Roast Tripping

[Slattery_20]

yeah i would have been fine with 1-2 for davey. did damage and kinda hard to call an accident

as for tripping, i'd say the kicking factor also plays a part...a trip from behind as you're going through your kicking motion is pretty dangerous.

Yep could've easily done serious neck/shoulder damage, the fact the bloke was carted off should've gone against him.

Of course, tunneling is no longer the de rigeur rule...

 

[Phone]

Watch it again carefully, you'll see that Crameri runs off a legitimate tackle and trips due to his right foot hitting his left leg.

yes and why do you think his foot hit his leg. but yes we'll watch it again. i personally think the side on view tells the story: otten's tackle falls off, he goes the trip to at least stop Cram from running into goal ala houli the week before.

[youtube]bUq0RRvtGzs[/youtube]

he doesn't hold onto his leg for 5 seconds and start humping it but he def. flicks his leg and throws cram off balance. indeed let's take it to picture form!

from this point hear it's clear what otten intends to do with his arm, and it ain't dragging cram down by his collar.

and from here well....

you can see otten's hand transform into a flicking position/motion around cram's right foot - the same foot he hits his leg with! Oh gee i wonder...you can even see in the last picture cram's right foot has already been knocked off direction by otten in comparison to the picture above

he would have been unlucky to get weeks but it was intentional and the point of it was to bring cram down and stop a goal. thankfully captain shit himself van berlo stepped in and kicked it straight back to us anyway

so Call Me Cake i ask you......lol y u trolling dawg?

oh and btw by popular demand i made lolololololololol #1 a public video

 

[Slattery_20]

I thought he flicked the (side closest to the centre) foot which then kicked the other foot. Didn't super-slo-mo it, but that was my impression.

Don't really care if it's suspended or not - hardly dangerous - but why the heck wasn't it a free kick?

 

[Kong]

... It was a free kick.

 

[Phone]

i think he meant 50. i thought hand trips were supposed to be called 50 too.

 

[Kong]

Yeah that's what they've been saying.

I really wouldn't know these days.

Wasn't a tackle/hold/bump applied after the disposal's made supposed to be an automatic 50m as well?

 

[Phone]

Yeah but I think there's a sorta grey area there. the umps will usually call it if they feel you've had the time to prevent the bump happening.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

yeah i would have been fine with 1-2 for davey. did damage and kinda hard to call an accident

really? Huh...

I definitely thought it was an accident - as in at no point did Davey make an action that would result in a player hitting the ground without his feet under him.

He just protected the space and turned into the player, who jumped at the same time.

 

[Skeeta Olly]

Crameri wasn't tripped.

Watch it again carefully, you'll see that Crameri runs off a legitimate tackle and trips due to his right foot hitting his left leg.

I thought we were extremely lucky to get the free (even if Crameri looked like he was getting back up pretty quickly after falling down).

Watch it again, it was not a trip.

As the result of having his ankle tapped. That's the whole point of it, you flick the person's foot to the other side so they kick their own leg and trip over.

[YOUTUBE]n6O5a6umR5s[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]z8pDeYMH-iE[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]liH5dGHJjpo[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]G4PGZfloohQ[/YOUTUBE]

4 examples of what Otten did.

 

[Kong]

I'm assuming CMC was kidding.

Right?

 

[LofaTatupu]

In League, not sure about Union, you cannot tackle a player below the waist or try to trip them if they are in the motion of kicking.

In AFL kicking is obviously a lot more prevalent and you don't have the opportunity to tackle a player's legs when they aren't kicking very often so it is outlawed completely rather than leave a grey area.

If you are comparing tackling between sports I think the "in the back" rule in AFL is much more bizarre and confusing. It seems like it has been around since day dot though and is a quirk, I suppose.

Yeah very good points, that goes to Phone as well. Thanks guys. It does make sense if they are kicking, but it still frustrates me in general play. All I was looking for was the justification behind the rule and I'm quite satisfied with that even if I don't 100% agree with it. But that's just my opinion.

You're right, I also don't really 'get' the in the back free kicks. They also really annoy me. Sure if someone is on the ground and you jump into their back, fine. But any tackle that starts in a standing position, and the person just happens to land on their back (I'm sure there are situations you could say the tackled deliberated drove into his back, and that's fine), I hate when those are frees. I think it's the interpretation that's the problem with that rule though. It should be applied less than kicking in danger IMO. Keep it in the rules, but interpret it only in blatant situations where there is intent or recklessness, not just any old tackle where the player unintentionally lands on someones back.
But this wasn't the thread to bring that up in really So sorry about the thread jack. Carry on.

 

[stugots]

see rubbish after rubbish 50's every week but they let a potentially very dangerous act like that go

 

[ringo200]

I could be wrong but I always thought it was tripping with the feet that was an automatic 50 and report and the hand trip is seen as a lesser offence.