Alex McKinnon possibly Quadriplegic - Mclean guilty of dangerous throw - 7 weeks

[eozsmiles]

I expect that it will be another 40 years before a shocking incident like this occurs again.

It wasnt a spear tackle, it wasnt a grapple.

Its a shocking outcome, but that doesnt mean its anything more than an accident.

Terrible accident. But Fa'aoso and Mckendry both broke their necks last year and I'm sure there are more around each season. It's only a millimetre here or there when dealing with the spine. I hope you're right about the 40 years, 50 would be better, but I wouldn't hang my hat on it. Might be next century, might be next week. That's the thing with accidents, you never know when. And if we look at this one, it was from a seemingly normal or common event.

 

[Frederick]

It was completly caused by Alex, he tried to win a penalty and it backfired, if any Melbourne player gets suspended its a farce.

genius

 

[Slammin]

Poor bloke. It was only a matter of time, many more lifting tackles that have looked a hell of a lot worse. Those involved in the tackle will probably be riddled with guilt right now.

All I can say is good luck to Alex. Hopefully the game has him well and truly looked after. I'm assuming this player should be covered under insurance somehow.

 

[Tommy Smith]

It was completly caused by Alex, he tried to win a penalty and it backfired, if any Melbourne player gets suspended its a farce.

In the very immediate aftermath and without the benefit of replay this was my opinion too. (And expressed with an equal lack of class).

But after watching the incident a few times, and with the benefit of hindsight, it's pretty clear that he was disorientated.

We shouldn't underestimate the impact of having one bloke grab you between the legs, and with the help of two other 100kg men, lift and then twist you somewhat in the air at speed. It would be both disorientating and frightening.

Hence why he made the miscalculated decision to tuck his head in. It was clearly intentional, but was due to disorientation and an expectation that he was about to be lifted well above the horizontal. Unfortunately he wasn't, and as a result his decision to tuck his head in saw his neck crushed under the weight of four bodies.

As for the tackle, I still don't think this was even close to the worst lifting tackle in that game. It was just a freak accident and if it's anything more than a Grade 2 then we'll have a lot of players suspended this year, including another 4 or 5 out of that game alone.

 

[jamesgould]

In general play it would be fine if you allow players who tackle around the legs to be able to roll into marker position over the tackled player which I think should be allowed now. The disadvantage a good around the legs tackle allowing a quick play the ball needs to be cut from the game. A lot more smaller men would be able to defend in the line better.

Another great point, if you want to go back to the real historical genesis of this incident. When I first started watching league in 92, if a player tackled around the legs, he was allowed to come over the top of the tackled player to get to marker. The tackle took it's own natural time to complete, if you will.

At some stage (possibly the insanely fast pace of the game when superleague came around - although that pace of play did continue for several years without any huge change in defensive tactics) this became a penalty. There were no rule changes to facilitate this, just a change in interpretation.

Now if two defenders are in a tackle, invariably they will both be up high, to hold the ball runner up, slowing down the play the ball until a third man comes in to complete the tackle. This has lead to the third player in charging at the legs (McKinnon was also a victim of that, last year vs Souths) and the third player in lifting the legs.

Rather than the 10 metre rule or any other theory, I think this is the true reason for the increase in these types of tackles. In many ways it's an endorsement for this season's changes - if the game needs to be sped up, then do it via rule change, rather than by a change in interpretation.

Regardless, I don't think the game would lose anything by allowing tacklers to take their natural time to get back to marker. It's possibly to late to return to that now though, time wasting/wrestling tactics are too deeply ingrained.

 

[Tommy Smith]

My biggest gripe with the modern game is that a classic 1-on-1 legs tackle is actually penalised rather than rewarded. As soon as they make the tackle all you hear is "release!". When imo any 1-on-1 tackle should be a dominant tackle.

It's madness.

The modern game no longer rewards great tackling.

 

[Bman26]

7News reporting Storm are wanting Mclean play this week, judiciary chairman to make a decision tonight.

 

[Joker's Wild]

I quite like the idea of a player being able to drop the ball & retain possession if lifted.

Would make it much easier for said player to get into a better position.

Kind of redundant if all lifting tackles are penalised. Doesnt matter if you drop the pill or not, you'll still retain possession

 

[Pugzley]

7News reporting Storm are wanting Mclean play this week, judiciary chairman to make a decision tonight.

Grubs.

 

[magpie4ever]

In this situation maybe, but that is only because he didn't go as far as he probably thought he did. There was no time or room to roll as he was too close to the ground.

Normally in a dangerous tackle they are a bit higher, and a bit further past the horizontal, so their head is going straight into the ground. In that situation, rolling is the only option if they don't want a broken neck. The tucking of the head is to make them land on the back of the neck/shoulders instead of the top of their head.

Using his arms may slow him up a bit, but his head is still hitting the ground because of both his and the tackler's momentum.

I believe this is wrong, I have been on the end of a few - more spear tackles - and your natural instinct is to arch your back, neck and head in the opposite direction, get your arm (or arms) out to brace for the impact with the ground. By placing your neck against your chest, you are creating a grabble tackle situation but with the immovable ground not a player's arm, chest or shoulder.

If Newcastle were advising players to do this, than any court case or judiciary against Melbourne or their players would and should be thrown out. The Newcastle club is the one at fault, it was absolutely the wrong advice.

 

[thorson1987]

7News reporting Storm are wanting Mclean play this week, judiciary chairman to make a decision tonight.

Whilst I would have preferred if he sat out this week, they are well within their rights to do so as per the NRL.

 

[Nightward]

Grubs.

I wouldn't go that far.

As I said earlier, we're where we are now because of lacklustre refereeing and a tackle that wasn't intended to cause injury going horribly wrong. I think McClean should face some time out of the game, especially since he's probably going to need some counselling for this.

If he'd come in late with a massive swinging arm and the Storm were wanting to fight the charges, it would be situation normal. We're all understandably worked up because of the injury McKinnon sustained, but unfortunately nothing we do now will prevent him from being injured or, in all likelihood, ever feeling better about it.

What the NRL can do is signal its intent to crack down on lifting tackles, but enforcement if they go down that route must be stringent and absolute. As I said earlier, lifting in a tackle should result in an immediate held call; lifting past the horizontal is therefore continuing of play after a call and should attract time off from the judiciary, with tackles where the lift and drive is followed through seeing sin bins if not send offs.

These tackles shouldn't have been let go year-in, year-out; the potential for an injury like this was always there, never mind that it's only one in many thousand where it actually happens- tackles where players are lifted have far too much potential to go wrong and we're lucky (not that this means much to McKinnon or the Knights) that this is the first injury of this level. If they'd cracked down when players like Tallis and Tate were being lifted and speared all those years ago, McKinnon would likely never have been in this situation. At least let's finally learn from it and do something going forwards.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

I have been on the end of few - more spear tackles

That explains a great deal.

 

[magpie4ever]

That explains a great deal.

Good one.:lol:

Well at least I can type from experience, not like many desktop warriors.

 

[Tucantango]

I wouldn't go that far.

As I said earlier, we're where we are now because of lacklustre refereeing and a tackle that wasn't intended to cause injury going horribly wrong. I think McClean should face some time out of the game, especially since he's probably going to need some counselling for this.

... ... ...

These tackles shouldn't have been let go year-in, year-out; the potential for an injury like this was always there, never mind that it's only one in many thousand where it actually happens- tackles where players are lifted have far too much potential to go wrong and we're lucky (not that this means much to McKinnon or the Knights) that this is the first injury of this level. If they'd cracked down when players like Tallis and Tate were being lifted and speared all those years ago, McKinnon would likely never have been in this situation. At least let's finally learn from it and do something going forwards.

Excellent insight!

I think you have also hit another important nail on the head with respect to McLean. Bloke will definitely need counselling of some kind. I dare say it is probably eating him up inside as well.

With regard to Melbourne seeking his inclusion in the team this week; I am hoping (and will try to believe) that it is more aimed toward getting his mind off the incident that has occurred. I don't think it is right but I can understand the rationale. For want of a better term it would be like, "you cant change the past, but you can rectify the future!"

 

[PoWdErFiNgEr84]

I believe this is wrong, I have been on the end of a few - more spear tackles - and your natural instinct is to arch your back, neck and head in the opposite direction, get your arm (or arms) out to brace for the impact with the ground. By placing your neck against your chest, you are creating a grabble tackle situation but with the immovable ground not a player's arm, chest or shoulder.

If Newcastle were advising players to do this, than any court case or judiciary against Melbourne or their players would and should be throwing out. The Newcastle club is the one at fault, it was absolutely the wrong advice.

You are f**king kidding me. If McKinnon wasn't put in a dangerous position this would not have happened. The minute the player goes beyond the horizontal, but by the grace of god, anything can happen. Anyone with half a brain could imagine what can go wrong in these tackles. They should have been rubbed out of the game a long time ago. This lifting of the leg to slow the play the ball down is a load a sh*t. What a flimsy defence.

 

[_Johnsy]

He was arguing the tackle not the injury. A bit like people derailing a thread about Alex to slip the boot into Smith. Time and place and all that.

What a total load of shyte. McKinnon is being carried off on a stretcher after laying motionless on the ground. It was obvious to anyone at the ground or watching on TV that it was very, very serious. Approx 5min later McKinnon is being carried off and Smith is arguing, attempting to apportion blame to McKinnon.

Not on in any way shape or form. I'd say it's the exact opposite, some in this thread trying to defend Smiths actions. Time and place indeed, shame Smith didn't take your salient advice.

All he had to do was shut his mouth and cop the penalty & tackle being placed on report & let the judiciary make a decision. This was always going to occur because melbourne players did lift him into a dangerous position. Not the best look for our national Cpt.

 

[STORM.99/07]

There were 2 spear tackles on Ben Hampton in the first half of the game that the ref let go.If the ref would have penalised the knights players earlier then maybe this accident wouldn`t have happened.

 

[Pugzley]

f**k me, maybe some storm supporters were dropped on their head when they were little.

 

[magpie4ever]

You are f**king kidding me. If McKinnon wasn't put in a dangerous position this would not have happened. The minute the player goes beyond the horizontal, but by the grace of god, anything can happen. Anyone with half a brain could imagine what can go wrong in these tackles. They should have been rubbed out of the game a long time ago. This lifting of the leg to slow the play the ball down is a load a sh*t. What a flimsy defence.

Lifting in tackles has been around since 1908, I agree it should be penalised and changes to the rules should be made to take them out of the game. Some suggestions like rewarding the low tackle etc are great ideas.

But if Newcastle were advising their players to place their head on their chest, they were wrong and, therefore, at fault. I'm no expert at bio-mechanics but that advice was always going to end up with a serious injury.