all the incidents that are cited by the MRP, but they might not do it this week until after tonight's game.
Click to expand...

Yeah true, I have kept forgetting there's a game tonight.

Hopefully we can see some comparative footage so we can see where Tex apparently went wrong.
 
Crow-eater said:
It was negligent ( 1 point), medium impact (2 points) and high contact ( 2 points)

Why medium and not low?
Click to expand...
also bullshit (4 points)
 
Medium impact? So 'low impact' is 'no impact'? He was off the ground for 5 minutes max.

Also how is it high contact when he never touched his head or directed it toward the ground.
 
Could be way off the mark, but my first thought was if Walker's is deemed rough conduct, How isn't Lovett_Murray's? Then I remembered its dreamtime at the G this weekend. Coincidence?

I think we'll challenge. A good tackle shouldn't be punished. I doubt it would have even come up without the media focus. I was at the game and at the time I thought it was a great tackle. That seemed to be the consensus of the crowd.
 
thumbnail.aspx
Sando should do a video showing some examples of tough football for the media. Not good enough Walker:thumbsd:
 
We will challenge this, even if to get it down to a match. The Nahas one was considered in media circles to be a lot worse and the only one likely to cop a suspension, so the fact he gets off pisses me off! It was a bloody spear, this was simply a tackle with one motion and it was unfortunate Taylor was slightly hurt. It was not a sling ffs!!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Wilburwild said:
Could be way off the mark, but my first thought was if Walker's is deemed rough conduct, How isn't Lovett_Murray's? Then I remembered its dreamtime at the G this weekend. Coincidence?

I think we'll challenge. A good tackle shouldn't be punished. I doubt it would have even come up without the media focus. I was at the game and at the time I thought it was a great tackle. That seemed to be the consensus of the crowd.
Click to expand...

I hope we do challenge, Lovett-Murrays was probably the worst of the three, so the decision made is bizarre.
 
MarcusP2 said:
Medium impact? So 'low impact' is 'no impact'? He was off the ground for 5 minutes max.

Also how is it high contact when he never touched his head or directed it toward the ground.
Click to expand...
This is what doesn't make sense, and gives more than enough doubt for a trip to the tribunal.
 
Harry Taylor played 90% of the game FFS!! The 6th highest TOG by a Geelong player.

Adelaide have to challenge it - as I posted elsewhere Taylor was only off the ground for 7 minutes of the 1st quarter and resumed without any sign of concussion at the beginning of the 2nd quarter.

The AFL is a Vic-centric run game - 2 similar potential charges against players of Victorian based teams totally ignored, but as usual its slam the non-Victorian.

No way did that tackle deserve citing, let alone the hefty penalty being offered. :thumbsd:
 
Crow-eater said:
It was negligent ( 1 point), medium impact (2 points) and high contact ( 2 points)

Why medium and not low?
Click to expand...

Contact wasn't high either, It was the grass that got him high. Firstly it should be thrown out, but if they want to keep it, it should be negligent (1 point), low impact (1 point) and whatever you get for not high contact...
 
spexau said:
Anyone got any footage of the Nahas and NLM tackles? I need a comparison!
Click to expand...

AFL House: The footage of the Nahas and Lovett-Murray tackles has uh... mysteriously disappeared.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The club must challenge this

Harry was not injured
Harry did not release the ball so Tex was well in his rights to bring the player to ground
The tackle was continuous, there was no secondary motion in the tackle
 
Complete. Utter. Bullshet.

it was a great,strong tackle, with no secondary motion. both guys hit at the same time, with the same part of their body.

is tex getting a week for the damage that he may have done to himself as well????

Please afc, please challenge this.
 
I'm leaning towards challenging. It would suck if we lost at the tribunal and he ended up being out for 3.

The impact grading is the most confusing. Harry Taylor was off the ground for like 5 minutes, and Tex gets medium impact. And yet NLM gets off despite Priddis going off for concussion.

Inconsistency?!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom