More trouble for Aloiai

XV-1 said:
The tackle was already under control. There was no reason for him to come in late. That he then slides down and causes the injury proves he should never have been there.
Click to expand...
Have you watched any Storm games? Almost every tackle they have two to hold then a third comes in - carefully, its true - and takes the legs so the tacklee is put on the ground, then of course wrestled there for a while. Highly effective. Probably Chooks and Panthers been doing this too, but I certainly notice it each time I see Storm play. Its rather clever.
 
SeaEagleRock8 said:
Have you watched any Storm games? Almost every tackle they have two to hold then a third comes in - carefully, its true - and takes the legs so the tacklee is put on the ground, then of course wrestled there for a while. Highly effective. Probably Chooks and Panthers been doing this too, but I certainly notice it each time I see Storm play. Its rather clever.
Click to expand...

So now we are justifying the tackle because the Storm do it perfectly without causing players injuries.
If a 3rd Storm player came in from the side and caved a guys need sideways we would expect them to be suspended.

Manly does not need to lower itself to be the Storn.

Josh screwed up, he will be suspended, hopefully for not very long and he will learn to not do it again.
 
I agree it looked clumsy but was just commenting on your claim that no reason to come in and take the bloke down by grabbing the legs. I think he went wrong by not just using his arms to grab the legs and agree I wont be surprised if he's suspended, but hopefully not more than a game or two
 
Leys say its a likely Grade 2 dangerous contact which is 200 points. 25% discount if early guilty plea. So would be 150 points so 1 week suspension BUT Des said Aloiai has carry over points so if he has more than 50 carry over points it'll likely be 2 weeks.
I actually like minimising the carry over points before the semis. If you carry a lot of points into the semis you potentially miss a big game for a minor offence.
 
Last edited:
XV-1 said:
Respectful, that is BS. The tackle was already under control. There was no reason for him to come in late. That he then slides down and causes the injury proves he should never have been there.
Click to expand...
You are correct IF the referee had called "Held!". But he hadn't as the Tiger was still walking forward. The Tiger could have stopped walking and the referee would have called held.

Speaking generally the cannonball tackle would be even less frequent if referees call held when they should, in the interest of player safety. But they don't. They delay calling held in the hope it encourages making late offloads.

Yet if the NRL made referees call held when they should, maybe more ballcarriers would actually pass the ball before the tackle.

NRL are focused on head knocks, But the tackles that are killing careers are cannonballs because they don't call held quick enough and also the 'kit kat' tackles where defenders grab from behind and throw their full body weight on a opponent's knee, lower leg and feet.
 
Brissie Kid said:
You are correct IF the referee had called "Held!". But he hadn't as the Tiger was still walking forward. The Tiger could have stopped walking and the referee would have called held.

Speaking generally the cannonball tackle would be even less frequent if referees call held when they should, in the interest of player safety. But they don't. They delay calling held in the hope it encourages making late offloads.

Yet if the NRL made referees call held when they should, maybe more ballcarriers would actually pass the ball before the tackle.

NRL are focused on head knocks, But the tackles that are killing careers are cannonballs because they don't call held quick enough and also the 'kit kat' tackles where defenders grab from behind and throw their full body weight on a opponent's knee, lower leg and feet.
Click to expand...

I can certainly agree that refs should be calling held quicker in tackles like this and many others.

Josh only had to pull the legs of the tigers player, not use his complete shoulder and forcibly push with his entire body inwards. Knees are not made to go in that direction.
 
It was careless more than agressive. But when I saw it I still think it wasnt necassary to go in at that stage. So a suspension is justified. Hey we've played without him for so long, im not really that bothered.
 
Depending on the charge Manly might challenge the grading. But hey, when was the last time we ever did that? Honestly can't recall. Seems to me an example of Manly cost-cutting compared with certain other clubs who throw cash at challenging all the time.
 
Points to consider:

* The ball runner was still aggressively trying to make meters and or break the tackle, at no point had Seyfarth surrendered. (That’s probably why the ref hadn’t called held, because his progress was not stopped and there was an opportunity to promote the ball and or a 2nd phase play)

* Josh was entitled to become involved due to the above and with no call from the ref of held, it is his job to stop the ball runner and put him on the ground.

* The initial point of contact looked to be above the knee, what made it look worse was Seyfarth‘s movement during the attempt which may have caused Josh‘s point of contact to look awkward while sliding down the leg, even after first contact Seyfarth continued to turn his body, contributing to the end result, which for mine is nothing more than unfortunate incident.

* There was no penalty blown immediately, it only become an issue once it was obvious Seyfarth was injured, then, no send off, no bin, during the game, which clearly demonstrated that Klein didn’t initially see it as foul play, it was only placed on report as a result of the injury and Klein said quote “ it was unnecessary and dangerous contact” . How can it be deemed unnecessary when there was no call of held, while clearly Seyfarth was still trying to earn post contact metres or promote a second phase play, Josh had every right and further more obligation to join the tackle and stop the ball runner.

* Then there’s Men’s Rea, which is intent and given there was absolutely none what so ever, just a big man making a legal play at stopping the ball runner, exactly as his trained to do and exactly as we see in every other game, 3rd man in takes the legs in an attempt to stop the ball runner and finish the movement on the ground. Given there was already 2 defenders up top struggling to stop Seyfarth, Josh’s instinct was to tackle the legs.

* It would be very different if Klein had called held or perhaps even if Seyfarth had surrendered in his effort, remembering neither occurred, the original point of contact was above the knee and always looked to be aimed at hitting above the knee, as pointed out the continued movement in the play was a contributing factor in how it looked initially and how the attempt at tackle ended, there was no intent and no interpretation of intent by Klein‘s on field decisions. It’s just an unlucky and if anything slightly clumsy, but legal attempt to tackle the ball runner. Should even eventuate in a fine least of all a charge based on the evidence in my opinion, but that’s just my opinion, backed up by what I saw and the on field actions of the players and more importantly the referee.

And yes I am a one eyed Manly supporter, however I have given my honest take on the incident and I’d have no problem saying it the other way round if I believed Josh did the wrong thing or was guilty of dangerous contact, regardless of where my loyalties stand. So I hope common sense prevails and that nothing comes of it, I will be disappointed in the whole process if it ends in time on the sideline.
 
This is the second time in 2 weeks that the fox commentators go on and on about tackles Manly players make and suddenly the bunker takes a look. It is obvious the bunker listens into the commentary and are influenced by them. The commentators obviously know this and go out of their way to influence the bunker, which is all sorts of wrong
 
MissKate said:
This is the second time in 2 weeks that the fox commentators go on and on about tackles Manly players make and suddenly the bunker takes a look. It is obvious the bunker listens into the commentary and are influenced by them. The commentators obviously know this and go out of their way to influence the bunker, which is all sorts of wrong
Click to expand...
We clearly need some more Manly commentators! For so many years we were spoiled having Moose and then Fatty.
(I don't think Spud is going much further with his media career somehow!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 212 (members: 4, guests: 208)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Online statistics

Members online
4
Guests online
208
Total visitors
212
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom