News Worpel given a week for tackling opponent

[Strapping Young Lad]

Do we not want players to tackle at all for risk of them falling over?
That’s the only conclusion I can draw from this supposed suspension.




What a mess.

 

[Wojcinski]

Do we not want players to tackle at all for risk of them falling over?
That’s the only conclusion I can draw from this supposed suspension.



What a mess.

surely gets off on appeal, different type of tackle but the same thing as the Holman one. No second motion

 

[hawkman]

Amazing strength by Worpel to slam his head just by tackling just 1 arm

 

[NakedDeadGuy]

Must get off, pathetic suspension.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

The media keep saying “he pinned the arm”.

He didn’t pin an arm, he just held the guys wrist in an attempt to stop him from running off with the ball and disposing of it.

 

[Micksy]

Jesus, looks like all he did was hold his wrist.. Not like he slammed him into the ground.

 

[Devington]

Not sure how much force you can exert while falling to the sodding ground...

Should be thrown out.

 

[HairyO]

Medium impact to a guy who wasnt even injured.

This after high impact why Walsh wasnt injured...

 

[Kezza86]

No chance getting this overturned.

 

[Generalissimo]

Christian has officially gone bonkers.

 

[It Just Is]

No chance getting this overturned.

It’s fairly consistent with what we’ve seen from the MRO this year. Maybe Hawthorn could argue down to low impact and a fine but essentially if you tackle someone and they end up with a sore head, no matter how incidental, you are in trouble.

 

[lordbob]

John Ralph "Because of the pinned arm he is not able to defend himself"

Shows replay of him using non pinned arm to defend himself


So he can't defend himself but defends himself? which is it?

Unfortunate circumstances, would say that worpels legs taking out cunninghams as worpel fell backwards probably contributed to the fall more than the wrist being held as it meant he was unable to keep his feet and pull the arm away.

 

[master bate]

Alex Neal-Bullen put 1 hand on the jumper, 1 hand on the arm and rotated a player attempting to kick and got 4 weeks.

Worpel's got 3 less.

Not a lot in it but if you look at it closely Cunningham is looking to kick and Worpel gets his foot under his other leg and takes him clean off his feet. Combined with the dumping motion that's going to be a week.

The only way to argue is to say he didn't mean to take his legs out from under him and expected him to be stronger. Which is probably true. Unfortunately I don't think that's much of a defence.

 

[master bate]

John Ralph "Because of the pinned arm he is not able to defend himself"

Shows replay of him using non pinned arm to defend himself
View attachment 1153799

So he can't defend himself but defends himself? which is it?

Unfortunate circumstances, would say that worpels legs taking out cunninghams as worpel fell backwards probably contributed to the fall more than the wrist being held as it meant he was unable to keep his feet and pull the arm away.

One free arm isn't much use against a combined 160kg+ getting yanked to the ground, probably not worth worrying too much about Ralphy but the armed pinned aspect of tackles is overrated. Perfectly fine tackles have both arms pinned. Terrible tackles have 2 arms free some times.

You're absolutely right about the legs, just not sure that's much of a defence.

 

[hawkman]

One gets a week and another doesn't get a mention

 

[Kezza86]

It’s fairly consistent with what we’ve seen from the MRO this year. Maybe Hawthorn could argue down to low impact and a fine but essentially if you tackle someone and they end up with a sore head, no matter how incidental, you are in trouble.

1. It’s a sling tackle, when he could have drop his knees to pull him down in a tackle.
2. He had 1 arm pinged
3. He is lucky he was not knocked out.

The intent and act is worth 1 game.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

One gets a week and another doesn't get a mention

Apparently they’re completely different things.

 

[OnTheRocks]

1. It’s a sling tackle, when he could have drop his knees to pull him down in a tackle.
2. He had 1 arm pinged
3. He is lucky he was not knocked out.

The intent and act is worth 1 game.

Your mentality is everything that is wrong with our game.

 

[Banyo Bloods]

This just can’t be allowed to happen (The suspension) horrible when it’s just a good tackle.

 

[HairyO]

One gets a week and another doesn't get a mention

Can the Hawthorn defence be Worpel had a head knock from this tackle therefore not responsible ?

 

[hawkman]

Can the Hawthorn defence be Worpel had a head knock from this tackle therefore not responsible ?

That would mean he misses a week due to concussion

 

[HairyO]

That would mean he misses a week due to concussion

Only if it was medically assessed as a concussion.

 

[lordbob]

One gets a week and another doesn't get a mention

Thats actually a worse tackle as its a double action where as worpels was a single action. Secondly, this is worse because he is swung in such a way taht worpels free hand isnt able to protect his head due to the movement of the body and position of the swans player. Thirdly, the swans player has worpel by the arm AND the jumper at the chest and intetionally slings him into the ground. But its a good tackle when someone tries to fend you off.

Neither should get looked at for a suspension. Both are good tackles. Worpel is just tougher so its not as noticeable.

 

[Chaisa]

Yeah that shouldn't be a suspension. It's more of a slinging act than Holman's was but it's a legitimate tackle IMO.

 

[Jugada]

Slung him to the ground by the arm. Hardly a shock to see that get a week