SA Footy

Why has it become an issue this year? Is there more of it? Or is it because there has been something that has happened by it recently which made someone in the AFL go "We have to stop it because it is dangerous?"

And it seems to me that there has been an increase in reports lately; it makes me wonder if players think twice about doing anything during the game which might see them go up before the tribunal for "rough conduct" or "charging" when the ball was their only objective.

I have no idea why it has just popped up. I can't honestly remember seeing too many of them but I don't think it should be a reportable offense. And only a free kick if it causes harm. That might be tough to police so not sure of the answer but it can't be reportable or an auto free kick.

Its a mans game, so I think what is best is just play on.

what about a sling tackle that throws someone into the wall at Norwood, or over a fence? After all, it's just a sling tackle.

CENTURION wrote:what about a sling tackle that throws someone into the wall at Norwood, or over a fence? After all, it's just a sling tackle.

Commonsene can prevail in some instances....der

CENTURION wrote:what about a sling tackle that throws someone into the wall at Norwood, or over a fence? After all, it's just a sling tackle.

That can happen with any tackle or push in the back, seen many a player pushed towards the wall at Norwood with not even a free kick paid

you can't have a rule that depends on the severity of the injury.

CENTURION wrote:you can't have a rule that depends on the severity of the injury.

Hence why i said 'play on'

no need for it, get rid of it

stampy wrote:no need for it, get rid of it

I am with you on this BUT they need to make a decision, either it IS a reportable offence, or it's not. The tackle's sole purpose is to injure the opponent.

CENTURION wrote:

stampy wrote:no need for it, get rid of it

I am with you on this BUT they need to make a decision, either it IS a reportable offence, or it's not. The tackle's sole purpose is to injure the opponent.

I don't agree it's sole purpose is to injure. It's purpose is retard the player. Any tackle could injure someone.

Jimmy wrote:

CENTURION wrote:

stampy wrote:no need for it, get rid of it

I am with you on this BUT they need to make a decision, either it IS a reportable offence, or it's not. The tackle's sole purpose is to injure the opponent.

I don't agree it's sole purpose is to injure. It's purpose is retard the player. Any tackle could injure someone.

Just one example is Trent Hentschel - and for however long he batted the injury and the others he sustained, he wasn't the same player. Compare these to the sling tackles. How many players have been seriously hurt? For mine, the more worrying trend is players charging full bore with their head down into the players legs, like the Jaymie Graham injury in the WAFL. I don't see the AFL jumping up and down about that. Rather, the way the umpires have been instructed, it encourages it.

Its unfair to big players that have the strength to tackle well
For example
Walker slings Delvins
Has Delvins the strength to do it on Walker ?

Parry slings a WA player early in a game and mainly because of his brute strength slung him
Late in the game Parry was tackled by a sMALler player who could not sling him completely
Parrys broad body was just to big for the player to wrap him up and to sling him

CENTURION wrote:

stampy wrote:no need for it, get rid of it

I am with you on this BUT they need to make a decision, either it IS a reportable offence, or it's not. The tackle's sole purpose is to injure the opponent.

i thought the purpose of the tackle is to get the ball off the opponent...side affect of said tackle may injure the player with the ball.

I agree with the banning of it.

It has crept into the game in recent years. A season or two ago, the AFL started paying free kicks, but it still didn't stop sling tackles. I guess when someone gets KO'd, a free kick isn't punishment enough. There is no need for it, unless you like seeing players being injured.

The Sleeping Giant wrote:It has crept into the game in recent years. A season or two ago, the AFL started paying free kicks, but it still didn't stop sling tackles. I guess when someone gets KO'd, a free kick isn't punishment enough. There is no need for it, unless you like seeing players being injured.

but thats the thing...players can get injured in any inocuous body contact...if we start banning things like that, soon our game will only be discernable from netball coz of the skirts the girls wear.

yeah, its not good when players get injured but its a part of the game. we have already seen hip and shoulders basically ruled out.

It's still a physical game. Ask J Brown and A Toovey. Sling tackle is a relatively new thing. It's not necessary in my opinion. Must admit, I do miss the good old fashioned shirt front.

If we see the sling tackle banned will we start to see players throw themselves to the side when tackled similar to what they do when they dive forward when tackled from behind to win the push in the back free.

I have heard the Gowans boys are perfecting this tactic, ready to unleash at the appropriate time in the finals.

As a football community, clubs, umpires and the league, we should be doing all we can to protect our players. I agree that it is dangerous to drag a player to the ground once their arms have been pinned and cannot protect themselves against the impact.

Here's a link to a recent article by Peter Schwab AFL Director of Coaching with some very pertinent points.

http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/inde ... b000757c66

EDIT:Higlighting the last paragraph

"As a game, we also cannot accept the concept of hurting someone legally, and believe me, that position has nothing to do with taking the physicality out of our game."