Crockers hit - the photo - how is it not legal?

[CliffyIsGod]

Nice selectivity...you forgot the next part. Fixed it for you though

Thanks -- it was careless. Thanks for the bolding of it.

 

[Bazal]

Careless? :lol: He went in to shoulder charge a bloke....you wanna outlaw that now? Only reason Stewart got knocked out is cos he gave with the catch, no fault or blame falls on Crocker for that.

 

[CliffyIsGod]

Did a portion of Crocker's shoulder come into contact with Stewart's head?

 

[Bazal]

Yes...but so what? Did he intend to knock Stewart out, or was it even reckless or careless given Stewart put himself in the position? If you're answer is yes, then go watch lawn bowls because this is obviously too manly a sport for you

 

[NK Arsenal]

it is legal, well done archer

 

[Eelectrica]

Add another couple of weeks to Ryles' suspension anyway, just to be on the safe side.

 

[Purtell The Turtle]

Did a portion of Crocker's shoulder come into contact with Stewart's head?

If you're going to be that pedantic about it, then you would see 99% of players sinbinned for coming into contact with the head. Solid hit, what's he supposed to do, realise that stewart is falling and use his magical powers to disappear??

What Manly fans should be asking is where was superstar Whatmoff?? Was he even out there????

 

[CliffyIsGod]

Yes...but so what? Did he intend to knock Stewart out, or was it even reckless or careless given Stewart put himself in the position? If you're answer is yes, then go watch lawn bowls because this is obviously too manly a sport for you

But the onus is on Crocker, not whether Stewart puts himself in that position.

 

[kia ora storm]

But the onus is on Crocker, not whether Stewart puts himself in that position.

WTF was Crocker supposed to do ???....oh hang on...run 100 miles at a player and then stop in front of him because he is falling and his head may get hit...bit bloody precious.

IMO Crocker got him in a fair hit...no questions.

 

[Mr Saab]

it is legal, well done archer

What did he do?
Stewart got smashed and it allowed Harrigan to watch replay after replay and decide whether or not to rule a penalty.
Archer did SFA

 

[jimmyo]

His head is moving back, and to the left in the Zapruder film. The shots came from the grassy knoll and the window of the Texas book depository.

 

[LESStar58]

Perfectly legal. It's not drop the hanky.

 

[Eagle_Rocker]

The tackle was legal, however I dont believe it should be. Anyone suggesting Corcker or Slater are tough for that effort are weak. They belted a bloke who had no way of protecting himself. If they outlawed tackling a player in mid air because it is dangerous then I think they should outlaw this as well. When you go in with a shoulder on a player looking up at the ball then you are going in with intent on taking him out. I don't believe they were aiming for his head, that was just unfortunate, but they didn't want him getting back up.

Melbourne did what they felt they had to do to win the premiership and good on them. However I think the NRL has a few things to look at this off season. I know it's a tough contact sport, but there is nothing tough about that tackle or some other tactics used that have been highlighted this year.

Just on Stewart though, I'm stoked for him that he got in the Aussie side. That catch he made shows what kind of guts the bloke is made out of. I hope Manly sign him away for life, he is a future captain and club legend!!

 

[Canard]

Has anyone got video of the hit yet? Or a link? I want to show my Rugby Union loving workmates here in London a real hit.

 

[Eagle_Rocker]

Has anyone got video of the hit yet? Or a link? I want to show my Rugby Union loving workmates here in London a real hit.

Why don't you show them Jarrad Haynes hit of the year then. That was a real hit the bloke that got hit could actually see it coming and defend against it. Anyone can take out a guy half their size that isn't ready for it.

 

[Canard]

The tackle was legal, however I dont believe it should be. Anyone suggesting Corcker or Slater are tough for that effort are weak. They belted a bloke who had no way of protecting himself. If they outlawed tackling a player in mid air because it is dangerous then I think they should outlaw this as well. When you go in with a shoulder on a player looking up at the ball then you are going in with intent on taking him out. I don't believe they were aiming for his head, that was just unfortunate, but they didn't want him getting back up.

I doubt there is a player in Rugby League that wants his opposition to "get back up" when they tackle him, in fact that would the intent of every player to legally tackle someone so hard they dont get back up.

Stewart bravely put his body on the line to catch the ball, that was his choice and he should be commended for it. If he was softer he could have let the ball bounce and go from there. He chose to be put in that position, not the other way around.

 

[Eagle_Rocker]

I doubt there is a player in Rugby League that wants his opposition to "get back up" when they tackle him, in fact that would the intent of every player to legally tackle someone so hard they dont get back up.

Stewart bravely put his body on the line to catch the ball, that was his choice and he should be commended for it. If he was softer he could have let the ball bounce and go from there. He chose to be put in that position, not the other way around.

If you have a front rower running straight at you and you put him flat on his arse, then good on you. Taking out a small fullback who only has eyes for the ball is weak. It should be illegal. If they had tackled him a second earlier we get a penalty and Stewart still gets carried off. They never had any interest in contesting the ball they only ever had eyes on him, and taking out a player like that is the act of a cat in my eyes. Sure if he catches the ball and is running back at you put a big shot on, but he had the ball in his hand for a split second. As for letting it bounce they would have collected him anyway they were never looking at the ball.

Im not trying to say he should have been sent off or that was why we lost, I just feel it should be outlawed much like tackling a player mid air was.

If you want to show off a "real hit" how about you show someone charging at the line and getting put on their arse, because taking out a defenceless player is not a "real hit".

 

[Perth Red]

next you'll be wanting them to wave their hands in the air and signal fair catch ala gridiron. It's a tough game for tough blokes. Its what makes RL.

 

[CharlieF]

If you have a front rower running straight at you and you put him flat on his arse, then good on you. Taking out a small fullback who only has eyes for the balls is weak. It should be illegal. If they had tackled him a second earlier we get a penalty and Stewart still gets carried off. They never had any interest in contesting the ball they only ever had eyes on him, and taking out a player like that is the act of a cat in my eyes. Sure if he catches the ball and is running back at you put a big shot on, but he had the ball in his hand for a split second. As for letting it bounce they would have collected him anyway they were never looking at the ball.

Im not trying to say he should have been sent off or that was why we lost, I just feel it should be outlawed much like tackling a player mid air was.

If you want to show off a "real hit" how about you show someone charging at the line and getting put on their arse, because taking out a defenceless player is not a "real hit".

Its useless arguing about it.

If Karma thinks it was a good, honest tackle then Karma will let it slide.

 

[manlyone]

I understood the rule was changed in the offseason that a shoulder to the head was illegal. If my understanding is right (?) then the tackle was illegal, if not it was ok.