The AFL salute

_________________
"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds." - Frank Zappa

A legal tackle is above the legs and below the shoulders whether you're 4 foot tall or 8 foot tall. For the record, Dylan Grimes is one of the worst offenders and he's 193cm! If smaller players are tackled legally, they have the same opportunity to raise their arms like everyone else.
If they are tackled above the shoulders, its a free kick, just like everyone else.
The rules apply to everyone and so they should, tall or short.

Jim was saying its a legitimate tactic for smaller players to use. I think that's wrong. If there was no reward, players wouldn't be ducking. The only reason they do it is to draw free kicks. If the AFL were serious about protecting the head, they'd change the rule.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

They wouldn't, but what I'm saying is these smaller guys often don't have the body strength to break a tackle without ducking, and will be less likely to get their arms free.

So by giving them no means to weave around in traffic other than the quickest of sidesteps, or enough acceleration to turn it into an arm tackle instead of a body one, they just have to sit there and cop the tackle without the option of ducking.

That effectively rewards taller players just for being tall.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

Sometimes I think you argue for the sake of it Jim.
Why do shorter players have less strength? Many of them have more power in the tackle due to a lower centre of gravity. Some players like Tony Liberatore or Byron Pickett were the strongest players going in tackles.
On Sunday I saw Clem Smith take the Coburg ruckman front on and drag him down. You're generalising without basis IMO.
To suggest changing the rule effectively rewards taller players just for being tall, it makes zero sense whatsoever.
Taller players have an advantage in many marking contests, taller players have an advantage in ruck contests, smaller players often have an advantage with the ground ball,
Its not the responsibility of the game to even up advantages for shorter players. Their responsibility is to provide a game that is relatively safe to play. Ducking into tackles promotes head high contact. Its a blight on the game IMO.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

I said often, not always?

Let's take Gallucci as an example: you're saying he should just roll over and play dead when someone is trying to pin his arms?

Either he gets penalised for being a smaller player without much body strength, or we get extra stoppages.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

if the player with the ball deliberately contributes to high contact there shouldn't be a free against the tackler but should be one against the ball carrier.

_________________
I hope Essendon* folds.

Yes, I said those exact words. Just go and see them.

The rules are theres for everyone. If a player doesn't have the strength to break a tackle without drawing contact to his head, bad luck. Should we allow him bring a ladder on the field so he can take pack marks as well? Should we excuse tall players from bouncing the ball because they have more margin for error?
Its a foolish argument IMO. The safety of the players shouldn't be compromised to give an advantage to shorter players.

Even Joel Selwood who is the master of drawing high contact now admits he is worried about his long term welfare.



If we continue to reward the action, players won't make the effort to change. To me, its a real concern that 2 players coming into the game are topping the high tackle statistics by dropping their knees. It filters down to the lower levels and we're seeing the results of that now. The AFL has missed the boat IMO.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

I can't imagine the AFL not changing the rule after this season

Stand to be corrected, but isn't a legal tackle below the shoulders and above the knees ?

_________________
The problem with Socialism is, you eventually run out of other people's money.

It may have been old Carlton

....that's why I'm interested in learning more about your insight that people at the club got ahead of themselves.

Like you, I'm not caught in the Melbourne bubble. I can only read and look at face value.

Don't caught up in the stats.

I'm going with my heart and from what I see, there is a group of young fellas who are speaking with more energy, desire and professionalism that springs a great sense that things on the right track.

This is my biggest concern, when you have a first gamer employing obvious tactics to draw high contact on himself it's clear that it's becoming prevalent at junior level which is entirely the fault of the AFL sitting on their hands.

_________________
"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds." - Frank Zappa

I'm not saying the tackler should be penalised if the tackled player slips down, just that the tackled player should be allowed the opportunity to duck out of the tackle.

The tackler can then tackle again if they slip free.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

The umpires are already instructed to call play on if the player ducks into a tackle, aren't they? Last year they were implementing an interpretation that the action of ducking was actually seen as your prior opportunity to dispose of the ball and were going to call holding the ball if you ducked and didn't get the ball out. I'm not sure if that's still being enforced.
The issue appears to be the same old chestnut of having too much left up to the umpires interpretation. What constitutes ducking into a tackle rather than ducking and weaving to in fact avoid the tackle? When is a player deliberately leading with their head rather than actually just getting in low and hunting the ball? Again, is a player dropping at the knees trying to manipulated head high contact, or are they taking evasive/reflex action?
No umpire will get those calls 100% right.
Personally I didn't mind the idea of the duck being considered prior opportunity to dispose of the ball, because if a bunch of players are getting caught holding the ball when their instinct has been to duck, soon enough they'll learn that this tactic isn't working and their instincts will change and should hopefully revert to the way the game was designed to be played, actually disposing of the ball in that situation.

_________________
@cecil_anderson

I'm talking about ducking once you're in the tackle, as in using the strength of your back and legs to try and break free.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

Nothing more infuriating than watching an ump rush in to award a free to a ducker who deliberately draws high contact

They should have changed it 5 years ago.

Anyone with half a brain should have been able to see what was happening. Obviously doesn't help that the majority of commentators on the game are morons. I still hear commentators saying 'It doesn't matter if they've ducked their heads. They still have to tackle them correctly.' When that's exactly what they don't have to do, according to the rules. That's what the 'ducking the head' exemption actually means.

I'm with Blue Vain on this. They should not only actually enforce the rules they currently have, but also broaden them to include collapsing at the knees or shrugging the tackle over the shoulder or lunging yourself forward. If a player is legitimately tackled he shouldn't be rewarded for tricking the umpire.

I enjoy watching movies. But when I watch the footy I want to enjoy the contest between players and teams, rather than an acting contest directed against the umpires.

Always despised this.

I remember in the VFA back in the 70's Sandringham had Clarke (ex Dees) centreman who would put his head down and charge at opponents' guts to draw a free kick. It was always in the last when Sandy were desperate for a win to avoid relegation back then. He always got the free kick. I loved the call because I barracked for Sandy in Div 1 those days and Willy in Div 2, but thought it was dead wrong!!!

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Are you saying once a player is tackled correctly, he should be able to duck out of the tackle and draw a free kick?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

No, that he should be able to duck (essentially buck) out of the tackle without drawing a free kick against himself for ducking.

If the guy tackling him clamps down again and that contact is high, then and only then do you penalise the tackler. The scenario I'm thinking of here is a tackle that starts just shy of the shoulders.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

Duck Carey: 'He didn't duck, he just dropped his knees a little'.

_________________
Formerly: Ackland the Wonderkid / Army the Wonderkid / quivering mess / molsey / Tony Lynn Fan Club