Swans screwed by Stevic and the other incompetents

[Scollop]

There may come a time when the AFL will start ruling on these collisions by asking the question whether a player had the choice to take evasive action.

We saw with the Tom Lynch impact decision when Lynch was out of contention for the mark and he chose to clean up (the euphemism is that he 'braced' for contact) Alex Keath.

Same thing with Mitch Duncan. Ho chose NOT to take evasive action and he cleaned up Robbie Fox. ...sorry, sorry.. he 'braced' for contact. He definitely did not take evasive action

So due to insurers demands because of litigation that is about to explode regarding former players and concussion and the tsunami that is coming with CTE in the future with AFL players, will we see the word 'evasive action' creep into the rule book

[Life Long Saint]

There may come a time when the AFL will start ruling on these collisions by asking the question whether a player had the choice to take evasive action.

We saw with the Tom Lynch impact decision when Lynch was out of contention for the mark and he chose to clean up (the euphemism is that he 'braced' for contact) Alex Keath.

Same thing with Mitch Duncan. Ho chose NOT to take evasive action and he cleaned up Robbie Fox. ...sorry, sorry.. he 'braced' for contact. He definitely did not take evasive action

So due to insurers demands because of litigation that is about to explode regarding former players and concussion and the tsunami that is coming with CTE in the future with AFL players, will we see the word 'evasive action' creep into the rule book

Players are under absolutely no obligation to move out of the way of a player...And nor should they be!

I don't think the Mitch Duncan incident is reportable. Fox was falling and went past the footy. Duncan didn't even have the opportunity to go in low.

[Scollop]

'Move out of the way'

I love the terminology used by those defending Duncan

[Scollop]

There may come a time when the AFL will start ruling on these collisions by asking the question whether a player had the choice to take evasive action.

We saw with the Tom Lynch impact decision when Lynch was out of contention for the mark and he chose to clean up (the euphemism is that he 'braced' for contact) Alex Keath.

Same thing with Mitch Duncan. Ho chose NOT to take evasive action and he cleaned up Robbie Fox. ...sorry, sorry.. he 'braced' for contact. He definitely did not take evasive action

So due to insurers demands because of litigation that is about to explode regarding former players and concussion and the tsunami that is coming with CTE in the future with AFL players, will we see the word 'evasive action' creep into the rule book

Players are under absolutely no obligation to move out of the way of a player...And nor should they be!

I don't think the Mitch Duncan incident is reportable. Fox was falling and went past the footy. Duncan didn't even have the opportunity to go in low.

Sorry...I worded that all wrong.

I meant with players that can see a collision is imminent, they must ensure their opponent is not impacted in a manner which is likely to cause concussion or be hit in the head.

Duncan went out of his way to target Fox's head. That might sound harsh but I think there is a case for that argument. Duncan had a choice to embrace Fox to protect Fox's head or take evasive action. He chose neither of these options. It's that simple.

I was wondering if the AFL needs to change the rules, but I certainly think they need to change the format and the personnel at the MRO

https://www.afl.com.au/news/911778/-jus ... on-fox-hit

[Scollop]

I just played the video from that link and....

What is blatantly obvious to me is that Duncan needs to send all the channel 7 commentators a nice bottle of wine each

The thing about the general public is that you can package up a turd and present it as 'special' item and the general public will gobble up whatever you tell them

People don't think for themselves

[CQ SAINT]

I just played the video from that link and....

What is blatantly obvious to me is that Duncan needs to send all the channel 7 commentators a nice bottle of wine each

The thing about the general public is that you can package up a turd and present it as 'special' item and the general public will gobble up whatever you tell them

People don't think for themselves

You don't need the fancy packaging. St.Kilda supporters have been mushroomed for decades and we just keep coming back.