#25 Jake Stringer


#1593

Nothing untoward just clumsy and should have been a free kick.


#1594

Flame’n hell.


#1595

Going back a few years now, but didn’t NLM get a free against and referred to the match committee for a similar incident against North?


#1596

If he lost another 3kg i’d be more convinced he wants to be a midfielder. Looks too heavy


#1597

First thing i thought when i saw him at training, and seconded by others.

Looking at Cripps tonighr, Jake can def lose a couple.


#1598

It didn’t look deliberate, so a free yes, a report no. Clearly it wasn’t seen by the umpire though, nor anyone else until the producers had delved through all the footage


#1599

Exactly. Accidental head clashes have never been a free kick, or a reportable offence. If it happened the other way around everyone would be accusing Rance of having a soft head and congratulating Stringer for taking him out of the game.


#1600

If both are going for the ball then yes. However, in the act of tackling I disagree. Rance in the act of tackling got him high. The duty of care is with Rance, and he clumsily tackled which resulted in the head clash.


#1601

Many head high tackles are caused by careless use of the arms. Why is careless, clumsy use of the head during the tackle any different? It is clear Rance did not apply a “Correct Tackle”

There does not appear to be a concept of “incidental contact” other than during marking contests.

15.4.1 Correct Tackle or Correctly Tackled
(a) For the purposes of these Laws, a Player executes a Correct Tackle
or a Player is Correctly Tackled if:
(i) the Player being tackled is in possession of the football; and
(ii) that Player is tackled below the shoulders and above
the knees

and

A Player makes Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player
if the Player:
(a) makes contact or attempts to make contact with any part
of their body with an opposition Player in a manner likely to
cause injury
;
(i) above the shoulders (including the top of the shoulders);

Should have been a free at least, and one could make a case for a report based on the outcome, being head trauma and concussion.

http://www.aflcommunityclub.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Coach_AFL/2017_Laws_of_Australian_Football.pdf


#1602

Jesus ■■■■■■■ Christ. You’re not seriously suggesting anyone should ever be reported for that???


#1603

I think its more about the fact that Stringer didnt even get a free kick


#1604

It’s really all coming down to interpretation

Say for example Rance instead in the action to tackle hit Stringer (who had the ball) in head with point of his elbow then it would be free kick

If he chose to bump and there was a head clash then possible free kick but definitely picked up at MRP

But it’s a contact sport and you wouldn’t want the accidental head clash in the act of tackling judged as a free kick. Just part of game.

Unlucky. Get on with it.


#1605

Wow.
How do you tag Nuffies on AFL Pages on blitz?


#1606

It is not down to interpretation. If you read Chris64’s post above, the rules are unambiguous on this one.

But I must be bored cos IDGAF


#1607

I accept that it is a customary interpretation to not award a free kick or report a player in such instances as its deemed to be “accidental” However, the rules of the game seem to suggest otherwise if taken literally.


#1608

The laws of the game say it’s a free kick against (many) players who hand or toss the ball to the boundary umpire.

The AFL don’t give a rat’s tossbag about their Laws.


#1609

A ■■■■■■-minded application of the rules is in no ones interest.


#1610

That is the most ridiculous rule. Seriously wtf?


#1611

I think it warrants a free kick and thats it. Does not matter if its accidental. It could be argued that every high contact is accidental, some more than others.
Hi Selwood family.


#1612

so Jake Stringer eh