Well my position on this could be characterized as socialist.
I pick issues on merit not a one size fits all dogma.
------
And I'm old enough to remember all the manifold times Victoria has given SA the serrated protuberance of the bromeliad.
so if it was a lesser known player he'd have got a week but because it burgoyne and hawthorn its all forgiven. Just another hypocritical decision not based on the action but on who the player and club are - free kick hawthorn
Its amazing how quick Danger got his right arm down to break the fall.
He looked gone with his left arm pinged but he was like a cat and rolled with it.
Most probably, but (cynically) I have to wonder that if it wasn't Dangerfield or another star on the end of it, then does former Geelong player and current AFL Ops Manager, Steve Hocking change the rules?
Clearly profile matters....
AFL have now changed the rule but the decision was correct. It was a sling tackle but he had the critical arm free. The rule stated that the arms (plural) had to be pinned which "they" weren't. The correct decision initially and now the correct move by the AFL.
I see the AFL have now changed the MRO guideline for a player being considered to be in a vulnerable position (where they can't protect themselves when falling) if an "arm" is pinned rather than "arms".
Surely the swinging of a player 180 or 360 degrees is not the dangerous part, it is the unnecessary slamming of them into the ground, usually in a way that angles their head towards the ground so the most impact is received in the head and shoulder region. Even if the player's arms are both free, he should only have to worry about disposing of the ball, not protecting his head because players tackle in a dangerous manner.
Like a lot of penalties in the public domain, this one is corrupted by the responsible authorities. No question this deserved suspension given precedent. Now a bullshit excuse announcement tonight by the AFL. Wow!
It’s time already for another change to the match review system or at least the personnel. We seem to going from bad to worse. Michael Christian has shown himself to be totally incompetent in this role.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Well my position on this could be characterized as socialist. I pick issues on merit not a one size fits all dogma. ------ And I'm old enough to remember all the manifold times Victoria has given SA the serrated protuberance of the bromeliad.
Jimmy
Guest
Maybe it’s because of socialists
Larrikin
Roar Rookie
so if it was a lesser known player he'd have got a week but because it burgoyne and hawthorn its all forgiven. Just another hypocritical decision not based on the action but on who the player and club are - free kick hawthorn
Goalsonly
Roar Rookie
Its amazing how quick Danger got his right arm down to break the fall. He looked gone with his left arm pinged but he was like a cat and rolled with it.
Birdman
Roar Rookie
Most probably, but (cynically) I have to wonder that if it wasn't Dangerfield or another star on the end of it, then does former Geelong player and current AFL Ops Manager, Steve Hocking change the rules? Clearly profile matters....
Jonboy
Roar Rookie
Calls for another protest march !
bdosi
Guest
What an absolute joke this decision is - if Taylor walker didn’t that he’d have got 3 weeks. Free kick hawthorn is alive and well still I see!
The Dom is good
Roar Rookie
any other team player would have copped a suspension - free kick hawthorn
RT
Roar Rookie
Bring back "unduly rough play"!
ScottD
Roar Guru
AFL have now changed the rule but the decision was correct. It was a sling tackle but he had the critical arm free. The rule stated that the arms (plural) had to be pinned which "they" weren't. The correct decision initially and now the correct move by the AFL.
RT
Roar Rookie
I see the AFL have now changed the MRO guideline for a player being considered to be in a vulnerable position (where they can't protect themselves when falling) if an "arm" is pinned rather than "arms". Surely the swinging of a player 180 or 360 degrees is not the dangerous part, it is the unnecessary slamming of them into the ground, usually in a way that angles their head towards the ground so the most impact is received in the head and shoulder region. Even if the player's arms are both free, he should only have to worry about disposing of the ball, not protecting his head because players tackle in a dangerous manner.
Charlie Keegan
Roar Guru
Four weeks might be excessive but I do think he was deserving of at least something
michael RVC
Roar Pro
I think I just made a comment that won’t be allowed by the site editors.
michael RVC
Roar Pro
Like a lot of penalties in the public domain, this one is corrupted by the responsible authorities. No question this deserved suspension given precedent. Now a bullshit excuse announcement tonight by the AFL. Wow!
PeteB
Roar Rookie
It’s time already for another change to the match review system or at least the personnel. We seem to going from bad to worse. Michael Christian has shown himself to be totally incompetent in this role.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
The act is what should be punished not the result
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Of course it will get serious when someone's neck is broken.
michael RVC
Roar Pro
One of the greatest of modern footballers and seemingly good guy, but this is silly. Four weeks down to two for a guilty plea.
Birdman
Roar Rookie
Play on! :silly: Nah, worth a week even if Danger not hurt but those calling for 4 weeks need to get a grip.
WCE
Roar Rookie
I'm confused, he got off? WTF??