League is a sport for gladiators so we must not confuse raw aggression with foul play says Daley
It's been that way for over 100 years. I remember back to my playing days when we had blokes like Ian Roberts, David Gillespie and Trevor Gillmeister who were not only the most feared players of their time but among the most respected.
I remember back to Spud Carroll and Chief Harragon going after each other in those great old games that helped built the rivalry we now have between Manly and Newcastle.
Like Matai, these players of the past all walked the tightrope with the way they played the game - but I will tell you this: I believe the game is better for those memories.
Fans loved the way those blokes played their footy back then, just like Manly fans love the way Steve Matai goes about his business in 2013.
I know times have changed and mostly I agree they have changed for the good. But my argument here is that if you sanitise the game too much you will eventually destroy part of the fabric that made it so great.
In my eyes it was the intensity and brutal defence that helped make last Friday night's battle at Brookvale so special. Remember it was 2-0 at halftime, not a try had been scored, and we were still saying it was the best 40 minutes of football of the season.
It's that intensity I want to see in my players in Origin next month.
Sure, we have to be conscious of the game's image and we can't tolerate foul play. And we want to sell the game to more women and make parents feel the game is a safe sport for their children to play.
But, again, at the elite level, it is important to understand that there is a difference between foul play and physical play. And it is a fine line.
The game is nowhere near as violent as it was back in the 1970s and the administrators have done a great job cleaning it up. The billion-dollar television deal is proof we are heading in the right direction.
But it's not always the razzle-dazzle that brings in the fans. I have looked at the Matai tackle over and over and the thing is the more times you slow it down the more times you see it coming off the ball.
If you watch it closely it is almost impossible to even say if there was actually contact made with the head.
Any way you look it, the force that rocked George Burgess came from the impact on the ball - it had nothing to do with the head contact.
And the other point here is this: If it was any other player, do they get suspended?
We see hits like that every week, where initial contact bounces up off the ball, and players don't have a charge to answer.
Maybe they aren't as spectacular as the hit Matai produced but I go back to the fact the force came from the impact at first contact, off the ball.
I am a firm believer there should be some leeway given if the initial contact is made in a legal position and unfortunately, through power or whatever it is, you bounce off and make accidental contact with the head.
Steve Matai is old school and is one of the few surviving hit men in our game.
He thrives on collision and intimidation and, at times, he has overstepped the mark in the past.
But I don't think he did last Friday.
Well said sir.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/league/...-play-says-daley/story-fn2mcuj6-1226635157532
