Is the AFL too reactionary?

[CyberKev]

Its a rhetorical question, chaps, as we all know that they bloody well are.

And now we have Lindsay Thomas paying the price for the organisation's penchant for jumping at shadows.

Fair enough to out players when they pull a Goodesy (i.e. slide deliberately studs up, soccer style, into an opponent) as this sort of activity is invariably going to result in player injuries.

Typically, Paul 'I'm all about Sydney and nothing else, so get stuffed the lot of yas' Roos was at his haughty and nonsensical worst On the Couch last night, claiming that Thomas had to get done because his beloved Goodesy had got done the week before.

Never mind that they weren't the same incident. Thomas was doing nothing more than cutting his body across his opponent to be first to the ball, NOT sliding in legs first and studs up! Incidents like this one have happened at least 128 times per season every season, with no more than the odd injury or two occurring. It was unlucky for Rohan, but it was just one of those freak accidents that can happen at any time for any number of reasons.

But giird the loins and cue for the now obligatory 'we won't tolerate this salacious activity' edict and for Obenfuhrer Geishen to perpetrate another gratuitous rewriting of the game's history, in his own inimitable Seargent Schulz style.

Sheesh. As the Beatles famously said, boys, Let it friggin' Be, just once, FFS!

 

[AuckMel]

I was surprised he was charged. Common sense has come through and he's been cleared.

Link

 

[Twizzle]

I dont think it was similar to Goode's tackle but I also dont see what he did wrong.

 

[CyberKev]

I also agree that the Goodes incident from the other week wasn't too bad, all up, particularly when compared with his effort in the NAB Cup.

That said, he did actually slide in legs first, which is now officially frowned upon (since the off-season change).

The object of the change is to prevent players from sliding into opponents with their studs or knees, which could result in nasty injuries.

It is ironic, thus, that the Goodes incident did not result in an injury (despite being openly contrary to the new ruling) while the Thomas one did. This doesn't change the fact that Thomas didn't slide in with his studs or knees and it was just a dreadful case of misfortune for Gary Rohan.

As was the case with Whitecross a fortnight back, the MRP would have felt heavy AFL pressure to sanction Thomas, but thankfully the Tribunal has ruled correctly here again.

Sometimes shit just happens on the paddock, and - alas - it pretty much always will.

 

[Azyboy]

It does make you wonder where exactly the line will be drawn. 12 months ago these incidents (the Thomas one moreso than the Goodes one) were just part of the game. It seems however that there is increasing focus on the outcome of such innocuous incidents to opponents. I think Goodes should have got done - no place to slide knees or stops first. The Thomas one was a freak accident and accordingly thrown out. The MRP are bound to, under current laws, site these offenses. It's the role of the tribunal to throw the accidental ones out. It's just an unfortunate process that needs to be managed better.

 

[Connie Kreski]

Whatever the future clarifications, the underlying principle has to remain that first in with eyes on the ball must be protected. It would cause even more confusion if that gets muddied.

 

[Lifetime ban]

They have never been known as reactionary before have they? :roll: