Dangerfield

[CURLY]

Joke of a decision

[saynta]

Put Ben Long in Dangerfields place....how many weeks?

3 to 4

[stevie]

Now they will prolly try and get the port guy pinged for accidentally kneeing the north guys head while spoiling

No wonder I don’t watch anymore I just check scores on the phone and that’s it

[st.byron]

Dangerfield is not my favourite player, but I’m looking at the footage and wondering what other choice he had. It wasn’t that late a bump and his momentum carried him into the collision. Bit of a farce I reckon if a player gets suspended for that. There was no intention to hurt. Looks to me like he realised he was put going to stop the guy disposing of the ball and the bump was legal and self protection. The head clash was totally accidental.
I understand the concern about protecting players from head injuries, but ffs it’s a fierce contact sport.

[Vortex]

3 weeks.

[saynta]

Dangerfield is not my favourite player, but I’m looking at the footage and wondering what other choice he had. It wasn’t that late a bump and his momentum carried him into the collision. Bit of a farce I reckon if a player gets suspended for that. There was no intention to hurt. Looks to me like he realised he was put going to stop the guy disposing of the ball and the bump was legal and self protection. The head clash was totally accidental.
I understand the concern about protecting players from head injuries, but ffs it’s a fierce contact sport.

☹

[saynta]

3 weeks.

Best news I have heard all day. No one fell for his bulls*** defence apparently. Suck s*** pussies.

[bigcarl]

Dangerfield is not my favourite player, but I’m looking at the footage and wondering what other choice he had. It wasn’t that late a bump and his momentum carried him into the collision. Bit of a farce I reckon if a player gets suspended for that. There was no intention to hurt. Looks to me like he realised he was put going to stop the guy disposing of the ball and the bump was legal and self protection. The head clash was totally accidental.
I understand the concern about protecting players from head injuries, but ffs it’s a fierce contact sport.

I agree, They’ve made an example of him.

The head is now regarded as sacrosanct because the league wishes to avoid a rash of law suits down the track for CTE.

Makes it hard for naturally aggressive players, but sling tackles, high hits etc won’t be tolerated.

That’s pretty clear. Anyone who infringes in a pre-meditated fashion has rocks in his head because he is going to cop weeks.

[B.M]

If a player goes foe a speccy and knees someone in the back of the head and knocks them out, is that worth a suspension?

[Vortex]

If a player goes foe a speccy and knees someone in the back of the head and knocks them out, is that worth a suspension?

And therein lies the complexity of what lies ahead over the next couple of decades. My guess is that contact sport will succumb to legalities and be modified considerably.

[B.M]

To me, it always the players choice to play or not... no one is forced to?!

And with that comes the risk of

Concussion, knee injury, back/spine injury, neck injury and whatever else that may happen?

Lost count of my injuries from footy, don’t hold the game responsible for those, it’s just part and parcel of playing the game.

[Superboot]

Put Ben Long in Dangerfields place....how many weeks?

3 to 4

Long 5 weeks

Steve Baker 9 weeks

[bangaulegend]

Sign of the times head injuries /concussion are a big issue's for the AFL so from here on every time a player is concussed the action that actually caused the injury will be under the microscope.

[Vortex]

To me, it always the players choice to play or not... no one is forced to?!

And with that comes the risk of

Concussion, knee injury, back/spine injury, neck injury and whatever else that may happen?

Lost count of my injuries from footy, don’t hold the game responsible for those, it’s just part and parcel of playing the game.

I suppose as soon as a playing field is legally defined as a workplace and your commitment to a sport is defined as a career then you are able to hold the sport responsible for loss.

[The Fireman]

I used to love watching the hard bumps, it's what made the game a real spectacle.
The game is changing dramatically and in a short period of time.
The tackle will be removed before you know it.

Dangerfield's bump was a pearler.

[Yorkeys]

This means he will get 4 or 5 next time, the seal of untouchability is broken. And there will be a next time. He will suffer from the frustration of Cats losing more often and him getting older, slower ; and the fading Selwood taking less heat off him. His nature will show up in cheap shots. I think.

Given his defence argument, if he gets his nose is accidently broken soon like the young Adelaide player who was being a ball not man player, Danger will just laugh it off as a mere trifle - broken noses don't hurt do they, particularly if you are knocked out concussed. Geelong what a mob.

[mr six o'clock]

This means he will get 4 or 5 next time, the seal of untouchability is broken. And there will be a next time. He will suffer from the frustration of Cats losing more often and him getting older, slower ; and the fading Selwood taking less heat off him. His nature will show up in cheap shots.

Should have got 4 or 5 this time .
Imo it was worse than what long did last year .
And longs victim played out the match and was one of the best afield.

[CQ SAINT]

Got what he deserved. He lined him up, launched at him, tried to knock him on his arse a fraction late and paid the price for an unnecessary head clash. Good job.

[Devilhead]

Marking & bumping are poles apart

Bumping is an action where the focus is taking out an opposition player

Marking is an action where the focus is catching the ball

Its pretty clear if you make the player your target and hit him in the head then you are in trouble - accidentsl or not

If the ball is your clear and obvious target then an incidental head hit will be treated more leniently

Danger clearly went at Kelly, launched at him and got him in the head - accidental or not in deciding to bump he had duty of care not to hit him in the head - the rules have been clear for a few years - Danger could have tackled, gone lower into the bump or tried to smother the handball - he chose unwisely

The crazy thing is that if this was another lesser low.profile player we wouldn't be having this conversation but because its Danger some think there should be leniency shown becuase he is a stsr if the competition

He is lucky he didnt get 4 given Kelly's injuries

[SaintPav]

David Astbury gets a fine for hitting someone in the head.

Where’s the consistency?

[CURLY]

Decision is a crock. The players are trained to attack the ball and the contest now we will be teaching them to corral them and stand off like a basketball guard.

[Scollop]

Decision is a crock. The players are trained to attack the ball and the contest now we will be teaching them to corral them and stand off like a basketball guard.

The key phrase above is “attack the ball”. You can still be ferocious when it comes to winning the footy. You can still hurt your opposition physically when it’s a contest ‘for the ball’, like a loose ground ball or in a marking contest. I’m pretty sure Jacob Hopper felt the Jack Steele tackle.

If a player is late and doesn’t make an effort to avoid a collision that could result in a head knock then they should cop their fair whack. What do you think the Frawley family wants as far as protecting players and reducing the incidence of concussion?

The other thing you mentioned is the word ‘trained’. Players have to adapt to rule changes don’t they? This is no different. This is more important for the AFL to change the mentality of senior players, because we also have to take into account the ramifications for junior sport

How would you feel if Holly was your child? https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-20/ ... /100014652

If it was your child who had topped himself like the Tuck kid, would you still be wanting them to ignore what Danger did? The consequences from players continuing to attack someone without the footy will be that more AFL players end up like Shane Tuck and Spud Frawley.

[cwrcyn]

Amen to that, Scollop

[CURLY]

Decision is a crock. The players are trained to attack the ball and the contest now we will be teaching them to corral them and stand off like a basketball guard.

The key phrase above is “attack the ball”. You can still be ferocious when it comes to winning the footy. You can still hurt your opposition physically when it’s a contest ‘for the ball’, like a loose ground ball or in a marking contest. I’m pretty sure Jacob Hopper felt the Jack Steele tackle.

If a player is late and doesn’t make an effort to avoid a collision that could result in a head knock then they should cop their fair whack. What do you think the Frawley family wants as far as protecting players and reducing the incidence of concussion?

The other thing you mentioned is the word ‘trained’. Players have to adapt to rule changes don’t they? This is no different. This is more important for the AFL to change the mentality of senior players, because we also have to take into account the ramifications for junior sport

How would you feel if Holly was your child? https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-20/ ... /100014652

If it was your child who had topped himself like the Tuck kid, would you still be wanting them to ignore what Danger did? The consequences from players continuing to attack someone without the footy will be that more AFL players end up like Shane Tuck and Spud Frawley.

Long bow to draw bringing what happened to Tuck into it but that's what the media are doing .

When running flat out at a contest how does a player stop in that split second?

Where is the ball carriers awareness to give the ball off?

Danger ran at the ball carrier if he hangs on to it he tackles if he gets rid of it what does he do implode into thin air?

[asiu]

mmmmm

nice work Scollop