TOPIC:

As everyone on this forum probably knows I am no fan of the Eagles BUT what a joke the MRO/MRP or whatever it is called with respect to the one week suspension of NicNat. That decision reeks of VFL-centric bias and/or absolutely no comprehension of basic physics. And yes I do know where the person who made the decision comes from.

Whilst I am on a roll a certain Geelong supporter should be unavailable for at least TWO WEEKS.

I had a look at the incident from several angles and while I agree that it is tough on Nic, the AFL have made it clear that the head is sacrosanct because of the increasing number of concussions so anyone who lays a tackle or bump that impacts on someones head is in trouble.In Nic's case the vigour of his tackle combined with the fact that he fell into the Port players back caused his head to jam into the ground and dazed him. So Michael Christian has interpreted the AFL policy correctly in my opinion. Whether or not the policy is realistic or fair to the tackler is another debate,
I would be very surprised if the Eagles appeal this given the current circumstances.

Fair dinkum Mike what should the bloke do?
He can’t bump Amon as that has virtually been outlawed and with the size difference between the 2 he would have knocked Amons head into the Swan River if he did and got 6 weeks suspension.
And now they are also saying you can’t tackle vigorously either (this was NOT a sling tackle).

I often wonder what some of the big strong blokes of the 70s & 80s must think of the game today the likes of Boucher, Michael, Moss, Duckworth, McCulloch, Alexander, Murray, Atwell etc not to mention the robust little blokes must shake their heads in disbelief at this soft sanitised serving of the game nowadays.

Well, it’s official - the bump is no longer allowed and the tackle is on it’s way out. A 103 kg man who is known to be a fierce tackler will no longer be able to tackle someone who’s 70kg dripping wet. Well, I guess that’s the way our footy is heading now. I can only dream what our game will look like in 25 years, or perhaps I don’t want to know.
Guess the Eagles will be able to give NN the week off they talked about.
Another out for next week’s game. Great timing hey??

I am not agreeing with the rule but I am saying that the Match review had no choice but to sanction Nic once the guy had banged his head. Here is what the AFL site said
"This was a dangerous tackle, which we deemed to be unreasonable in the circumstances in that he drove Amon into the ground with excessive force while Amon was in a vulnerable position with his arms pinged," Christian said on Monday afternoon.

The match review boss said Port Adelaide's medical report had been a key factor in him grading Naitanui's tackle as medium rather than low impact.
So if the medical report had put Amon in the clear then Nic would have probably escaped with a reprimand or a fine.

I'll go with Simmo on this one:

"It's a bit of a headscratcher for me, personally," Simpson told Channel Seven.

"The vision I saw, he didn't have his arms pinned."

For teams wanting to get an opposition player under the spotlight of the MRP, drag your player off if he has been tackled with more than a wet lettuce leaf.

swan42 wrote: As everyone on this forum probably knows I am no fan of the Eagles BUT what a joke the MRO/MRP or whatever it is called with respect to the one week suspension of NicNat. That decision reeks of VFL-centric bias and/or absolutely no comprehension of basic physics. And yes I do know where the person who made the decision comes from.

Whilst I am on a roll a certain Geelong supporter should be unavailable for at least TWO WEEKS.

Glad u took ur meds today.

One of your only relevant posts in the last 3yrs..

mikeh wrote: I had a look at the incident from several angles and while I agree that it is tough on Nic, the AFL have made it clear that the head is sacrosanct because of the increasing number of concussions so anyone who lays a tackle or bump that impacts on someones head is in trouble.In Nic's case the vigour of his tackle combined with the fact that he fell into the Port players back caused his head to jam into the ground and dazed him. So Michael Christian has interpreted the AFL policy correctly in my opinion. Whether or not the policy is realistic or fair to the tackler is another debate,
I would be very surprised if the Eagles appeal this given the current circumstances.

The only problem mikeh is that the previous week end a player bumped another player and in the process knocked him out. Christian's ruling: nothing to see here - accidental head contact.

Unholytugboat wrote:

swan42 wrote: As everyone on this forum probably knows I am no fan of the Eagles BUT what a joke the MRO/MRP or whatever it is called with respect to the one week suspension of NicNat. That decision reeks of VFL-centric bias and/or absolutely no comprehension of basic physics. And yes I do know where the person who made the decision comes from.

Whilst I am on a roll a certain Geelong supporter should be unavailable for at least TWO WEEKS.

Glad u took ur meds today.

One of your only relevant posts in the last 3yrs..

When I need your approval will be the day AFTER the end of the world.

I can't believe how anyone can defend that tackle. I admire the way Nic Nat plays his footy and I have no problem with the vigor he applies but he clearly launched himself into the tackle from behind on a player nearly half his size and made no attempt to drag him down or turn him around. This technical bs about whether he had both arms pinned or not is irrelevant.

Applying a tackle like that could have dire consequences and Natanui would have trouble living with himself if that player suffered a career ending injury, or worse an injury that is life changing. The AFL has made the right call and Nic Nat needs to make a slight adjustment to his tackling technique.