The AFL's biggest mistake in 2009

[the rotating forward]

It started off with a rule change after Nick Maxwell showed some fair physicality, and has been compounded by the recent decision to suspend Buddy for 2 weeks - clamping down on head high contact after a fair bump.

The rule states: a player shall be deemed to have committed a reportable offence where in the bumping of an opponent (whether reasonably or unreasonably) he causes forceful contact to be made with any part of his body to an opponent's head or neck when they had a realistic alternative to contest the ball or tackle.

This has lead to players recklessly throwing themselves at the footy showing no regard for their safety, putting themselves in dangerous positions. Examples of players sliding into a contest and colliding with their opponent's knee/hip, then receiving a free kick, have shown how ridiculous this rule change has become.

Buddy's hit on Ben Cousins was a good old-fashioned hip and shoulder, with his elbow well and truly tucked into his body. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O3h_E80vXw If you look at the footage (will need to wait until slow-motion replays to see clearly), Cousins leans forward at the last second to regain control of the football, resulting in his head recklessly flying forward into Buddy's shoulder.

If Buddy were to have done what the AFL had said, he would have either collided with Cousins front on causing injury to himself, or by tackling Cousins, he could well have caused shoulder damage.

In this case the bump was the only reasonably thing to do, and if it weren't for the AFL's ridiculous rule change, players may actually show a little bit of care for their safety.

Please rule makers - if there's one thing you are to do before season 2010, have some courage and admit you got the rule wrong. It is a terrible rule, one which must be rectified or else we shall see an art (bumping) be lost altogether.

Physical strength is becoming less and less useful (rucks are no longer able to, by way of strength, push their opponent out of the way; and in a marking contest you can only push someone away unless the ball is within 5 metres - for goodness sake, this is a physical impossibility proved so by physicians - you simply dont have time to push someone away within 5 metres of the ball then mark it when it's coming to you at the speed of a kick)!

Bring back coming sense, and bring back physicality. Reward players for being strong! Not recklessly strong or aggresive, but fair and skilful.

 

[mjr_42]

I agree that the rule makes bumping problematic, but it's not impossible.

There was nothing reckless about Cousins' actions - there was an attempt at a sidestep before dishing off a handball. His movement forward and sideways led to his body being angled forward.

And it wasn't unreasonable for Franklin to attemp to bump Cousins, either. However, when a 6'6" player attempts a front-on bump on a player who's 5'11", there's always a risk that the taller player will collect the smaller player in the head.

That's what happened and according to the rules - which incidentally, I agree with - Buddy has to go.

Finally, your assertion that Buddy would have hurt himself by tackling Cousins is ridiculous.

Melbourne's Neville Jetta (180cm, 77kg) attempted a front-on tackle on a running Aaron Sandilands (211cm, 125kg) in round 20 and won a free kick. In the process of the tackle, Sandilands fell forward on top of Jetta and both walked away unharmed.

Buddy had the option to tackle Cousins, but he chose not to. By choosing to bump, he increased his chances of making high contact.

 

[strategy]

I agree that the rule makes bumping problematic, but it's not impossible.

There was nothing reckless about Cousins' actions - there was an attempt at a sidestep before dishing off a handball. His movement forward and sideways led to his body being angled forward.

And it wasn't unreasonable for Franklin to attemp to bump Cousins, either. However, when a 6'6" player attempts a front-on bump on a player who's 5'11", there's always a risk that the taller player will collect the smaller player in the head.

That's what happened and according to the rules - which incidentally, I agree with - Buddy has to go.



So what your saying is Tackling is LEGAL and BUMPING first is ILLEGAL.

How wrong the rule is .

Cousins was hit in the neck as he was slipping .Contact was unavoidable .Cousins was NOT knocked out but stunned .

It was an accident .

 

[mjr_42]

So what your saying is Tackling is LEGAL and BUMPING first is ILLEGAL.

How wrong the rule is .

Cousins was hit in the neck as he was slipping .Contact was unavoidable .Cousins was NOT knocked out but stunned .

It was an accident .

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that choosing to bump first - particularly from front-on - is MORE RISKY than tackling.

Had Franklin made contact solely with Cousins' shoulder, there wouldn't have been a problem. But he didn't, and there was a problem.

I agree that the high contact was an accident, but I don't know how you worked out that Cousins was "hit in the neck". None of the footage in the YouTube video shows conclusively where Cousins was hit.

I also disagree that he was slipping - I contend it was simply his forward and sideways movement that caused him to be crouched forward - but that's neither here nor there.

Given Cousins' disorientation after the incident, it can be assumed that some contact was made above his shoulder (either neck or head) and that contact was therefore illegal and reportable.

Buddy made the choice to bump instead of tackle; he increased the risk that he would make illegal contact with Cousins and now he's paying the price.

 

[TimmehJC"]

You say Cousins actions were reckless, but neither were buddy's. He was chasing a player with the ball, the play changed direction straight into his path, he pulls up and braces for contact. 0.4s between the change of direction and the hit. What could he have done? And don't say tackle, because to make the decision in 0.4s is pretty much impossible.