Pickett tackle on Cornes

[mal]

I dont need glasses I have taped the incident and watched it
CORNES kicked the ball before he was tackled
Therefore the decision is holding the man
Therefore the decision is also in the back
The NEW rules[???] states when you impede a player after disposal it is illegal
Similar tackles have been penalised all year
If CORNES was in possession then the tackle is questionable and can accept a FAIR tackle.

Have a look at PICKETT he thrives on this type of opportunistic situation
He is 2nd to the ball and lines up his prey, hes not always looking at the ball he is
concentrating on maiming the player
Today he mangled CORNES and MADE SURE he pinned him and crushed him to the ground
Hes done similar so many times that its beyond coincidence

Most AFL players tackle opppotunisticly or instinctively as part of thier overall game as well as being fair
and equitable players
PICKETT is not opportunistic he premeditates his thuggery
Its this premeditation that involves him in so many incidents

[NFC]

PICKETT = thug
UMPIRE = idiot [why not a free kick, when so many softcock frees are charitised throughout the day]

Irrespective of whether the tackle was legit or not the guy who
tacked him has disgraced himself for the umpteenth time.
His pre-occupation with hurting the opposition is what annoys people
He REALLY made sure he hurt CORNES, thats the agitating aspect of the incident

Exactly! Great post.

[Dissident]

I would hardly call chasing down a player and tackling him well premeditated.

The contact was as he kicked it. In slow motion - sure - it's after, but a bee's dick of a second - but that doesn't warrant after disposal.

Pickett's past has nothing to do with this. Taking the Pickett-goggles off for a second - it was the perfect tackle, with an imperfect result.

[SCD]

Diss - completely agree with you...
Mal - what is your problem with Pickett?? must be personal..

This bloke may have had some issues in the past.. and he may in the future, but there was nothing major in the tackle.. agree he pinned both arms and gave Cornes no chance, but that's footy and always has been... if Cornes does it to Pickett - you would be saying he deserved it and was a good tackle...

I will just remind you Mal and the few others that have agreed with him - this is meant to be a man's sport, if you want to take that out of the game, then like the other morons (rules committee and umpires) who change the rules every 2 -3 weeks, I think you should stop watching footy and take on Basketball or better still Baseball...

[Stumps]

I dont need glasses I have taped the incident and watched it
CORNES kicked the ball before he was tackled
Therefore the decision is holding the man
Therefore the decision is also in the back
The NEW rules[???] states when you impede a player after disposal it is illegal
Similar tackles have been penalised all year
If CORNES was in possession then the tackle is questionable and can accept a FAIR tackle.

Have a look at PICKETT he thrives on this type of opportunistic situation
He is 2nd to the ball and lines up his prey, hes not always looking at the ball he is
concentrating on maiming the player
Today he mangled CORNES and MADE SURE he pinned him and crushed him to the ground
Hes done similar so many times that its beyond coincidence

Most AFL players tackle opppotunisticly or instinctively as part of thier overall game as well as being fair
and equitable players
PICKETT is not opportunistic he premeditates his thuggery
Its this premeditation that involves him in so many incidents

How the hell was pickett meant to know that he had got rid of it is my question??
It sounds to me like he should have tackled him so cornes had one hand free to brace his fall, and so cornes is able to fire out a quick handball to a running player to kick the sealing goal, as soon as Cornes released the handball Pickett should have let go, tapped him on the bum and jogged off the field onto the bench where he would be told his half arsed effort is unacceptabele and he wont be playing next week........silly pickett

MALicious -NO....Unlucky- YES

[devilsadvocate]

This Port man says fair tackle, play on.

Cornes was unlucky at having his arms pinned and the momentum of being chased down and falling in the direction he did.

Great tackle by Pickett. No malice in it at all.

[Hondo]

I would hardly call chasing down a player and tackling him well premeditated.

The contact was as he kicked it. In slow motion - sure - it's after, but a bee's dick of a second - but that doesn't warrant after disposal.

Pickett's past has nothing to do with this. Taking the Pickett-goggles off for a second - it was the perfect tackle, with an imperfect result.

Not quite 'perfect' - you said it was a 'bee's dick' late and you'd have to admit he didn't have to drive Cornes in to the gound at the end

Saying that doesn't make me a 'netball fan' BTW, nor a 'Pickett-basher' - just someone who watched the incident on TV. I'd say the same whatever players were involved. Still don't think it should or will be reported. Unfortunate accident.

[Dissident]

I would hardly call chasing down a player and tackling him well premeditated.

The contact was as he kicked it. In slow motion - sure - it's after, but a bee's dick of a second - but that doesn't warrant after disposal.

Pickett's past has nothing to do with this. Taking the Pickett-goggles off for a second - it was the perfect tackle, with an imperfect result.

Not quite 'perfect' - you said it was a 'bee's dick' late and you'd have to admit he didn't have to drive Cornes in to the gound at the end

Saying that doesn't make me a 'netball fan' BTW, nor a 'Pickett-basher' - just someone who watched the incident on TV. I'd say the same whatever players were involved. Still don't think it should or will be reported. Unfortunate accident.

It was a bee's dick after which means, in football rules, it's "at the contest". The ball had hardly left Kane's boot.
If it was deemed a free kick, it wouldn't have been down the ground.

[JK]

Pickett - Should have no case to answer, agree that it was similar to Hentchel last year, just one of those unfortunate incidents which every player know they are at risk of when they take the field.

Davey - Gone for sure

Silvia - Will probably get cited, but I hoope he get's off - I think it was more over exuberance with no malicious intent.

I would have been feeling pretty dirty if I were a Dee's fan yesterday, they got a Raw deal from the lavae imho.

[devilsadvocate]

Spot on with those first three points CP.

However WRT your comment on the 'lavae', I think the frees they paid were there. It was the frees they didn't pay that was the issue. The much talked about consistency in decision making will never be ther because there are 3 umpires on the field calling the shots.

[mal]

I would hardly call chasing down a player and tackling him well premeditated.

The contact was as he kicked it. In slow motion - sure - it's after, but a bee's dick of a second - but that doesn't warrant after disposal.

Pickett's past has nothing to do with this. Taking the Pickett-goggles off for a second - it was the perfect tackle, with an imperfect result.

Cant be a perfect tackle ?
I will describe the finishing positions of both players in its completion
CORNES with his whole body flat on the oval
PICKETT with his body flat over the top of CORNES
Looked like a Greek man with a virgin wife .....

The perfect tackle would be to roll and swivel the body and having CORNES
finishing in a side on position.

Plus I didnt see the ball underneath both players on impact
The ball was on the way to MOTLOP further down the field

[JK]

Spot on with those first three points CP.

However WRT your comment on the 'lavae', I think the frees they paid were there. It was the frees they didn't pay that was the issue. The much talked about consistency in decision making will never be ther because there are 3 umpires on the field calling the shots.

Yep I agree DA, and if I were a Dee's supporter I would have been annoyed for that reason ... I'll give an example of one (of the many) problem of officiating that occured yesterday.

Final Qtr approx 2 mins to go, Neitz penalised for pushing Wakelin in the back - Decision is spot on %100 correct.
Mid-late in 3rd Qtr, Wakelin pushes Neitz in back very close to goal, not called, crowd and Neitz go off - Umpire (on mic) is heard to say I couldn't see it because I was front on to the pack!

I don't recall seeing an ump side on or behind the contest in the first of those.

I'm not trying to deny Port their win yesterday, it takes a class team to perform below their best yet still take the choccies, and I'm only highlighting one incident (could go on about the deliberate out's aswell), but I just think it makes a mockery of the game.

[Dissident]

I would hardly call chasing down a player and tackling him well premeditated.

The contact was as he kicked it. In slow motion - sure - it's after, but a bee's dick of a second - but that doesn't warrant after disposal.

Pickett's past has nothing to do with this. Taking the Pickett-goggles off for a second - it was the perfect tackle, with an imperfect result.

Cant be a perfect tackle ?
I will describe the finishing positions of both players in its completion
CORNES with his whole body flat on the oval
PICKETT with his body flat over the top of CORNES
Looked like a Greek man with a virgin wife .....

The perfect tackle would be to roll and swivel the body and having CORNES
finishing in a side on position.

Plus I didnt see the ball underneath both players on impact
The ball was on the way to MOTLOP further down the field

Do you know how many tackles each game (including that one) end up with the tackler on that position?
Kane's momentum put him to the ground, not a push in the back.

[Down&Out]

Pickett is not tough- the greatest sniper out, but for people to want to outlaw this tackle is ridiculous- The game is a contact sport and people sometimes get hurt- everyone that plays the game knows this. Great tackle unfortunate outcome- but watch for the AFL to act on it!!

[mighty_tiger_79]

great tackle nothing wrong with it

[blink]

PICKETT = thug
UMPIRE = idiot [why not a free kick, when so many softcock frees are charitised throughout the day]

Irrespective of whether the tackle was legit or not the guy who
tacked him has disgraced himself for the umpteenth time.
His pre-occupation with hurting the opposition is what annoys people
He REALLY made sure he hurt CORNES, thats the agitating aspect of the incident

Sorry Mal, can't agree with you here. Cornes was wrapped up in a great tackle, which wasn't late. May appear to be late in the slow-mo replay but watch it in real time and you'll see that it wasn't.

If Pickett gets games for this it will be a disgrace. Cornes should be thankful that Choppy wasn't playing for Melbourne three or four years ago and the same situation occurred, because Byron would have dead-set killed him with a hip & shoulder back then, rather than a tackle, which would have also been fair.

[Blue Boy]

It looked pretty bad after he was knocked out with his neck bending like rubber man !!!

[Booney]

Looked like a Greek man with a virgin wife

Lucky?

[Wedgie]

Good to see that no action was taken by the AFL when it was recognised Picket did nothing wrong.

[RustyCage]

Pickett - Should have no case to answer, agree that it was similar to Hentchel last year, just one of those unfortunate incidents which every player know they are at risk of when they take the field.

Davey - Gone for sure

Silvia - Will probably get cited, but I hoope he get's off - I think it was more over exuberance with no malicious intent.

I would have been feeling pretty dirty if I were a Dee's fan yesterday, they got a Raw deal from the lavae imho.

The Neitz one very late in the game was an obvious free, but the deliberate out on a full after was bad.