Swans now uncertain tacklers: Roos

[Adelaide Swan]

Swans now uncertain tacklers: Roos - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/94468/default.aspx)


By Michael Rogers
3:40 PM Mon 17 May, 2010

SYDNEY Swans coach Paul Roos says he has no idea how to instruct his players to tackle their opponents following ruckman Shane Mumford's two-week suspension for rough conduct.

Mumford received a two-week ban after a vigorous tackle against Geelong, in which Cats star Gary Ablett was thrown to the ground and left dazed.

[Hartijon]

Swans now uncertain tacklers: Roos - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/94468/default.aspx)

By Michael Rogers
3:40 PM Mon 17 May, 2010

SYDNEY Swans coach Paul Roos says he has no idea how to instruct his players to tackle their opponents following ruckman Shane Mumford's two-week suspension for rough conduct.

Mumford received a two-week ban after a vigorous tackle against Geelong, in which Cats star Gary Ablett was thrown to the ground and left dazed.



Everybody agrees with you Paul except the members of the MRP.All the commentators were calling it a disgrace,all my friends who support other teams were baffled by it and the simple explanation is that the person tackled was Gary Ablett.Had it been someone like Ryan,nobody cares! Tadgh? nobody cares. It was a sad decision for AFL football!

[Adelaide Swan]

Agreed with that wholeheartedly. I think it has killed off any chance of expanding AFL into the northern states.

The dyed in the wool league fans will just shrug and see it as an attempt by the AFL to feminise the game and it gives RL fans ammunition to call it GayFL.

[Big Al]

Agreed with that wholeheartedly. I think it has killed off any chance of expanding AFL into the northern states.

The dyed in the wool league fans will just shrug and see it as an attempt by the AFL to feminise the game and it gives RL fans ammunition to call it GayFL.

As I stated in the other thread my League mates are already doing this. In the so called war for fans in GWS the AFL have shot themselves in the foot.

[Adelaide Swan]

As I stated in the other thread my League mates are already doing this. In the so called war for fans in GWS the AFL have shot themselves in the foot.

Yeah, I know several of my mates who are league fans(I'm a bit of a league fan myself as well) are laughing at this saying that Aussie Rules is a game for girls.

I think the GWS adventure will be doomed to failure tbh.

I have quite a few mates in that area who are league fans but support AFL as well and they tell me that they are Swans fans and won't change.

[Nico]

I happen to disagree. The tackle Mumford did was illegal. The problem is the inconsistency of the MRP. The week before ROK has his head pummbled into the turf the same way, but there was no citing of the Brisbane player who I think was Drummond. To see Rok's head bounce at least a foot off the ground to me was sickening. Koschitzke did the same to Craig Bolton in Round 1 yet nothing happened. Lenny Hayes did the same to an opponent the same week as Mumford but nothing came of it. It happens weekly and it was supposedly outlawed last year.

This slam tackle is inheritently dangerous and has the potential to maim or even kill someone. Did any of you see the story on head trauma in American Gridiron. The long term affect of head trauma in that sport is devastating. I cannot see the sense in the slam tackle as it is designed to badly hurt someone. On the Couch 2 weeks ago had a clip of a Carlton assistant coach bearting Carlton players because they didn't do enough slam tackles. What a mindless individual he is.

So do we want boys running around slamming opponent's heads into the turf on Sunday. Now that's a good way of warning parents off our game.

As for those lain brain, no neck NRL fans, how long did they allow the spear tackle to continue in their game, before someone thought this could be diabolical one day.

Our sport is too good and way above what the NRL can offer, without having to resort potentially maimimg opponents to win a game.

[sharp9]

Totally agree Nico...if the afl were consistent and intelligent enough to express their rulings then there wouldn't be a problem....let's assume the Mumford tackle is illegal, then the ruling should state

"When tackling - if the tackler lifts or throws the tackled player he must ensure that the tackled player does not have his head slammed into the turf."

As far as I am aware the afl did not actually make this ruling, they made a ruling about double movements and "deliberately" trying to cause injury....the ruling "you pick him up he's your responsibility" is probably ok....it's just that they never made it.

The grey area has been the O'Keefe tackle the week before where he was pinned and driven into the ground head first, IMHO, on purpose. I reckon there was also double movement because the tackle had been completed already. Unfortunately the afl just don't have the brainpower to be consistent. it's so obvious to me and plenty of others but players/coaches/gieschens etc are not the sharpest tools in the shed, quite frankly. The same goes for umpires.

To re-iterate, comfortable with the slam tackle being illegal...but for god's sake clarify the ruling...actually say what is illegal. They haven't even done that since the MRP!!! Something about rough conduct...what constitutes rough conduct? Use your words children.

And while they're at it clarify and be consistent with contact to the head!!! It should be so easy. But you get the Frawley's of this world who are, let's face it, not very intelligent, commentating and saying "fair bump...elbow was in" sort of stuff which went out before I started watching the game in 1995.

The afl says "if you make contact to the head when bumping it is illegal and probably reportable" however the commentators are thick, the umpires are stupid and the man in charge is worse....it should be so easy to be consistent on this one.