MRP / Trib. Pickett elbow on Soligo

Remove this Banner Ad

The AFL is not a combat sport, it's a ball sport.

Rules of this sport change frequently for many reasons, and this is probably the most valid reason there is. Have you completely missed all of the concussion lawsuits coming the way of the AFL, which will only grow? Without mentioning the impact on player's lives, such as the tragic Nigel Kellett story the other week.

There will always be an element of risk in a contact game like Australian rules football but no one deserves to have their life ruined due to playing a sport which decided not to act to deter the effects of concussion because certain people prefer it to stay like the good old days of Biffs, Bumps and Brawlers.
I'm not denying the lawsuits but how come the afl can't avoid them but every other sport can? Ice hockey is a good example.

I think if you sign up to a sport like this then having long term consequences is a potential risk. I'm ok for reducing the risks but not by changing the game so much where it's basically unrecognisable.
 
Frequently.

Pickett is a sniper thug always has been.
just playing in the wrong era. he plays like uncle Byron. Someone who people loved to watch for his brutality and big hits. Most of them perfectly executed, but some of them not. That's what playing on the edge is.

All well and good to point the finger but Pickett has never done anything to the same level as Tom Stewart who knocked out prestia late and got 4 weeks.
 
just playing in the wrong era. he plays like uncle Byron. Someone who people loved to watch for his brutality and big hits. Most of them perfectly executed, but some of them not. That's what playing on the edge is.

All well and good to point the finger but Pickett has never done anything to the same level as Tom Stewart who knocked out prestia late and got 4 weeks.

Ha, yeah OK. His hit on Bazlenka was fine was it?

3 suspensions for the same act in 12 months.

Stewart certainly hasn't done that.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The front on contact stopping someone in their tracks is far more violent than the majority of the tackles from yesteryear.

Comparing our sport to the shambles that is professional boxing, or to MMA is not really helpful. NFL, NRL, Rugby Union are all trying to stamp out the same things, Union in particular is really struggling with the front on nature of hits due to much better, more organised rush defence - impact injuries are a huge issue for them.
I dont really understand the whole front on thing to be honest. What's the big deal about front on tackles. People often say that rugby is softer than the afl because of the front on tackles i.e. you always know where the tackle is coming from etc.

I wasn't aware that rugby has had similar struggles. Have they changed many of their rules to cater for the cte considerations?
 
Ha, yeah OK. His hit on Bazlenka was fine was it?

3 suspensions for the same act in 12 months.

Stewart certainly hasn't done that.
the baz hit was the worst of the lot. let's not include the Soligo hit, it was incredibly soft. He restrained himself. I don't even recall the other hit.
 
I'm not denying the lawsuits but how come the afl can't avoid them but every other sport can? Ice hockey is a good example.

I think if you sign up to a sport like this then having long term consequences is a potential risk. I'm ok for reducing the risks but not by changing the game so much where it's basically unrecognisable.
I'm not sure what you're even arguing here? Football is still football even without players being allowed to bump each other in the head and potentially knock each other out whilst doing it.

On ice hockey, players wear helmets (and have for a long time, you could argue they were one of the first to introduce rules to prevent concussions for obvious reasons) and they also don't tackle. The sport has banned 'checks' to the head or neck since 2010. Concussion is a big issue in ice hockey. So how exactly is that sport a good example?

There are risks in everything you do, the AFL is just moving the line as to what is an acceptable risk and what is not by controlling what players are allowed to do (as they have done forever). As a result, less players lives should be affected. Too bad if you as a spectator don't like it.
 
the baz hit was the worst of the lot. let's not include the Soligo hit, it was incredibly soft. He restrained himself. I don't even recall the other hit.

So your excuse is he's playing in the wrong era and he's fine to keep going, it's just called "on the edge".

Yeah righto.

He's a thug and nothing more.
 
So your excuse is he's playing in the wrong era and he's fine to keep going, it's just called "on the edge".

Yeah righto.

He's a thug and nothing more.
To be fair, even his teammates (bizarrely) say similar, despite having one of their own retire a month ago due to the effects of concussion.

"From (Kysaiah’s) perspective, I don’t want him to change the way he plays,” said Petracca “He plays with an intensity and edge about him that, as a teammate, I love playing with"
 
I dont really understand the whole front on thing to be honest. What's the big deal about front on tackles. People often say that rugby is softer than the afl because of the front on tackles i.e. you always know where the tackle is coming from etc.

I wasn't aware that rugby has had similar struggles. Have they changed many of their rules to cater for the cte considerations?
They’ve changed a boatload and look to be trialing even more in upcoming seasons - it hasn’t all gone smoothly, and honestly they’re in a tough spot.

On the front on thing, if you are running forwards and get stopped in your tracks, it is a jarring action not dissimilar to being in a head on car crash.
 
To be fair, even his teammates (bizarrely) say similar, despite having one of their own retire a month ago due to the effects of concussion.

"From (Kysaiah’s) perspective, I don’t want him to change the way he plays,” said Petracca “He plays with an intensity and edge about him that, as a teammate, I love playing with"

Petracca is no Rhodes Scholar though is he. Seems very thick.
 
unbelievable....clearly directs the elbow straight to the head.....what excuse is there for that action?

thought his hit on Smith was absolutely appalling....obviously hasnt learnt anything....and is now hit with a wet lettuce leaf for a third offence and has his weak ass coach standing up for his sniping as some sort of old school badge of honor....

seriously, the bs from melbourne is too much.....
 
So your excuse is he's playing in the wrong era and he's fine to keep going, it's just called "on the edge".

Yeah righto.

He's a thug and nothing more.
Then Tom Stewart is too. 4 weeks his thug hit on Prestia. don't deny it's different. it's worse.its not his first rodeo either for Tom
 
So your excuse is he's playing in the wrong era and he's fine to keep going, it's just called "on the edge".

Yeah righto.

He's a thug and nothing more.
He plays very similar to his uncle Byron. Someone who was incredibly aggressive. And yet the odd bump went too high and resulted in punishment.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I'm not sure what you're even arguing here? Football is still football even without players being allowed to bump each other in the head and potentially knock each other out whilst doing it.

On ice hockey, players wear helmets (and have for a long time, you could argue they were one of the first to introduce rules to prevent concussions for obvious reasons) and they also don't tackle. The sport has banned 'checks' to the head or neck since 2010. Concussion is a big issue in ice hockey. So how exactly is that sport a good example?

There are risks in everything you do, the AFL is just moving the line as to what is an acceptable risk and what is not by controlling what players are allowed to do (as they have done forever). As a result, less players lives should be affected. Too bad if you as a spectator don't like it.
didn't know that about hockey. I thought that they still had punch on's on the rink?

You say 'too bad if you are a spectator' and that was my initial point. It is too bad. The game sucks compared to what it used to be. Can't bump anymore out of fear of getting a guy too high, you can't tackle a guy without having to place him down softly on the grass, and ruckman can't even have a proper run and jump at the footy anymore so we have to watch lumbering ruckman get 1 inch off the ground.
 
I dont really understand the whole front on thing to be honest. What's the big deal about front on tackles. People often say that rugby is softer than the afl because of the front on tackles i.e. you always know where the tackle is coming from etc.

I wasn't aware that rugby has had similar struggles. Have they changed many of their rules to cater for the cte considerations?

Rugby got rid of the shoulder charge due to head knock concerns, which many rugby diehards said would kill the game.
 
He plays very similar to his uncle Byron. Someone who was incredibly aggressive. And yet the odd bump went too high and resulted in punishment.

Pickett hardly ever got suspended till the end of his career, after the rules and interpretation changed. Most of his hits were legal under the rules of the day
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top