Rocca out for 2 matches

[smithy]

SOFT AFL........SOFT
This suspension is a disgrace and more than hint of what our game is becoming.
Malthouse was right with his "becoming gaelic" comment

[Hondo]

I think Malthouse was just lobbying for his key forward so he wouldn't miss any games. Get in early and make a comment in the media about how the game is changing for the worse and hope enough people pick it up and the tribunal feels under more pressure to let it go. Sheedy, Roos, Matthews, etc often do the same things when their star players get reported.

Rocca's mistake was in not looking at the Sydney player and seeing that his head was down in line with Rocca's shoulder. As soon as you hit the head the tribunal will come down hard. Stopping players from hitting opponents in the head area doesn't make the game soft ... it's a sensible precaution in a contact sport.

I was surprised he challenged the one-match ban personally.

[Benchwarmer]

Too true, Hondo. Good to see a Collingwood rat go for a row.

P.S. Can someone gag "Chuckles" Malthouse ... unless of course he breaks rank and talks positively about something for once! The record needs changing or breaking.

[Psyber]

I watched the video of it and thought it was worth 3 matches - a deliberate hit, shoulder braced, and arm raised. Mind you I'm all for it becoming more like the Gaelic game.

[Benchwarmer]

May as well use a fist, it would get you the same penalty (e.g. Eagleton's love tap).

[sydney-dog]

I'm comfortable with the 2 matches, the hit was high

[smithy]

I still think it should be deemed a legal "shepherd" although an unfortunate one.
If the sydney players head was up more, he would of been able to take the impact better, but from what I saw there was hardly anytime for either the sydney player to raise his head or for Rocca to change his intentions.
Rocca's arms were braced in (no elbows).
The umpire also stated it didn't warrant a report at the tribunal.
What would've other people and his coach have thought if RRocca side stepped at the last moment and let the sydney player continue his chase?
I agree head high contact should be minimised as much as possible, but in this instance it was more the sydney players fault rather than Rocca's.

[Blue Boy]

Really unlucky - just my opinion though !!!

[Armytank]

The way I see it............

If he didn't make contact with the head, it would have been a legal shepherd (although with the soft rules he still would probably have been up for "charging" )

Contact was made with the head therefore it is deemed a reportable and suspendable offence.

The head is sacred (as it should be) but that doesn't mean that the hip and shoulder shepherd is ruled out of the game. Care is required when doing it not to make contact with the head.

If Dempster had possesion of the ball he would have been given a free kick for too high and Rocca may still have been reported.

Two weeks ...........fair mainly because he wears black and white!

[scoob]

Dont forget that if he pleaded guilty he would have only got 1 week, only got 2 because he challenged it. Think 1 week was a fair result.

[Psyber]

Mind you, you can do someone brain damage just by jolting them hard, often enough, without actually hitting the head - like the "Shaken Baby Syndrome" - small haemorrhages in the shaken up brain and cumulative damage.

Perhaps I should mention that to the players' association and Slater & Gordon, and their former associate now representing the workers Julia Gillard - it looks like an Occupational Health & Safety issue to me!

[Rik E Boy]

smithy's missed a half volley here. This thread should have been entitled Rocca Rolled!

regards,

REB

[Benchwarmer]

Workin' well, REB!

[Dogwatcher]

It's a soft decision - how can Rocca help Dempster's actions?
I hate seeing people ruled out for things like this from any club.

But, having said that, I'm surprised Anthony challenged it. Under the current system, he was always going to get done. Should've taken the one.