Match Review Panel

[Q.]

Can a player slide for a mark or is that illegal?

[The Sleeping Giant]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/135770/default.aspx
The MRP video of this weeks charges.

They seem to be making it up as they go along especially with the sliding in to get the ball. There's a few of these where a player has slid in, made no high contact, no injury and a free is paid, or where 3 players have slid in all at the same time, no high contact or injury and they're saying that a free should be paid, what the F for?
How the Walker tackle is worse than Lovitt-Murray's I'll never know, arms pinned and driven forward head first. Surely the possiblity of this action poses a huge danger to the head AND the neck. Walkers tackle only poses a possible danger to the head. My opinion only and I ain't no brain surgeon,,,so to speak. Murray doesn't even get 1 week or carry over points, it's a joke. The MRP decided that Murray's was not intentional, well he could've dropped his knees and pulled Priddis down instead he chose to propell him forward head first, how is this not intentional and Walkers is deliberate?
Following these two examples are a series of head high contacts that would've resulted in weeks on the side lines last year, all could result in serious head and neck injury, all get off with nothing.
Some of the language used to explain these incidences sound more like they're looking for excuses not valid explanations. One player (GC v GWS game) bumps during a shepherd and makes head high contact yet the MRP say that "no player goes into a bump expecting high contact", well what sort of reason is that, WHO EVER DOES EXPECT TO MAKE HIGH CONTACT?
Most of these I'd be happy to let go but that some are and some aren't is just a joke.

Were any of the players injured in the incidents you mentioned.

[Mythical Creature]

Surely Harry O'Brien should be in trouble for cleaning up big Nath Brown's knee!

[tipper]

Can a player slide for a mark or is that illegal?

from my understanding Q man (and i am happy to be corrected) it is not the act of sliding itself that is now a no no. it is sliding and making contact with another player. if you slide and collect the ball, or take a mark, and your momentum takes you into another player, then it is illegal, even though you had the ball and collected it legally!

if you slide and dont contact anyone you are free to go. once again, my understanding may be wrong, but if i am right it is ridiculous. a reactionary rule change to one player getting injured. what next, penalising the nearest opposition player when someone does a hammy??

[CUTTERMAN]

TSG, Priddis suffered concussion and was subbed off in the second 1/4, at least Taylor played the game out, that's the only one I'll put up as defense for the confusing stance of Walkers suspension. As for the others, and if you read my post, I've said that the way the MRP explains these incidents is very confusing in itself let alone the stance week to week and god forbid year to year. As I said previously some of the language they use in that video seems more about making excuses for certain incidents rather than explaining the rules.

[Rik E Boy]

TSG, Priddis suffered concussion and was subbed off in the second 1/4, at least Taylor played the game out, that's the only one I'll put up as defense for the confusing stance of Walkers suspension. As for the others, and if you read my post, I've said that the way the MRP explains these incidents is very confusing in itself let alone the stance week to week and god forbid year to year. As I said previously some of the language they use in that video seems more about making excuses for certain incidents rather than explaining the rules.

Yep it's all over the place. The Priddis one is most confusing. As for Wojo I said last week that I thought he was lucky. I don't think Walker was unlucky.

regards,

REB

[Footy Smart]

TSG, Priddis suffered concussion and was subbed off in the second 1/4, at least Taylor played the game out, that's the only one I'll put up as defense for the confusing stance of Walkers suspension. As for the others, and if you read my post, I've said that the way the MRP explains these incidents is very confusing in itself let alone the stance week to week and god forbid year to year. As I said previously some of the language they use in that video seems more about making excuses for certain incidents rather than explaining the rules.

Yep it's all over the place. The Priddis one is most confusing. As for Wojo I said last week that I thought he was lucky. I don't think Walker was unlucky.

regards,

REB

Walker wasnt unlucky at all, he had almost 1 game suspension in carry over points and the way the AFL looks at the game these days he was always going to get one atleast. He tackled as he has always done, he didnt mean for Taylor to his his head he did mean for him to feel the tackle....

[Gingernuts]

Meh, so be it.

If Adelaide are to be truly considered a premiership threat then they have to be able to cover the lost of a key player like Walker. He's been great the last couple of weeks but he hasn't won the games off his own boot. McKernan will come in as a more than capable replacement.

On last nights display they'll beat Carlton without him anyway.

[CUTTERMAN]

Surely Lovitt-Murray deserved carry over points at the very least.

[Jim05]

Surely Lovitt-Murray deserved carry over points at the very least.

Thought the Nahas incident was the worst one out of those 3

[cripple]

Harry Taylor was concussed. Nothing else matters.

If this is true i look forward to the AFL questioning Geelong as to why they continued to play a concussed player. Clearly against the rules and penalties should follow

[Spargo]

Meh, so be it.

If Adelaide are to be truly considered a premiership threat then they have to be able to cover the lost of a key player like Walker. He's been great the last couple of weeks but he hasn't won the games off his own boot. McKernan will come in as a more than capable replacement.

On last nights display they'll beat Carlton without him anyway.

Gingernuts, the crows are not considered a premiership threat - spare me.
On last night's display if you want back the crows this week against carlton - you can get that bet on with me

[The Sleeping Giant]

Harry Taylor was concussed. Nothing else matters.

If this is true i look forward to the AFL questioning Geelong as to why they continued to play a concussed player. Clearly against the rules and penalties should follow

No rules against a concussed player coming back on to the ground. Maybe you should do some more investigating.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Meh, so be it.

If Adelaide are to be truly considered a premiership threat then they have to be able to cover the lost of a key player like Walker. He's been great the last couple of weeks but he hasn't won the games off his own boot. McKernan will come in as a more than capable replacement.

On last nights display they'll beat Carlton without him anyway.

The crows board is thataway ====>

[cripple]

Harry Taylor was concussed. Nothing else matters.

If this is true i look forward to the AFL questioning Geelong as to why they continued to play a concussed player. Clearly against the rules and penalties should follow

No rules against a concussed player coming back on to the ground. Maybe you should do some more investigating.

Yes there is, it came in at the start of last season. Quick Google search will give you all the info.

[Gingernuts]

Meh, so be it.

If Adelaide are to be truly considered a premiership threat then they have to be able to cover the lost of a key player like Walker. He's been great the last couple of weeks but he hasn't won the games off his own boot. McKernan will come in as a more than capable replacement.

On last nights display they'll beat Carlton without him anyway.

The crows board is thataway ====>

There's a place for arseholes somewhere around here too I believe.

[The Sleeping Giant]

As I thought. Guidelines, not rules.
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2011/s3225219.htm

[The Sleeping Giant]

Meh, so be it.

If Adelaide are to be truly considered a premiership threat then they have to be able to cover the lost of a key player like Walker. He's been great the last couple of weeks but he hasn't won the games off his own boot. McKernan will come in as a more than capable replacement.

On last nights display they'll beat Carlton without him anyway.

The crows board is thataway ====>

There's a place for arseholes somewhere around here too I believe.

Not anymore princess

[Rik E Boy]

Meh, so be it.

If Adelaide are to be truly considered a premiership threat then they have to be able to cover the lost of a key player like Walker. He's been great the last couple of weeks but he hasn't won the games off his own boot. McKernan will come in as a more than capable replacement.

On last nights display they'll beat Carlton without him anyway.

The crows board is thataway ====>

There's a place for arseholes somewhere around here too I believe.

Not anymore princess

LMAO. Owned Giant.

regards,

REB

[The Sleeping Giant]

Yes, I'll have to start rebuilding.