Carlton successful at tribunal... AGAIN

[Scollop]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/ ... eb338658f6

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/ ... d72eb922a2

[Scollop]

No chance in hell would Boyd have been cleared if he was represented by the Saints.

Or does it matter which club you play for, rather than which barrister and solicitor is representing you?

[Life Long Saint]

It was the right call, though...Unlike the Cripps one a few years ago.
The Tigers player clearly ducked his head into the tackler and doing everything we were taught not to do as kids.
What the Tigers player did is a spinal injury just waiting to happen.

[meher baba]

It was the right call, though...Unlike the Cripps one a few years ago.
The Tigers player clearly ducked his head into the tackler and doing everything we were taught not to do as kids.
What the Tigers player did is a spinal injury just waiting to happen.

He bent forward in an effort to pick up the ball and hadn’t had time to stand up straight before he got hit. Are you suggesting that players shouldn’t do that any longer?

While we are only talking about the difference between one week and getting off altogether, I reckon it was the worst tribunal decision for many years.

[The_Dud]

They should start paying free kicks against players who duck their heads, that will be the quickest way to change behaviour and get it out of the game.

[Life Long Saint]

It was the right call, though...Unlike the Cripps one a few years ago.
The Tigers player clearly ducked his head into the tackler and doing everything we were taught not to do as kids.
What the Tigers player did is a spinal injury just waiting to happen.

He bent forward in an effort to pick up the ball and hadn’t had time to stand up straight before he got hit. Are you suggesting that players shouldn’t do that any longer?

While we are only talking about the difference between one week and getting off altogether, I reckon it was the worst tribunal decision for many years.

Never stick your head somewhere where your bum will fit.
He made two actions. One to pick up the ball, looked up, then put his head back down.

Geez, I used to teach my Auskick kids to turn the body slightly when picking up the footy to protect your head. It's not rocket science. It is really a matter of time before someone is seriously injured due to poor technique.
It's equivalent to a better turning their back on a short ball. In that situation, you never take your eyes off the ball and you make sure you get out of the way. Too many batters are hit in the helmet (or just below it) these days becuase they're not taught how to play the short ball properly.
Footballers are ignoring self-preservation in order to get a free kick and the AFL is encouraging it.

[Scollop]

It was the right call, though...Unlike the Cripps one a few years ago.
The Tigers player clearly ducked his head into the tackler and doing everything we were taught not to do as kids.
What the Tigers player did is a spinal injury just waiting to happen.

What's the Richmond player supposed to do when he sees someone approaching him while he's crouched down getting the footy?

The Richmond player didn't buckle his knees or drop a shoulder or drive with the head

He ducked because that's your first reaction to protect yourself. You're not going to invite the hit smack bang in the middle of your face!!

The Richmond guy will either cop it in his face front on...or he tries to avoid getting his nose broken and tries to get hit on top of his head

The Richmond player wasn't on trial here!! FFS ...you'd think he was by some of the thinking here.

The Carlton player Boyd charged at the guy playing the ball. Simple.

Some of you will believe anything

Some of you still believe Angus Brayshaw veered into Maynard's shoulder

[Scollop]

Life Long Saint,

I agree with this bit below BUT.... you're forgetting one thing.

He made two actions. One to pick up the ball, looked up, then put his head back down.

You can't charge at someone on the ground. Full Stop!

Why do you think Boyd was on trial?

Was it maybe because he approached a guy on the ground without a duty of care? I think the answer is yes. I think Boyd should have either dived low to be at the same level or he should have corralled the Richmond player to intercept the footy when he was trying to handball

One other thing...much easier to avoid a cricket ball than a bloke with knees and hips and arms swinging

[Life Long Saint]

It was the right call, though...Unlike the Cripps one a few years ago.
The Tigers player clearly ducked his head into the tackler and doing everything we were taught not to do as kids.
What the Tigers player did is a spinal injury just waiting to happen.

What's the Richmond player supposed to do when he sees someone approaching him while he's crouched down getting the footy?

Turn his body and protect his head.

The Richmond player didn't buckle his knees or drop a shoulder or drive with the head
He ducked because that's your first reaction to protect yourself. You're not going to invite the hit smack bang in the middle of your face!!
The Richmond guy will either cop it in his face front on...or he tries to avoid getting his nose broken and tries to get hit on top of his head
The Richmond player wasn't on trial here!! FFS ...you'd think he was by some of the thinking here.

If you duck into an on coming tackle, then you're inviting a far more serious injury than a broken nose.
It's hard to argue that the Richmond players actions didn't contribute to the high contact and potential serious injury.

The Carlton player Boyd charged at the guy playing the ball. Simple.

Some of you will believe anything

Some of you still believe Angus Brayshaw veered into Maynard's shoulder

I seriously question your point of view if you're equating this to the Brayshaw/Maynard incident. Not even remotely the same.

[Scollop]

It was the right call, though...Unlike the Cripps one a few years ago.
The Tigers player clearly ducked his head into the tackler and doing everything we were taught not to do as kids.
What the Tigers player did is a spinal injury just waiting to happen.

What's the Richmond player supposed to do when he sees someone approaching him while he's crouched down getting the footy?

Turn his body and protect his head.

The Richmond player didn't buckle his knees or drop a shoulder or drive with the head
He ducked because that's your first reaction to protect yourself. You're not going to invite the hit smack bang in the middle of your face!!
The Richmond guy will either cop it in his face front on...or he tries to avoid getting his nose broken and tries to get hit on top of his head
The Richmond player wasn't on trial here!! FFS ...you'd think he was by some of the thinking here.

If you duck into an on coming tackle, then you're inviting a far more serious injury than a broken nose.
It's hard to argue that the Richmond players actions didn't contribute to the high contact and potential serious injury.

The Carlton player Boyd charged at the guy playing the ball. Simple.

Some of you will believe anything

Some of you still believe Angus Brayshaw veered into Maynard's shoulder

I seriously question your point of view if you're equating this to the Brayshaw/Maynard incident. Not even remotely the same.

If the Richmond player 'turned his body' he would NOT have avoided being hit high.

Boyd is not a cricket ball

You're dreaming if you think that!

Worse still he might have copped a knee to the side if his head and been severely concussed

Boyd charged at the bloke on the ground. Get that through your thick skulls people

Boyd was cited for 'forceful front on contact'

Stop blaming the ball player

Have another look at the video.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/ ... eb338658f6

[takeaway]

It was the right call, though...Unlike the Cripps one a few years ago.
The Tigers player clearly ducked his head into the tackler and doing everything we were taught not to do as kids.
What the Tigers player did is a spinal injury just waiting to happen.

What's the Richmond player supposed to do when he sees someone approaching him while he's crouched down getting the footy?

Turn his body and protect his head.

The Richmond player didn't buckle his knees or drop a shoulder or drive with the head
He ducked because that's your first reaction to protect yourself. You're not going to invite the hit smack bang in the middle of your face!!
The Richmond guy will either cop it in his face front on...or he tries to avoid getting his nose broken and tries to get hit on top of his head
The Richmond player wasn't on trial here!! FFS ...you'd think he was by some of the thinking here.

If you duck into an on coming tackle, then you're inviting a far more serious injury than a broken nose.
It's hard to argue that the Richmond players actions didn't contribute to the high contact and potential serious injury.

The Carlton player Boyd charged at the guy playing the ball. Simple.

Some of you will believe anything

Some of you still believe Angus Brayshaw veered into Maynard's shoulder

I seriously question your point of view if you're equating this to the Brayshaw/Maynard incident. Not even remotely the same.

If the Richmond player 'turned his body' he would NOT have avoided being hit high.

Boyd is not a cricket ball

You're dreaming if you think that!

Worse still he might have copped a knee to the side if his head and been severely concussed

Boyd charged at the bloke on the ground. Get that through your thick skulls people

Boyd was cited for 'forceful front on contact'

Stop blaming the ball player

Have another look at the video.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/ ... eb338658f6

Nothing in it. Should not have even been cited for a week. Correct decision has been made.

[Life Long Saint]

Watched the video again...It's even worse for the Richmond player. He actually went down considerably lower AFTER taking possession.

More confident now that the right call was made.

[Scollop]

That's ok. I understand we can't all agree on everything

Thr real issue many people have... is actually that they can't get their head around the fact that the game of Aussie rules has changed

Assume the Richmond guy doesn't duck...Is Boyd still going to hit him high? Yes or No? Simple

Most of you pine for the good ol days. Back in the day...the little blokes had better awareness to avoid clothes hangers and elbows and shirt fronts. It was a mans game

None of this 'duty of care' rubbish.

Many still believe that it was Hunter Clark's 'awareness' that was the problem. Hunter should have seen Andrew McKay coming and should have taken precautionary measures

Same with Brayshaw. He should have been more aware and he shouldn't have veered into Maynard's path

[Life Long Saint]

Assume the Richmond guy doesn't duck...Is Boyd still going to hit him high? Yes or No? Simple

Who knows as he ducked. Therefore that action raises doubt. Simple!
All I know is that may not have been in the firing line for head high contact if he'd have continued upwards after taking possession. The "forceful" front on contact may only have been glancing.

[takeaway]

That's ok. I understand we can't all agree on everything

Thr real issue many people have... is actually that they can't get their head around the fact that the game of Aussie rules has changed

Assume the Richmond guy doesn't duck...Is Boyd still going to hit him high? Yes or No? Simple

Most of you pine for the good ol days. Back in the day...the little blokes had better awareness to avoid clothes hangers and elbows and shirt fronts. It was a mans game

None of this 'duty of care' rubbish.

Many still believe that it was Hunter Clark's 'awareness' that was the problem. Hunter should have seen Andrew McKay coming and should have taken precautionary measures

Same with Brayshaw. He should have been more aware and he shouldn't have veered into Maynard's path

You'd better let the AFL Tribunal know Scols.

[Saint 58]

It was the right call, though...Unlike the Cripps one a few years ago.
The Tigers player clearly ducked his head into the tackler and doing everything we were taught not to do as kids.
What the Tigers player did is a spinal injury just waiting to happen.

He bent forward in an effort to pick up the ball and hadn’t had time to stand up straight before he got hit. Are you suggesting that players shouldn’t do that any longer?

While we are only talking about the difference between one week and getting off altogether, I reckon it was the worst tribunal decision for many years.

He picked up the ball, THEN looked up, then dropped his head

Like we teach the kids at training, turn your body to protect the ball & your head, & crash/bump the guy coming at you
Clark does the same thing which is why he’s always injured (head)