It would be late contact, so I’d suspect a free kick, but not a report. Unless of course he got some injuries and they might go down the “duty of care” line…
1 Like
Nah mate, the sin was laying the hit about two days after the game finished.
If Saad had of had the ball it would have been ok, but he didn’t.
Not even close.
2 Likes
But Browny and Kingy (on C7 Talking Footy) said it was actually Saad’s fault as he showed a lack of peripheral awareness and he should have been prepared for it.
What instead of paying attention to the game
5 Likes
The only reason it wouldn’t be a free would be that the play had gone so far on that no umpire saw it.
But it’s a free downfield every day of the week and fairly shocked the question would be asked by someone.
2 Likes
My brother messaged me when it happened and just said “Fair bump, play on?”
For the absolute life of me I don’t understand this thinking, particularly just one week after Gaff. It was about as late as you could possibly hit a bloke, Saad’s body was completely relaxed and in no way shape or form should he have reasonably expected any contact at all. It was a complete dog act, he should get 4 minimum.
If the AFL said 'we’re gonna crack down on punching" then a week later go soft on this. Freak me.
Look, I’m no expert on the rules, but I reckon Saad should have been more aware.
Either the hit was sooo late that Saad should have had time to get his bearings, or Saad was still in play because he was ball watching.
Bit I’m not sure of the rules, I thought blokes got bumped off the ball all the time. Before the bounce, after kicking a goal, etc. Seems to be a very grey area where it’s perfectly fine as long as they don’t get hurt - so what’s the point of doing it?
Down the field free kick usual for late bumps isn’t it?
It was really late though. And impact has to be graded high.
As Woosha said it was avoidable. That’s the big problem with it.
And as we’ve mentioned a few times, and as Goddard found a few weeks back, there’s a 50 metre penalty for taking a guy out who wants to continue on with the play.
This is a perfect reason why.
People should accept that we’re not in the 80s any more.
Not that I’m one to talk about living in the past.
2 Likes
Raz on the lead and kicks the opening goal 20 seconds in says it all
Fixed
FFS
1 Like
Saad should have been more aware??
Brown had no right to crash into him like he did. Saad would have been watching to see if he needed to do any follow up work. He shouldnt be expecting any ridiculously late contact and shouldnt have to brace for crude contact that late after he handballed.
2 Likes
What? The ball isn’t within 5metres and he gets taken out.
King and Brown are both the floggiest flogs who ever flogged. Still don’t understand how Brown has got a gig being a special comments man.
2 Likes
Not sure if serious.
If you decide to bump (instead of tackle) when the ball is in the area it is your duty not to hit the head. If you do then it’s weeks.
Ad to that the ball was nowhere near the area and contact was not anticipated…oh and he was knocked out and stretched off.
He’s ■■■■■■.
1 Like
I think you’re responding to the wrong post
no I’m not.
Big boofy good bloke. How could he not get the job?
Brown will / should get weeks.
We were one man down from 15 mins in and Saad is likely out this week. So effectively 2 games missed and a blow to our (slim) finals chances.
Teams should not benefit from reportable acts that take an opposition player out. And the higher the stakes, the greater the temptation (hi Barry Hall).
IMO there is a good case for a send-off rule as a deterrent,
1 Like
He picked him off. Plain and simple. Once Saad kicks the ball (and an absolute eternity - in football terms - has passed) there is no way he should be looking warily at a sniper to his right.
I wouldn’t want an Essendon player doing that and I speak as someone who has (wrongly) cheered acts like this by players like D. Wallis in the past.
The game is better without acts like this. They diminish the true fair bumps and toughness we see on a weekly basis.
2 Likes