Roar Rookie
Joined February 2012
3k
Views
2
Published
3
Comments
Have returned to Adelaide after 27 years in Sydney. Favourite teams; Adelaide Crows, Glenelg FC (SANFL), Wests Tigers, Glenelg DCC (SACA). Cricket tragic and author, or co-author, of four books on the game.
Published
Comments
The recent furore surrounding the suspension, and subsequent pardon, of Melbourne's Jack Viney has raised debate as to whether the bump needs to be…
Maybe it's just because India is involved but it seems the "spirit of the game" has awoken with a vengeance. First there was the…
Brendon,
The concept of a waiver may, or may not, solve the problem down the track. I’m sure there are any number of ambulance chasing lawyers who might argue that while the player accepts responsibility for accidents which may happen to him the AFL is responsible for allowing a situation to exist which may cause harm when they could have prevented it (e.g. ban the front-on bump – given, as I said, the AFL have no control over how that bump might be delivered).
As for ‘sad, selfish’ people suing the AFL I’d merely say that human nature suggests these people are all around us. Like litigation today, it is seen as just another way of ‘winning the lottery’.
As for the Hawks/Swans game last night I did not see it (out at a cricket dinner) but I am becoming more concerned with how readily commentators are prepared to highlight potential MRP offences. This is often highlighted with footage from various angles which was not shown as part of the telecast at the time the incident occurred. Often, the only way we know it even happened is by this footage being shown later with the attendant, “I think he’s in trouble!” comment.
As for renewing your Port Adelaide membership, as a Crows fan, I’d say “Do it”. The Power, despite the apparent divisions within SA, are one of the teams I most like watching. Living in Sydney for 27 years has taken from me the childish Adelaide tendency to ‘hate’ Port, or ‘hate’ the Crows (if you’re a Port fan). I understand rivalry but here it is extreme to the point of stupidity. Those fans who say they would not attend the ‘other’ teams home game because it means they get the money is petty, childish and stupid beyond belief. I love seeing the Crows and Port win against interstate opposition (even more so if it’s Victorian). Perhaps I’m not so different after all.
Is it time to bump the bump?
Sheek,
I agree entirely that it’s a dangerous, slippery slope the AFL (or the NRL) head down if they start penalising purely on the damage done. Two identical bumps. One player cannons into another but in doing so is stopped from crashing heavily to the ground and suffering concussion with the impact. The other player smacks into the ground, like Ward, and is concussed.
Is this second bump, in its execution, worse than the first? The answer is no but player two has a case to answer. Frankly, it is ridiculous and reeks of political correctness. Unfortunately, it seems that’s the way we are headed.
Is it time to bump the bump?
Footy Fan,
I’m sure this will be discussed, if it hasn’t been already. The question will remain (until somebody tests it) whether just signing a waiver completely absolves the AFL of any and all responsibility in this area.
As I suggested in my article – and I don’t know the legal ramifications – if the AFL actually ban this type of action they can at least lay claim to have attempted to do something about protecting players. If they continue to allow the bump then they run the risk of being responsible because they can have no power to determine how that bump might be executed or the unintended consequences of that bump. The AFL can say, “Don’t hit him in the head” but by allowing the bump to be ‘legal’ they can’t guarantee it. Will waivers actually protect the AFL from legal action down the track?
Is it time to bump the bump?