2017 AFL Season

[daysofourlives]

I can't believe Greene got a fine. How can you give a fine for that. It's either big weeks or nothing all together?!!

IMO he should have got nothing, but i just can't work out how they have decided that it is worthy of a fine. Like it is one way or another, not in between. Or have they just given him something for the sake of it to keep the Dogs happy?

Wouldn't be the 1st time the afl have done something to keep the dogs happy would it wubbsy

[DOC]

I can't believe Greene got a fine. How can you give a fine for that. It's either big weeks or nothing all together?!!

IMO he should have got nothing, but i just can't work out how they have decided that it is worthy of a fine. Like it is one way or another, not in between. Or have they just given him something for the sake of it to keep the Dogs happy?

Yep agree.

All year, the head is sacrasant blah blah blah. Grundy and Dangerfieldget a week when the head was a consequence and not the target. He/they are very lucky.

[prowling panther]

I can't believe Greene got a fine. How can you give a fine for that. It's either big weeks or nothing all together?!!

IMO he should have got nothing, but i just can't work out how they have decided that it is worthy of a fine. Like it is one way or another, not in between. Or have they just given him something for the sake of it to keep the Dogs happy?

Yep agree.

He should have got a week at minimums, now it will happen more often cos $1K is bugger all to players nowdays.

[JK]

I know Greene like all AFL players have a duty of care for opponents these days, but doesn't Dalhaus also have a responsibility to protect himself? Seems all blame these days goes to the player making the contact

[prowling panther]

I know Greene like all AFL players have a duty of care for opponents these days, but doesn't Dalhaus also have a responsibility to protect himself? Seems all blame these days goes to the player making the contact

Players dont really expect to get a size 11 in the face, protecting yourself from that is one thing not often thought about.

[JK]

I know Greene like all AFL players have a duty of care for opponents these days, but doesn't Dalhaus also have a responsibility to protect himself? Seems all blame these days goes to the player making the contact

Players dont really expect to get a size 11 in the face, protecting yourself from that is one thing not often thought about.

Well maybe they need to change - boots hanging out aren't a new thing, albeit it's a lot less common these days. Players are protecting themselves, particularly the head region, less and less these days.

[jackpot jim]

I know Greene like all AFL players have a duty of care for opponents these days, but doesn't Dalhaus also have a responsibility to protect himself? Seems all blame these days goes to the player making the contact

Players dont really expect to get a size 11 in the face, protecting yourself from that is one thing not often thought about.

Well maybe they need to change - boots hanging out aren't a new thing, albeit it's a lot less common these days. Players are protecting themselves, particularly the head region, less and less these days.

Havent taken a whole lot of notice over the incident as originally when i saw a reply of it i was under the impression Greene took the ball in a marking contest and thought that whilst its unusual to stick ya foot up that high, its not illegal in a marking contest just as a player jumping on a blokes head and knocking him out with his knee, thats just incidental contact going for a mark. Maybe actions like that will be scrutinized soon as the AFL seems to be on a crusade to stamp out any risk of injury occurring at all in physical clashes.
Anyway, when i realized that Greene was just receiving a handball, then thats a hole different kettle of fish.
Totally agree with the umpire for reporting him for dangerous play. players have a duty of care not to make contact to a players head unreasonably.
Quite simple what was Greenes intentions?
To guard his space and fend off the tackler to give him time to take possession and dispose of the footy.
If you choose to fend of a player with the "Big dont argue" with a hand and it cops the player to the face, its a free kick.
As with a bump, if you choose to bump and cop the player high and it causes injury, you will get cited for rough play or the like.
So it should be the same with fending off with a hand to the head, you choose to do that and it gets the player high and it causes injury, you should be cited as well.
So it should be no different in Greene choosing to raise his boot to head height and fend off, he chose to put others players safety at risk and got the bloke high in the face. Should be cited which he was and copped a half arse penalty that leaves everyone confused.

So what are players to think now?
Can they all go around doing the same thing and just leave it to luck that they dont injure someone?

The penalty system these days that penalizes the consequence of the action rather than the action itself i believe is a joke buts thats a debate for another day.

End result of all this inconsistent crap of the tribunal and variable umpiring interpretations etc on an almost weekly basis has waned my interest in the game enormously to the point i havent attended an AFL game for several years and only taking a passing interest in it on telly these days.
I wonder how many others feel the same?

[nuggety goodness]

Bob Murphy fronting the media...

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[JK]

I know Greene like all AFL players have a duty of care for opponents these days, but doesn't Dalhaus also have a responsibility to protect himself? Seems all blame these days goes to the player making the contact

Players dont really expect to get a size 11 in the face, protecting yourself from that is one thing not often thought about.

Well maybe they need to change - boots hanging out aren't a new thing, albeit it's a lot less common these days. Players are protecting themselves, particularly the head region, less and less these days.

Havent taken a whole lot of notice over the incident as originally when i saw a reply of it i was under the impression Greene took the ball in a marking contest and thought that whilst its unusual to stick ya foot up that high, its not illegal in a marking contest just as a player jumping on a blokes head and knocking him out with his knee, thats just incidental contact going for a mark. Maybe actions like that will be scrutinized soon as the AFL seems to be on a crusade to stamp out any risk of injury occurring at all in physical clashes.
Anyway, when i realized that Greene was just receiving a handball, then thats a hole different kettle of fish.
Totally agree with the umpire for reporting him for dangerous play. players have a duty of care not to make contact to a players head unreasonably.
Quite simple what was Greenes intentions?
To guard his space and fend off the tackler to give him time to take possession and dispose of the footy.
If you choose to fend of a player with the "Big dont argue" with a hand and it cops the player to the face, its a free kick.
As with a bump, if you choose to bump and cop the player high and it causes injury, you will get cited for rough play or the like.
So it should be the same with fending off with a hand to the head, you choose to do that and it gets the player high and it causes injury, you should be cited as well.
So it should be no different in Greene choosing to raise his boot to head height and fend off, he chose to put others players safety at risk and got the bloke high in the face. Should be cited which he was and copped a half arse penalty that leaves everyone confused.

So what are players to think now?
Can they all go around doing the same thing and just leave it to luck that they dont injure someone?

The penalty system these days that penalizes the consequence of the action rather than the action itself i believe is a joke buts thats a debate for another day.

End result of all this inconsistent crap of the tribunal and variable umpiring interpretations etc on an almost weekly basis has waned my interest in the game enormously to the point i havent attended an AFL game for several years and only taking a passing interest in it on telly these days.
I wonder how many others feel the same?

I guess what Im trying to say, is that I don't disagree with a player having a duty of care to protect opponents, but surely players should still have a duty of care to themselves also?

Look at Cripps copping a fractured cheekbone (or jaw, can't remember which) this year and Mills getting KO'ed. Both were well involved in the leadup niggling to the incidents, and the offenders were rightly punished, but neither Cripps nor Mills defended themselves. The rules will punish the perpetrators, but that doesn't save you from copping a whack and seeing stars.

Same with the tackling - About 3 or 4 years ago players being tackled were buckling their legs and being rewarded with a free for "In the back". The system enabled this behaviour. Now we have problems with players getting knocked out when their head hits the turf in a tackle. Well duh!?!?

In the Greene (who's skills I admire, but character I can't stand) situation, he has two seconds tops to plan on how to take the ball, how he's going to protect himself, how he's going to dispose of it. He doesn't have the luxury of measuring up the approaching opponent to assess how big he is, or the precise moment he'll arrive. If he sticks the leg out and cops Dalhaus in the Chest or Arm is it still reportable? The only way it can be fair for the players to know what's acceptable or not is to have a blanket rule that you can't stick your foot out, and then we'll have no physical contact in ruck clashes and no more high marking. Both situations that would ruin the game.

The AFL has been so reactionary with their rules for so long now, they have boxed themselves into a corner imho.

[Lightning McQueen]

I guess what Im trying to say, is that I don't disagree with a player having a duty of care to protect opponents, but surely players should still have a duty of care to themselves also?

Look at Cripps copping a fractured cheekbone (or jaw, can't remember which) this year and Mills getting KO'ed. Both were well involved in the leadup niggling to the incidents, and the offenders were rightly punished, but neither Cripps nor Mills defended themselves. The rules will punish the perpetrators, but that doesn't save you from copping a whack and seeing stars.

Same with the tackling - About 3 or 4 years ago players being tackled were buckling their legs and being rewarded with a free for "In the back". The system enabled this behaviour. Now we have problems with players getting knocked out when their head hits the turf in a tackle. Well duh!?!?

In the Greene (who's skills I admire, but character I can't stand) situation, he has two seconds tops to plan on how to take the ball, how he's going to protect himself, how he's going to dispose of it. He doesn't have the luxury of measuring up the approaching opponent to assess how big he is, or the precise moment he'll arrive. If he sticks the leg out and cops Dalhaus in the Chest or Arm is it still reportable? The only way it can be fair for the players to know what's acceptable or not is to have a blanket rule that you can't stick your foot out, and then we'll have no physical contact in ruck clashes and no more high marking. Both situations that would ruin the game.

The AFL has been so reactionary with their rules for so long now, they have boxed themselves into a corner imho.

Fair point, if he takes the ball in his hands he has no arm to fend off and therefore will be a sitting duck and a holding the ball free kick is imminent.

[Rik E Boy]

Greene $1500 fine
Wines $1000 fine
Howlett $1000 fine
Pruess $1500 fine
Martin $1000 fine

No Cat players no suspensions. 100% consistent.

regards,

REB

[MW]

All the games greats are retiring in 2017...Neil Craig has announced his retirement from involvement in AFL.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-08-14/neil-craig-calls-time-on-his-career-in-football

[Lightning McQueen]

All the games greats are retiring in 2017...Neil Craig has announced his retirement from involvement in AFL.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-08-14/neil-craig-calls-time-on-his-career-in-football

How will the game survive?

[Wedgie]

All the games greats are retiring in 2017...Neil Craig has announced his retirement from involvement in AFL.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-08-14/neil-craig-calls-time-on-his-career-in-football

How will the game survive?

In fairness he has contributed a hell of a lot to the game and sports since he started playing in the early 70s.

[Booney]

Could be argued that he brought sports science into Aussie Rules football ( with Charlie Walsh ) before others had thought about it.

[MW]

Certainly did.

[mighty_tiger_79]

Now look at the damage sports science is doing to the game....

[MW]

Go on

[Booney]

Now look at the damage sports science is doing to the game....

Sports science is one thing, a crack pot being left unchecked is another.

[Q.]

the tribunal is a clusterphuck of hypocrisy