SA Footy

this is an absolute joke & this is the main reason why we gave up our footy park memberships (4 of them), it was simply a bump there was no intent to hurt or mame cousins, it wasn't behind the play, it was just norMAL footy (cousins is one of the elite players going around so where was his perepheral (not sure of the spelling) vision ...i know they've re-written the wording in the laws but ffs they have harder hits in netball & this is clearly the wrong path the afl is heading up, sure the crowds & tv viewers are supposedly up but so is the population so perhaps they aren't as high as they think


THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE GARBAGE DECISION

Spot on ... but as I said in the other thread and you've alluded to, it's in the current laws so you can't blame the tribunial or the Match Review Committee.

The most telling aspect is that none of the 3 field umpires thought it was worthy of even a free kick on the day.

We need to piss off Adrian Anderson and get someone who understands footy as the AFL Football Operations Manager ... that would be a good start.

Am I incorrect in saying that no-one has ever been killed by a bump on an AFL football field?

What was wrong with the game 15 years ago that needed changing?

Arent the AFL board there to administrate, not change the laws of the game?

Don't all players of Australian Rules, Ben Cousins included, understand that it is a contact sport and involves an element of risk?

This is a disgrace.

Good article here:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25983154-5018851,00.html

Not a great decision but if you gave up your footy park membership just becuse of that sort of thing thats just hilarious

Bat Pad wrote:Am I incorrect in saying that no-one has ever been killed by a bump on an AFL football field?

What was wrong with the game 15 years ago that needed changing?

Arent the AFL board there to administrate, not change the laws of the game?

Don't all players of Australian Rules, Ben Cousins included, understand that it is a contact sport and involves an element of risk?

This is a disgrace.

I highly doubt Ben Cousins would advocate a 2 week suspension for the 'hit'.

It's a sad day when a bump like that gets a 2 week suspension. From what I could see it was a split second decision by Buddy to lay the bump, rather than a tackle, the ball was obviously in the area because Cousins had it !! The bump jarred the ball free which is a better result for the crumbing forwards rather than locking the ball in with a tackle and he made a determined second effort after the bump to try get the ball. I guess the head high contact is what sealed the deal in the end it but I would doubt that any of the 44 players from either side would go thru a game without head contact of some sort either in a marking contest, tackle or in general play. The game has turned soft and it's sad to see split second incidents like this highlighted and punished.

Move on folks. If it was Round 3 and some no descript character from Fremantle no-one would give a rats toss....

Head high contact has been penalised all year.

Perhaps Hawthorn could have had faith in the rest of the squad to beat Essington this week and would have had Buddy available ( with a weeks rest under his belt ) for week 1 of Finals if they had not challenged it. More to the point they obviously didnt look at what the tribunal has handed down for similar incidents all the way through 2009.

Poor managment from Hawthorn IMO, as far as the rules go, I didnt say I like it, but thats the way it is now.

Is there a hidden motive for suspending players for these incidents ?
May well be with the proliferation of AFL games being televised thesedays that the AFL wants the scale of serious injuries and collisions to be minimised
Why ?
Lots of parents and children are watching the televised games
If they see injuries thru collisions [even legit ones like Buddys] or behind play king hits or serious injuries for illegal tackles or whatever this could put off the parents allowing, and kids being put off from playing footy at the grass roots levels

Soccer could be percieved as a serious threat in Australia, with the Soceroos improvement over the years there is a bigger audience awareness for the national team
Is the AFL concerned that young kids may prefer or be made to play soccer becoz its considered a lesser non contact sport compared to Football ?

As for Buddy its gotta be one of the worst tribunal blunders Ive seen
Spare a thought for Buddy when you consider what Barry Hall did in a prelim final not so long ago

I wonder if Buddy would have got suspended if he did this in the SANFL ?
We had a spear tackle land a player a 2 game suspension in the SANFL this year
Then we have Buddy who made a split second decision and what appeared a fair bump cop the same suspension

Im with Bayman and a chorus of others who are turning almost solely towards SANFL footy which has remained a mans game

PS
Who was on the AFL/FRANKLIN tribunal, The Australian Cricket Selectors....

Hawthorn to appeal the 2 match suspension

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,865 ... 51,00.html

Makes you wanna stop watching AFL. This is the reason no one brags about the Aussie rules anymore. You never hear people saying "best game in the world" anymore. People now seem to follow AFL out of team passion, not game passion.

Booney wrote:Move on folks. If it was Round 3 and some no descript character from Fremantle no-one would give a rats toss....

Head high contact has been penalised all year.

Perhaps Hawthorn could have had faith in the rest of the squad to beat Essington this week and would have had Buddy available ( with a weeks rest under his belt ) for week 1 of Finals if they had not challenged it. More to the point they obviously didnt look at what the tribunal has handed down for similar incidents all the way through 2009.

Poor managment from Hawthorn IMO, as far as the rules go, I didnt say I like it, but thats the way it is now.

If reckless and intentional then i would agree that Franklin deserves his two week suspension. However, the part Cousins played in this incident simply can't be overlooked, his fumble and turn which lowered his body played a significant role in the contact ending up high. Franklin shouldn't be suspended for this incident.

Perhaps Byron Picket should have got off when James Begley fumbled that ball?


What Cousins did has nothing in the slightest to do with the fact Franklin hit him in the head...

wycbloods wrote:

Booney wrote:Move on folks. If it was Round 3 and some no descript character from Fremantle no-one would give a rats toss....

Head high contact has been penalised all year.

Perhaps Hawthorn could have had faith in the rest of the squad to beat Essington this week and would have had Buddy available ( with a weeks rest under his belt ) for week 1 of Finals if they had not challenged it. More to the point they obviously didnt look at what the tribunal has handed down for similar incidents all the way through 2009.

Poor managment from Hawthorn IMO, as far as the rules go, I didnt say I like it, but thats the way it is now.

If reckless and intentional then i would agree that Franklin deserves his two week suspension. However, the part Cousins played in this incident simply can't be overlooked, his fumble and turn which lowered his body played a significant role in the contact ending up high. Franklin shouldn't be suspended for this incident.

The AFL have made it pretty clear that the bloke over the footy gets protected from head high contact, accidental or otherwise. Cousins was first to the footy = protected, fumble or not. I think 1 week was appropriate, 2 a bit stiff. I do find it weird that there was no free kick at the time, but maybe the umpire didn't see the contact from his angle at the contest.

Yes, AFL is getting pretty soft these days, but as another poster highlighted the exposure and tv coverage make this necessary to gain appeal over supposed 'safer' sports. It's unfortunate, but the reality of a highly competitive sporting industry.

Regarding this incident, I think the only appeal the Hawthorn heirachy should be making from here is to the entire squad for playing like cr@p all year and leaving them in this position 'grasping at straws' in the first place.

Good post Fantapants.

Booney wrote:Perhaps Byron Picket should have got off when James Begley fumbled that ball?


What Cousins did has nothing in the slightest to do with the fact Franklin hit him in the head...

Well i must have been watching a different game.

BestHumanEver wrote:Makes you wanna stop watching AFL. This is the reason no one brags about the Aussie rules anymore. You never hear people saying "best game in the world" anymore. People now seem to follow AFL out of team passion, not game passion.

Yeah but AFL is not Aussie Rules is it? Still the best game in the world for mine.

regards,

REB

F*** gaining appeal. AFL will lose supporters if it doesnt stay close to the game it remotely started as. As someone else has said in another topic, its close to a hybrid version of the game that was founded all those years ago. Disgraceful decision.

Booney wrote:What Cousins did has nothing in the slightest to do with the fact Franklin hit him in the head...

Yep, Buddy should have dropped to his knees before delivering the bump so as not to get him high.

Explain oh wise Boon how Maxwell got off earlier in the year? At least Franklin hit the guy with the ball.

And I would be feeling the same way if it was Ben Cousins who hit Franklin in the same manner. Disgraceful decision.

I know I'm in a minority position here, and I admit I was one of the first group of kids moving to Soccer and Hockey to keep my brain and body intact.
But, if you want mayhem give 'em swords and clubs, and "flexible" rules.
And if you want ball-handling skills on show give them protection.

I have no comment on the specifics of this incident because I didn't see it.