It took a jury 30 minutes to dismiss the charge. What wasn't clear about it? You have a player whose job is to tackle other players tackling another player. Charge him for that tackle and the game is poorer for it. You probably ruin his career. There's no way he ever plays with that pure edge ever again having been put through the wringer this week. Glad the bye is coming.
Fair enough re matter of opinion, however being a panel will not guarantee being more consistent.
Plus, don't forget, the old panel had a roster. From memory it was 3 of a panel of 5 would adjudicate each week.
That's a matter of opinion. And all other things being equal, a panel can't be more inconsistent than a single person.
Of course, they still have to appoint the right people.
The brain basically floats inside the skull in a jellylike substance call cerebrospinal fluid. A concussion is when the brain basically slams into the inside of your skull. Wearing a helmet does nothing to stop that.
Helmets stop skull fractures and such.
Thom, l am not making up any rules, just made a comment.
He has been charged with a dangerous tackle. Clearly Christian thinks it could have been executed better. It appears that he does slam him a little into the ground, which is probably what Christian was thinking (I can't think of anything else he could have been thinking).
I am sure he will get off on appeal.
As a general comment (not saying anything about this case), I don't like the way players slam each other into the ground in tackles. It is dangerous and the AFL should keep a close watch on it.
Thom good point, however the "high contact" is for his head hitting the ground, not what part of the body the tackler grabbed.
Put it another way, if a player grabbed another round the waist in a tackle, upended him and deliberately rammed his head into the ground, I am sure you wouldn't be arguing it was not high contact because he grabbed him around the waist.
Not that I am suggesting that this case is anything like that, I am just trying to make sense of the assessment. There are many comments on this article critical of Christian, but he does have to follow guidelines and I don't think the criticism of him is fair.
If that’s true, and it’s just not, then litigation will end the AFL within 10 years. More and more players will wear headgear and it will become mandatory at lower levels until it becomes ubiquitous at AFL level.
Can headgear stop CTE? No. But that’s where you are confusing things. Of course headgear can absorb shocks and reduce concussion. What helmets can’t do is prevent CTE or concussion via the neck.
Offer proof or admit you are wrong.
You are talking about the club that just had $10.6 million slashed from their funding. They haven’t got the money to challenge! They didn’t challenge for Touk and he’s in Brownlow form. They’ll challenge for Nick, but how dare the AFL put them up to it?!
It is time for the AFL to free the Suns from their onerous ownership deal and let them self determine. Kowtowing to Gil’s ego will kill the club.
Nothing about the tackle was high. It’s ball and a free kick, cased closed. It would have been a travesty if it wasn’t called ball. Nothing to see. Anything else I have to say is unpublishable.
Perhaps as a Cat supporter, you would realise that Dunci will miss two weeks due to the careless tackle. Also as a Geelong supporter I am not sure if you remember a player called Danger being rubbed out for four weeks due to a careless bump.
What has happened to our game!? As a cats supporter I have no issue with what Nick has done - perfect tackle. What else could he have done!? Unfortunate Duncan was concussed - but hey - it’s a contact sport.
Or well it used to be contact sport - what a joke!
Worst . . . decision . . . ever! First the 6x6 rule, then the bloody stand rule. What next? Touch footy? Fair dinkum, the game is being ruined. It's becoming more and more like AFLX.
It's not his fault. He has 3 things to determine and the table of penalties gives an outcome.
In this case he ruled
Careless conduct
High contact
High impact
The only arguable one is careless conduct. Was it careless or something less? Probably careless, yet seems unfair to result in a 2 match suspension.
I think he will get off, but I am pretty comfortable with the ruling and appeals process.
Thom Roker
Roar Guru
It took a jury 30 minutes to dismiss the charge. What wasn't clear about it? You have a player whose job is to tackle other players tackling another player. Charge him for that tackle and the game is poorer for it. You probably ruin his career. There's no way he ever plays with that pure edge ever again having been put through the wringer this week. Glad the bye is coming.
RT
Roar Rookie
Fair enough re matter of opinion, however being a panel will not guarantee being more consistent. Plus, don't forget, the old panel had a roster. From memory it was 3 of a panel of 5 would adjudicate each week.
JamesH
Roar Guru
That's a matter of opinion. And all other things being equal, a panel can't be more inconsistent than a single person. Of course, they still have to appoint the right people.
Chanon
Roar Rookie
Chuck the AFL has officially forbidden rear end tackles!
Cat
Roar Guru
The brain basically floats inside the skull in a jellylike substance call cerebrospinal fluid. A concussion is when the brain basically slams into the inside of your skull. Wearing a helmet does nothing to stop that. Helmets stop skull fractures and such.
RT
Roar Rookie
Thom, l am not making up any rules, just made a comment. He has been charged with a dangerous tackle. Clearly Christian thinks it could have been executed better. It appears that he does slam him a little into the ground, which is probably what Christian was thinking (I can't think of anything else he could have been thinking). I am sure he will get off on appeal. As a general comment (not saying anything about this case), I don't like the way players slam each other into the ground in tackles. It is dangerous and the AFL should keep a close watch on it.
RT
Roar Rookie
Thom good point, however the "high contact" is for his head hitting the ground, not what part of the body the tackler grabbed. Put it another way, if a player grabbed another round the waist in a tackle, upended him and deliberately rammed his head into the ground, I am sure you wouldn't be arguing it was not high contact because he grabbed him around the waist. Not that I am suggesting that this case is anything like that, I am just trying to make sense of the assessment. There are many comments on this article critical of Christian, but he does have to follow guidelines and I don't think the criticism of him is fair.
Thom Roker
Roar Guru
No fault of the tackler. It has never been against the rules to tackle a player like that. But now you’re making up the rules. Give it a rest.
Thom Roker
Roar Guru
If that’s true, and it’s just not, then litigation will end the AFL within 10 years. More and more players will wear headgear and it will become mandatory at lower levels until it becomes ubiquitous at AFL level. Can headgear stop CTE? No. But that’s where you are confusing things. Of course headgear can absorb shocks and reduce concussion. What helmets can’t do is prevent CTE or concussion via the neck. Offer proof or admit you are wrong.
Thom Roker
Roar Guru
You are talking about the club that just had $10.6 million slashed from their funding. They haven’t got the money to challenge! They didn’t challenge for Touk and he’s in Brownlow form. They’ll challenge for Nick, but how dare the AFL put them up to it?! It is time for the AFL to free the Suns from their onerous ownership deal and let them self determine. Kowtowing to Gil’s ego will kill the club.
Thom Roker
Roar Guru
Nothing about the tackle was high. It’s ball and a free kick, cased closed. It would have been a travesty if it wasn’t called ball. Nothing to see. Anything else I have to say is unpublishable.
.kraM
Roar Rookie
Not perfect but no way should ge be suspended for it.
Gatto Nero
Roar Rookie
Perhaps as a Cat supporter, you would realise that Dunci will miss two weeks due to the careless tackle. Also as a Geelong supporter I am not sure if you remember a player called Danger being rubbed out for four weeks due to a careless bump.
Andrew
Guest
What has happened to our game!? As a cats supporter I have no issue with what Nick has done - perfect tackle. What else could he have done!? Unfortunate Duncan was concussed - but hey - it’s a contact sport. Or well it used to be contact sport - what a joke!
pablocruz
Roar Rookie
Worst . . . decision . . . ever! First the 6x6 rule, then the bloody stand rule. What next? Touch footy? Fair dinkum, the game is being ruined. It's becoming more and more like AFLX.
Chanon
Roar Rookie
So true plus he’s a black & white!
Charlie Keegan
Roar Guru
Can’t trust anyone with two first names
Chanon
Roar Rookie
Clearly Christian is looking through a different lens. Sack him a bloody joke!
RT
Roar Rookie
The panel was more inconsistent. And who was the panel member that commented on a radio show about a case before they even had their meeting? Amateur.
RT
Roar Rookie
It's not his fault. He has 3 things to determine and the table of penalties gives an outcome. In this case he ruled Careless conduct High contact High impact The only arguable one is careless conduct. Was it careless or something less? Probably careless, yet seems unfair to result in a 2 match suspension. I think he will get off, but I am pretty comfortable with the ruling and appeals process.