AFL Round 4

Corona Man · Post by **Corona Man** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 1:08 pm

Armchair expert wrote:Bucks just called out the Swans academy rorts

AMAZING!

Nice deflection

whufc · Post by **whufc** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 1:09 pm

Dutchy wrote:I understand the new rules, if it is a deliberate bump, but as I said in slo-mo its easy to make that call, Cunno was half a step from Laird when he disposed of it, at full speed how is he supposed to do anything else? It was more of a protective measure more than anything which happen's a hundred times in a game of footy.

Not sure the AFL discriminate between a deliberate bump and non deliberate bump. Either get to the player on time and tackle or get there slightly late and make sure no matter what you do you don't make contact with the head.

If you watch the footage again he 100% doesn't tuck in the elbow to bump until after the ball is kicked. His miss judged his timing. He had two choices, realise he was late and take half a step either side and brush past laird at most or tuck in for a hip and should and hope like hell he doesn't hit the head. The fact it was a down the field free is enough evidence to show he was slightly late.

I don't like the ruling anymore than the next bloke but as mentioned before it staggers me that people I consider astute/knowledgable football people are still arguing cases like this one and the Dangerfield one, albeit they are a bit different.

Armchair expert · Post by **Armchair expert** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 1:21 pm

MW wrote:
Armchair expert wrote:How far do you go?

Ban the hanger
Spoils that whack the guy playing in front

In both those instances, the player is going for the ball. When you bump, you have no intention going for the ball.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/what- ... e7d9bcdcde

Harbrow incident shows you can bump and contest the ball

What I am saying is there is always going to be bumps

Zelezny Chucks · Post by **Zelezny Chucks** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 2:57 pm

Eagles2014 wrote:
whufc wrote:
Dutchy wrote:Watch the Cunnington incident in full speed and tell me what his option was? Slo-mo makes it look like he had time

That doesn't really come into account at the tribunal.

He could have looked to tackle and worst case outcome is he wraps around the hips and brings the player to ground and gives away a holding the man.

He choose to bump, hit the head and will now be suspended. The AFL cant be clearer, you bump people, if you make contact with the head no excuse will get you out of a suspension. They cant be any clearer that they don't want players bumping.

Absolutely spot on whufc!!

It staggers me people that understand footy as much as Dutchy, Booney, etc don't get this

The vision clearly shows the bump hit Laird in head. End of story. EVERYBODY in the AFL knows this is a one week suspension under the new rules.

End of story, get over it!!

Any link to this vision that clearly shows contact to the head?

The only vision I have seen is inconclusive at best. Considering Laird was with it enough to focus on watching where the ball ended up I don't think it had a huge impact on him, looked like he stayed down because he was winded over groggy.

IF there was contact to the head then I am fine with him getting a week, what I am not fine with is if Harbrow gets off for the exact same thing.

whufc · Post by **whufc** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 4:08 pm

I cant google the same footage but AFL360 showed a camera angle from the opposite side to what I can find on the net and it clearly was should up against the head. All the footage I can find on the net comes from the tv broadcast side but the footage 360 had was coming from the right of screen outer pocket angle and it was clear as day.

Best bet might be if you have kayo to watch the replay of AFL360. It was on before they spoke to the coaches IIRC.

cracka · Post by **cracka** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 4:44 pm

Eagles2014 wrote:
whufc wrote:
Dutchy wrote:Watch the Cunnington incident in full speed and tell me what his option was? Slo-mo makes it look like he had time

That doesn't really come into account at the tribunal.

He could have looked to tackle and worst case outcome is he wraps around the hips and brings the player to ground and gives away a holding the man.

He choose to bump, hit the head and will now be suspended. The AFL cant be clearer, you bump people, if you make contact with the head no excuse will get you out of a suspension. They cant be any clearer that they don't want players bumping.

Absolutely spot on whufc!!

It staggers me people that understand footy as much as Dutchy, Booney, etc don't get this

The vision clearly shows the bump hit Laird in head. End of story. EVERYBODY in the AFL knows this is a one week suspension under the new rules.

End of story, get over it!!

I didn't watch the game nor have I seen the incident but if Laird played out the game & hasn't suffered a concussion then there should be no suspension IMO

Spargo · Post by **Spargo** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:05 pm

Cunnington cleared, $2k fine.
First win of the year for North.

whufc · Post by **whufc** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:22 pm

Spargo wrote:Cunnington cleared, $2k fine.
First win of the year for North.

AFL trying to ‘even’ out the competition.

Very inconsistent with other suspensions they have handed out

Post by **Dutchy** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:53 pm

Common sense wins the day

Spargo · Post by **Spargo** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:57 pm

whufc wrote:AFL trying to ‘even’ out the competition.

I reckon if you had your time again...

Eagles2014 · Post by **Eagles2014** » Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:59 pm

whufc wrote:
Spargo wrote:Cunnington cleared, $2k fine.
First win of the year for North.

AFL trying to ‘even’ out the competition.

Very inconsistent with other suspensions they have handed out

Staggering decision. Appeals committee are a joke, on different wave length to what Steve Hocking and AFL trying to do!

Booney · Post by **Booney** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 8:17 am

Spargo wrote:
whufc wrote:AFL trying to ‘even’ out the competition.

I reckon if you had your time again...

North without Cunnington aren't half the side mate.

stan · Post by **stan** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 8:40 am

Armchair expert wrote:Bucks just called out the Swans academy rorts

AMAZING!

I reckon he should worry about how his side is going on the field rather than anything anyone else is doing.

To me this shows he is getting desperate now and deflecting at any chance.

I wonder if he now has the full support of the board?

Bum Crack · Post by **Bum Crack** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 8:51 am

Only saw the Cunnington incident last night for the first time and can't believe he got a game in the first place. That's why this game has gone to shit. Absolute joke.

gadj1976 · Post by **gadj1976** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 9:19 am

Bum Crack wrote:Only saw the Cunnington incident last night for the first time and can't believe he got a game in the first place. That's why this game has gone to shit. Absolute joke.

completely agree.

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 9:23 am

gadj1976 wrote:
Bum Crack wrote:Only saw the Cunnington incident last night for the first time and can't believe he got a game in the first place. That's why this game has gone to shit. Absolute joke.

completely agree.

Soon the bump will be outlawed, imagine how many games Pickett would've missed if he only came on to the scene now.

whufc · Post by **whufc** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 9:58 am

Lightning McQueen wrote:
gadj1976 wrote:
Bum Crack wrote:Only saw the Cunnington incident last night for the first time and can't believe he got a game in the first place. That's why this game has gone to shit. Absolute joke.

completely agree.

Soon the bump will be outlawed, imagine how many games Pickett would've missed if he only came on to the scene now.

The PA facebook page put up a Pickett highlight reel the other week and he deadest would have got 20+ games easily. Pretty much every bump of his he was off the ground :lol:

What a legend.

tigerpie · Post by **tigerpie** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:02 am

This ruling has made the bump still legal if done correctly.
Don't make contact to the head and you are fine.
Cunnington had every intention of taking laird out, but didn't really follow through with it.
But it was late and slight head contact.
If that's just a fine, I'm all good with that as long as its consistent.
I'm just wondering, if Hawkins did it would the penalty be the same?

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:26 am

tigerpie wrote:This ruling has made the bump still legal if done correctly.
Don't make contact to the head and you are fine.
Cunnington had every intention of taking laird out, but didn't really follow through with it.
But it was late and slight head contact.
If that's just a fine, I'm all good with that as long as its consistent.
I'm just wondering, if Hawkins did it would the penalty be the same?

Unless you burrow in and hope that your opponent doesn't, the force of impact will more often than not cause both heads to wobble somewhat making the clash of heads quite inevitable.

Armchair expert · Post by **Armchair expert** » Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:29 am

whufc wrote:
Lightning McQueen wrote:
gadj1976 wrote:
Bum Crack wrote:Only saw the Cunnington incident last night for the first time and can't believe he got a game in the first place. That's why this game has gone to shit. Absolute joke.

completely agree.

Soon the bump will be outlawed, imagine how many games Pickett would've missed if he only came on to the scene now.

The PA facebook page put up a Pickett highlight reel the other week and he deadest would have got 20+ games easily. Pretty much every bump of his he was off the ground

What a legend.

Rhett Biglands career highlight is getting cleaned up by Byron

AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Re: AFL Round 4

Who is online