Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Ghost Like wrote:Head high contact in a making contest is illegal. Pretty simple. Forget the fact the mark should have been payed. It was, and always should be a free kick. Whether it was an accident or not is about as relevant as what I had for breakfast.
Explain then why you can knee someone in the back of the head whilst taking a mark? Or flying for a chest mark and your should makes contact with another player trying to take an identical mark? It is not illegal, simply subjective to interpretation. BTW, what did you have for breakfast?[/quote]
Your joking right. Boiled egg.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
I reckon Roo needs a rest... He looked buggered in the first quarter yesterday. I know the bye is around the corner, but he has absolutely held us together this year, goes 110% with no apparent self preservation. Would hate to see him get injured or burn out his knee...
Ghost Like wrote:He didnt though. He was also trying to mark it. i cannot beleive people actually think it was anything more than a pure accident.
Accidental or not, is it not against the rules to make head high contact?
The rule is not about intent it is about not making contact above the shoulders.
Agree with P66, both going for the mark, contact part of the act of marking. No different to driving a knee fair square into the back of someone's head, taking mark of the year, winning a car whilst the stepladder that was used has blood pouring from the back of his head.[/quote]
Head high contact in a making contest is illegal. Pretty simple. Forget the fact the mark should have been payed. It was, and always should be a free kick. Whether it was an accident or not is about as relevant as what I had for breakfast. [/quote]
No it isnt a free if they are both going for the ball like they were. As pointed out a knee to the back of the head isnt a free in a marking contest. never a free and hopefully will never be a free.
dragit wrote:I reckon Roo needs a rest... He looked buggered in the first quarter yesterday. I know the bye is around the corner, but he has absolutely held us together this year, goes 110% with no apparent self preservation. Would hate to see him get injured or burn out his knee...
I reckon he looks buggered about 20 times a game, but he always goes again & again. It's probably because of his work-rate !!
NEW scarf signature (hopefully with correct spelling) will be here as soon as it arrives !!
Saw the replay on TV of Roo getting knocked out and it looked pretty clearly like a clash of heads in the contest. The mistake was that Roo had the ball in his hands when the clash occurred and the ball ended up in the defender's hand who claimed, and was wrongly paid, the mark by the umpire. Didn't see it as a punch to the head but will watch it again.
mildurasaint wrote:Saw the replay on TV of Roo getting knocked out and it looked pretty clearly like a clash of heads in the contest. The mistake was that Roo had the ball in his hands when the clash occurred and the ball ended up in the defender's hand who claimed, and was wrongly paid, the mark by the umpire. Didn't see it as a punch to the head but will watch it again.
Was he definitely paid the mark. i didnt hear a whistle but I was at the pub so it was hard to hear. Nothing in it though and wasnt a mark so a mistake if paid.
Ghost Like wrote:Head high contact in a making contest is illegal. Pretty simple. Forget the fact the mark should have been payed. It was, and always should be a free kick. Whether it was an accident or not is about as relevant as what I had for breakfast.
Explain then why you can knee someone in the back of the head whilst taking a mark? Or flying for a chest mark and your should makes contact with another player trying to take an identical mark? It is not illegal, simply subjective to interpretation. BTW, what did you have for breakfast?
Your joking right. Boiled egg. [/quote]
Haha, no I'm not. When have you ever seen a free kick paid against a player for taking a high mark after putting a knee or leg into a players head. Trevor Barker would never have taken a screamer. Look at all the marks of the year (nearly all), they all make contact to the head. A genuine marking contest is the exception to the premise, the head is sacrosanct.
One bloke kneeing someone in the back of the head to take a screamer is totally different to the incident in question - OK!!! 2 blokes going for a mark is different to a late hit - isn't it?
why deflect from the issue of whether it was a late hit?
The attempt to spoil/body opponent/or even let's assume he was attempting to mark (like Jack Riewoldt was last night when clearly it was an illegal attempt) was late...Rooy controlled the footy...
Accidental head high contact is illegal if it's late!!!
Scollop wrote:One bloke kneeing someone in the back of the head to take a screamer is totally different to the incident in question - OK!!! 2 blokes going for a mark is different to a late hit - isn't it?
why deflect from the issue of whether it was a late hit?
The attempt to spoil/body opponent/or even let's assume he was attempting to mark (like Jack Riewoldt was last night when clearly it was an illegal attempt) was late...Rooy controlled the footy...
Accidental head high contact is illegal if it's late!!!
Yep but not if they are both going for the mark which he clearly was. And we expect umpires to get it right when even on here after watching it many times we have people seeing the same incident completely differently.
Scollop wrote:One bloke kneeing someone in the back of the head to take a screamer is totally different to the incident in question - OK!!! 2 blokes going for a mark is different to a late hit - isn't it?
why deflect from the issue of whether it was a late hit?
The attempt to spoil/body opponent/or even let's assume he was attempting to mark (like Jack Riewoldt was last night when clearly it was an illegal attempt) was late...Rooy controlled the footy...
Accidental head high contact is illegal if it's late!!!
I don't care how many exclamation marks you use. Obviously my stance is that it wasn't a late hit and occurred in a marking contest. My reply using the knee to the back of the head was in reply to the claim that you cannot make contact to the head at any time. No deflection, just no agreement on our takes on this incident.
Scollop wrote:One bloke kneeing someone in the back of the head to take a screamer is totally different to the incident in question - OK!!! 2 blokes going for a mark is different to a late hit - isn't it?
why deflect from the issue of whether it was a late hit?
The attempt to spoil/body opponent/or even let's assume he was attempting to mark (like Jack Riewoldt was last night when clearly it was an illegal attempt) was late...Rooy controlled the footy...
Accidental head high contact is illegal if it's late!!!
Yep but not if they are both going for the mark which he clearly was. And we expect umpires to get it right when even on here after watching it many times we have people seeing the same incident completely differently.
When you are a defender, your only option is to try and get body on your opponent if you are late. I think the umpire got it wrong, but I don't expect that they should always get it right at the breakneck speed our game has turned into. The Rooy incident was borderline against the doggies but there have been other late spoiling attempts which have been ignored by the AFL
It's difficult to get all decisions right, but that's where the MRP needs to comes in and penalise the player who comes in late. The doggies player knew that he needed to make body contact to try and spoil because Rooy was perfectly positioned.
Last year when Brisbane's daniel Merrett only copped a reprimand for a late charge on Rooy it highlighted the inconsistencies when they say that they are protecting the ball player. Whether it's in play or whether it's late is the issue...The MRP last year ruled that Merrett was going for the footy which is bulldust.
2-3 years ago it was Ok for Mcpharlin to pretend like he was trying to mark a footy when his knee went through Jonathan Brown's face...yes accidents do occur in footy, but accidents due to a late attempt to spoil should be cited!!!!! it's the same with the way the bump has been treated in recent years. Players going for the ball or a forward going for a mark must be protected and the MRP needs to highlight to defenders that they have a duty of care.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
I watched it again. i still cant possibly see how its a free.
Punched him in the head. Pretty clear. Maybe watch it again pluggsy when you sober.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
Didn't say it was an intentional punch. Yes. Same game, same incident. One minute to go. Have you ever attempted to take a mark with a fist clenched? Interesting technique by Picken.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
8856brother wrote:Didn't say it was an intentional punch. Yes. Same game, same incident. One minute to go. Have you ever attempted to take a mark with a fist clenched? Interesting technique by Pickens.
It would a ridiculous way to mark if it actually happened. It didnt but i do agree that if he did that it would have been a free.
8856brother wrote:Didn't say it was an intentional punch. Yes. Same game, same incident. One minute to go. Have you ever attempted to take a mark with a fist clenched? Interesting technique by Pickens.
It would a ridiculous way to mark if it actually happened. It didnt but i do agree that if he did that it would have been a free.
How did Roo get KO'd?
_______________________________________________________________________
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
8856brother wrote:Didn't say it was an intentional punch. Yes. Same game, same incident. One minute to go. Have you ever attempted to take a mark with a fist clenched? Interesting technique by Pickens.
It would a ridiculous way to mark if it actually happened. It didnt but i do agree that if he did that it would have been a free.
How did Roo get KO'd?
It looks like Rooy head hits Picken upper arm. Both his hands were open. No fist all all unless he is a magician and nearly mark the ball with a clinched fist.
Maybe my TV is different to yours! Anyways, it's been fun. I give up. You win.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
plugger66 wrote:Out of everything i have ever read about the saints this may be the most one eyed ever. Both went for the mark and it was just a simple accident. I wonder if people can actually watch footy through two eyes. I thought this may come up but then i thought no one could be that biased. No mark, play one and 100% fair.
Roo went for a mark against Adelaide and got a week.
plugger66 wrote:Out of everything i have ever read about the saints this may be the most one eyed ever. Both went for the mark and it was just a simple accident. I wonder if people can actually watch footy through two eyes. I thought this may come up but then i thought no one could be that biased. No mark, play one and 100% fair.
Roo went for a mark against Adelaide and got a week.
Well that sounds like a poor decision if it is true.
At the ground it looked like he ran in to a prone Roo who marked anyway. The umps obviously decided he was acting because even the game went on around him while the trainers were with him while he was on the ground. poorly handled either way and looked like Picken ran through him- came when he wasn't in the contest.
Roo copped a flush hit to his jaw with a clenched fist from Picken. If Picken has the hand eye co-ordination to be able to pluck a loose footy out of a collision at that speed, he certainly has the skill to be able to know how to avoid an illegal head high hit.
Umpires are forgiven when they make mistakes because they cannot be expected to get it 100% right at the speed of the game, but MRP is failing as far as player welfare is concerned. They have the luxury of the replays.
