Round 9 vs Bombers @ SCG - match thread

[ugg]

Actually if you look how Champion Data counts a tackle, it’s basically what you’ve termed an effective tackle

FAQs – AFL – Champion Data

Q: A player was tackled as they disposed of the ball. Why wasn’t a tackle awarded?

A: If a player attempts to tackle a player in the act of disposing of the ball, and that disposal is deemed to be effective, then no tackle will be awarded. If it leads to an ineffective disposal or a clanger disposal, or prevent a disposal, then a tackle shall be awarded. The defensive player is credited with a tackle attempt.

[Hotpotato]

Robbo ( Bombers supporter ) and Gerard (AFL 360) couldn’t find one word of praise for The Swans v Bombers , spending the entire appraisal on the whimpish Essendon and that no one ‘lined up’ Luke Parker after his effective Shimmy around Dylan Shiel and his (Luke’s) taking the p$&@ out of Dylan .
Good for a chuckle.

[Maltopia]

I think it is very fair to say RowBottom is a performing as a C grade player. Saying he will never be better than a C grader would be an insult.

If you take all the midfielders across all the 18 teams, and rated them as A, B, C, D with C being at about the standard of making the midfield of most teams, then Rowbottom is performing at a C level.

He would be selected in the midfield to more than half of the teams in the league. He won't push out players from Melbourne, Brisbane or Fremantle's side. Carlton would be happier with Hewitt than RB. Geelong and the Saints would be happy with their midfield stocks as well and would not swap RB in for one of their current starting six in the midfield (minus the ruck, but add an interchange player).

Just because we don't have obvious alternatives to play the same role right now, does not mean he is no good or doesn't deserve his spot. About half of all the midifielders who are getting 12+ games a year would be C graders, so it isn't an insult per se.

C grade in most grading systems, is a pass, or meeting the standard. B is above the standard, and A is well above the standard.

Crows and Kangaroos might have over half a dozen or more C grade players in their starting 22 at the moment, Melbourne might have none or only a couple. As a 5th to 9th placed team, it is not surprising of us to have five to six C grade performers, who wouldn't be selected in the other top teams, no matter how much we love them ourselves. Rampe, Cunningham, Rowbottom, Wicks, Hayward and Bell would be unlikely to push anyone out of the current top four teams, but they all play important roles for us. Kennedy might be a C grader too now.

[sharp9]

He put in a shepherd and got him high. Free kick. Move on. A shepherd is putting yourself between your opponent and your team mate. The shepherd is as old as the game. Is the shepherd dead?

Not sure where you’re going there, Nico. If you put in a shepherd and it’s high, you are right it is a free kick. But if the contact is significant and to the head then it’s suspension as well.

[sharp9]

Liz, just a thought on Picket’s legendary bump and Kirk’s even more legendary response…pretty sure there was no head contact. Maybe I’ll have to check the tape. Unlike that dog Kerr who, when we were beating the Eagles at Subiaco deliberately lined up Kirk at a stoppage and put him out of the game with his elbow. Not even a free, let alone a suspension. Mind you I think that might have been the same year that Staker(??) received a free kick when he moved off the marked and bumped Crouch who was running past. Won them the game IIRC.

[TheBloods]

Seems like im not allowed to talk about the same things as anyone else , so ill move on .

I love Jmac but i can 't believe he doesn 't know how to handball . He doesnt have a handballing technique at all . Staggering . How do you make it onto an AFL list and be so good at so many things but not know how to handball ? Its part of the bread and butter of the sport !

[Ludwig]

I see Tom Lynch got off for an elbow to the head of Impey, I guess because he's an 'A' grader not named Toby.

I also noticed that no one on those footy shows picked up on the nudge in the back of Rowbottom. I don't know what the Swans' appeal will be based on, but it's hard to see a case for RB without the nudge in the back as a defence. I think we can bring in a bio-mechanics expert to attest that the nudge was the culprit.

I'm not too keen on this grading business for footballers. Perhaps 'A' graders are ones that make the AA 40. The other grades are just a matter of opinion.

As for Rowbottom, if you go down the list of midfielders drafted in 2018, Sam Walsh and Bailey Smith would be way out in front. After that, it's pretty close with Rowbottom and a bunch of others, including, Rozee, Butters, Duursma, Taryn Thomas, Jmac and James Jordan. Some have more flair than Rowbottom, but RB is probably the best defensively and is also very consistent. Walsh and Smith are 'A' graders for sure, but RB is better than a C grader, unless we want to call the rest of the 2018 draft C graders. All the needless debate on here about RB has caused him to become a much underrated footballer, when in fact, he stacks up very well amongst the 21 yo mids in the game.

[liz]

Liz, just a thought on Picket’s legendary bump and Kirk’s even more legendary response…pretty sure there was no head contact. Maybe I’ll have to check the tape. Unlike that dog Kerr who, when we were beating the Eagles at Subiaco deliberately lined up Kirk at a stoppage and put him out of the game with his elbow. Not even a free, let alone a suspension. Mind you I think that might have been the same year that Staker(??) received a free kick when he moved off the marked and bumped Crouch who was running past. Won them the game IIRC.

I confess I didn't go and look at vision when I made my earlier post. I have no doubt that the majority of the bumps that Pickett was lauded for over his career would fall foul of today's MRO and tribunal.

So I just went to seek out vision of the Kirk bump and found it quite close to the start of this compilation.

Byron Pickett unleashes brutal bumps and massive torps | Cult-Figure Fridays | 2020 | AFL - YouTube

It's actually hard to see the extent of head high contact from the full speed vision, and there is no slo-mo on this compilation. Certainly the brunt of the force was to Kirk's body but his head immediately goes back. I can't tell whether there was direct contact or if it was just a whiplash-type reaction.

Either way, it doesn't really detract from my point that the duty of care in certain football actions has changed over time.

[liz]

I see Tom Lynch got off for an elbow to the head of Impey, I guess because he's an 'A' grader not named Toby.

I also noticed that no one on those footy shows picked up on the nudge in the back of Rowbottom. I don't know what the Swans' appeal will be based on, but it's hard to see a case for RB without the nudge in the back as a defence. I think we can bring in a bio-mechanics expert to attest that the nudge was the culprit.

They may argue impact was low rather than medium, based on Merrett getting up and playing on. If that is the basis of the appeal, I think they will fail.

Liam Ryan has been offered one week for his bump on Jake Bowey on Sunday, where the impact was flush to the head, rather than just clipping the chin as with Rowbottom's. But Bowey also seems to have played on, and I don't think anyone would question Ryan's suspension (unless arguing he should have got two).

[i'm-uninformed2]

I have to step in here. On Fox Footy shows for years the panelists have been analysing different teams midfield capacity by grading the midfielders as A, B or C graders. If you look at Geelong they would say that Dangerfield and Selwood are A graders and then they work down. There are always plenty of players whom are C-Graders.

Rowbottom would be classified as a C grade midfielder if such an analysis occurred. Mills, Parker and Heeney would be A graders with Chad as a B grader. Florent is a C grader on current performance but good form would have him as a B grader.

TB analysis of Rowbottom being a C grader is exactly what a Fox Football panel analysing a Swans midfield would grade Rowbottom.

People on here must cease and desist the unmitigated attacks on TB.

One, as a pure midfielder, Heeney would be a B. He’s an A as a hybrid mid-forward.

Two, as someone who has praised your grammar and construction of sentences, this is an incorrect use of the word unmitigated. Try, intemperate or unbridled.

Three, the offer of a highly fuelled party after you buy me dinner at Mimi’s is off. Use of the phrase cease and desist, and a good time, don’t mix.

[The Big Cat]

Getting sick of the same old arguments back and forward lately. Tempted to follow the same path as Rock Lobster, Aunty Gerard, Stella and those who talked about the team and not themselves.

[Ludwig]

They may argue impact was low rather than medium, based on Merrett getting up and playing on. If that is the basis of the appeal, I think they will fail.

I agree. These appeals to lower the grading usual do fail. That's why I think we might have 'the blame it on the other guy' defence. Maybe they'll clear RB and give Mills a week.

[Faunac8]

I agree. These appeals to lower the grading usual do fail. That's why I think we might have 'the blame it on the other guy' defence. Maybe they'll clear RB and give Mills a week.

There is some footage from the other side of the contest which is quite interesting.
It shows definite forward motion and James’s back bending with the momentum from the Callum push. This happens with the ball in front of them and not after James passes the ball.
When James feels the contact his eyes move from the ball to the impending contact and he appears to tuck his shoulder in and change his focus to that of shepherding for Callum
It also appears to show the point of contact to be high on the chest not to the head but it’s possible he clipped the chin of the Essendon player. There doesn’t seem like any actual backward momentum by the head at the time of the initial contact.
I have scrubbed the footage dozens of times and can understand why we have appealed.
Definitely think Biomechanics experts will be called.

[liz]

As opposed to a competition which seems to be saying that it is ok to elbow someone in the head, enough to draw blood, as long as it looks like an accident.....and you come from Richmond?

I've just seen some clearer footage of the Lynch incident and I've changed my mind. He looked to be fully aware of where his tackler was, and attempted to fend off with his elbow. I don't see that can be considered a reasonable action.

[COB]

There was an incident a few years ago when Buddy was in possession and being tackled and moved his elbow (at some velocity), catching the tackler high (and concussing him, IIRC). Some in the media were calling for his head; others suggested that when you're in possession, you have the right to manoeuvre and to protect yourself. The MRP determined that Buddy didn't have a case to answer.

The Lynch incident arose in similar circumstances, and the lack of finding against him is consistent with the way the game has been adjudicated over recent years.

The starting premise in today's game is that we want to protect players by reducing head high contact. However, given the 360 degree and aerial nature of the game, plus the speed at which it is played, eliminating all head high contact means compromises need to be made. The game needs to decide which elements where head high contact is possible (or likely) are so integral to the game that they can't be removed, and which can. Those posts are moving over time.

It wasn't so long ago (well, maybe a decade or so) that we were in uproar when Mumford was suspended for a tackle that drove his opponent's head into the ground. I think he was the first player to be suspended for such an action. Now we are pretty used to players being suspended for such actions, albeit always accompanied by some mumblings about how tackling is just part of the game.

Bumps used to be celebrated. Often brutal ones. Byron Pickett was the master of them. Part of the Legend of Brett Kirk is the bump that Pickett laid on him in the 2003 QF, from which he staggered to his feet, went back into the fray, and was instrumental in helping the Swans hang on against a desperate Port side clawing back the deficit. In today's game, Kirk would be taken from the ground for at least 20 minutes, probably not to return at all.

Those who administer the game have made the call that it is possible to bump, shepherd, tackle without causing head high contact to the opposition, and thus you can reduce the risk of head high contact to players without eliminating those elements from the sport. On the other hand, it is pretty much impossible to eliminate incidental head high contact in marking contests , particularly aerial ones, without fundamentally changing the game. So "the game" has determined that such head high contact has to be accepted. At least for now.

Those elbows by players seem to - at the moment - sit in that area of what can't easily be eliminated from the game, unless we want to deny the right of a player to try and break a tackle or even to try and dispose of the ball. The video of the Lynch incident available on the AFL site isn't great. It just shows the incident as it happened from a wide-pan camera. There's no replay or close up vision (though I think I saw something on the footy news over the weekend). From the vision on the AFL site, it doesn't look as if Lynch raised his arm high, or swung it particularly hard. Even from what I can recall of better vision, the contact does look accidental.

Rowbottom's high contact on Merrett was, I am sure, also accidental, but different types of footy action are adjudicated differently. For now, the Lynch action has pretty consistently been deemed to be reasonable, and the Rowbottom one not correctly executed and thus not reasonable. Maybe, in time, we will see the AFL determine that a player in possession has a duty of care for any contact made to a tackler, but for now that is not the case.

If every slightly clumsy act by a player in possession were deemed reportable / suspendable, I think Buddy would have had several enforced holidays over the last few years.

Brilliant summation.