-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Rhyan Mansell welcome to Tigerland
- Thread starter MB78
- Start date
At the end of the day, I just hope that the oven got turned on.
Important
IF the AFL, MRP and tribunal were consistent this would/could be a watershed moment, BUT it is not consistent and I fear that the next time a similar incident arises it will not be based on the action but WHO has performed the action. Eg. mansel suspended Dangerfield - no case to answer. Been happening for years. Remember Soldo got suspended for virtually swatting a fly.
"We observe also that the Tribunal included highly experienced members with a long history of involvement in Australian rules football at the elite level. "
This statement is factually incorrect... but anyway, we really should accept this with a long-term view for where the game is heading, and instead focus more on finding solutions to playing and succeeding at the new version of AFL that will exist in 5-10 years.
Use this to get on the front foot and get ahead of the curve once again.
This statement is factually incorrect... but anyway, we really should accept this with a long-term view for where the game is heading, and instead focus more on finding solutions to playing and succeeding at the new version of AFL that will exist in 5-10 years.
Use this to get on the front foot and get ahead of the curve once again.
It is not about Richmond and hating or loving. That is just too easy. These people and I mean the AFL, are taking the game and tearing it up, without actually going through the process of changing the games rules.
I'm going tomorrow night to honour Cotch. I truly don't know if I'll bother going to any more games in future. Maybe try local footy instead.
I'll still support the Tigers (member for 53 years), but I truly can't handle the hypocrisy of the current AFL regime.
I'll still support the Tigers (member for 53 years), but I truly can't handle the hypocrisy of the current AFL regime.
the way its going, I very much doubt I'll be following the AFL that exists in 5-10 years
they are *smile* up the game on the fly. no thought has gone into managing the concussion issue, they just crap themselves everytime a new report comes through and don't know what to do.
BS.
Feel the kid.
Would be playing for a contract next year.
Similar to Marlion.
He has completely changed the way he plays. It’s affected how he goes about things. You can see hesitation.
Or it was the “weight on his shoulders” of impending trouble when he was in Perth next which was the cause.
Feel the kid.
Would be playing for a contract next year.
Similar to Marlion.
He has completely changed the way he plays. It’s affected how he goes about things. You can see hesitation.
Or it was the “weight on his shoulders” of impending trouble when he was in Perth next which was the cause.
False! What was important was what sorta pies were they? Party pies? Or some nice gourmet chicken and leek? I wonder if they had some tiddly oggies?
It's interesting that Huston braced for contact with Danger last night in a marking contest. Huston's elbow/forearm slammed into Danger's body causing broken ribs, a punctured lung and meant Danger spent last night in hospital. He's having to be driven drive home today. He will miss several weeks you'd think.
Now, in light of Mansell's suspension, Huston surely has to go for what can't be described as a football act. The replay clearly shows him "bracing for impact" at the last moment when he knew a collision was unavoidable. Ironically the defence used by the media when Danger when he knocked out Floss but didn't even get cited in the 20 gf.
So, the Huston and Mansell incidents are different. One was an open ground ball 50/50 contest and the other one was a marking contest where Huston found himself out of position, but is still obliged to make some kind of contest. It's the kind of situation footy players find themselves in multiple times in a game.
However, today's Mansell ruling sets a precedent. Even if you're bracing yourself to avoid injury, arguably an involuntary movement of self preservation and what both Mansell and Huston clearly did, that's no excuse now if you injure the other person. Danger's injuries are considerable and I would think incredibly painful.
But sorry Dan Huston, that's three weeks mate. Shoulda just let Danger take the mark.
Odds on it doesn't even get looked at, let alone cited.
The New AFL that will exist in 5-10 years will be a version of the sport in which winning the contested ball may be a slower portion of the game.
Concussion is a lower risk in slower contests.
The second change will be to tackles, as concussions from tackles is still a common occurrence. I can't envision how the game will adapt in this area... but it will change the way teams move the ball, and the way teams defend others from moving the ball.
All 3 areas of the game will therefore change (with the ball, contested, without the ball) as a result of concussion adaptations. This result teaches us that the contested game will be slower. That's new information, and we should use it to innovate. Ignore it at your own loss. There is no going back, so there's no point complaining about it, we should accept it and get ahead of the curve.
How will tackling change in the coming years? This will change how we can move the ball, so the sooner we figure it out, the better. If technique alone doesn't reduce the concussion rate, then more significant changes will occur.
Concussion is a lower risk in slower contests.
The second change will be to tackles, as concussions from tackles is still a common occurrence. I can't envision how the game will adapt in this area... but it will change the way teams move the ball, and the way teams defend others from moving the ball.
All 3 areas of the game will therefore change (with the ball, contested, without the ball) as a result of concussion adaptations. This result teaches us that the contested game will be slower. That's new information, and we should use it to innovate. Ignore it at your own loss. There is no going back, so there's no point complaining about it, we should accept it and get ahead of the curve.
How will tackling change in the coming years? This will change how we can move the ball, so the sooner we figure it out, the better. If technique alone doesn't reduce the concussion rate, then more significant changes will occur.
The AFL doesn't go by precedent.
Actions leading up to a collision are controllable, it's not just about the split second before a collision. Players are carrying out learned behaviours that have been considered and practiced in the months and years prior.
It is controllable, and we shouldn't make excuses.
Ok asking stakeholders what they want. These are arbitrary knee jerk decisions reacting to fear mongering. Captains picks, brain farts and in the case of Hockings rule changes a grave abuse of power by someone with a strongly vested interest (not in the state of the game overall as we're told to believe) but for the benefit of their own club.
The rot has well and truly set in and we know where the fish rots from.
It's called AFLX
Or hybrid netball/basketball with a Sherrin.
Nobody can say they didn't see it coming.
The AFL does go by precedent, almost all legal procedures rely on precedent unless new legal ground is being considered. It's an axiom of the Westminster legal system on which most our law is based. You see previous similar incidents rolled out at tribunal hearings almost every time. That's precedent.
As for the rest of your statement it's absolute rubbish imo. Mansell had 0.2 of a second to determine what to do. That's why it's called a split second decision.
Yes.
Noticed a few players last night waiting for the player to collect the ball and get set before tackling.
Dangerfield in particular waited for his opponent to collect and then tackled.
In the old days (a month ago) he would have at the least competed for the ground ball.
Now we have a spot where there are more tackles with no winner, the aim is to stop play and cause (yet more) ballups.
