Nic Nat's Tackle

[Twodogs]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

In the past tackles were tackles, there was no such thing as a sling tackle or driving guys into the turf. When you were tackled you got rid of the ball quickly so you wouldn't be pinged. Now what happens is players don't want to let go of the ball, and they know they won't be pinged for holding the ball due to no prior opportunity.

Hang on. What's prior opportunity and holding the ball in got to do with sling tackles and rag dolling blokes? Are you saying they are tackling harder or longer because the tackler knows the player with the ball will just hold it?

[jeemak]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

NicNat could have held the tackle and dropped to his knees, not given away a free kick and not be in his current predicament. Instead he lifted and leapt and gave away a free and is suspended.

[Bornadog]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

Hang on. What's prior opportunity and holding the ball in got to do with sling tackles and rag dolling blokes? Are you saying they are tackling harder or longer because the tackler knows the player with the ball will just hold it?

The players are not letting go of the ball (not all the time, occasionally) and the tackler keeps tackling harder and slinging players to the ground. Just watch a few games and keep this in mind. Players are instructed to create a stoppage because some teams (we are one) are good at stoppages.

[Bornadog]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

NicNat could have held the tackle and dropped to his knees, not given away a free kick and not be in his current predicament. Instead he lifted and leapt and gave away a free and is suspended.

Agree, but he doesn't do that. Watch the video below of the same tackling method on another 3 occasions this year where he does the same thing he did to the Freo player. Not sure why he wants to go to ground and slam the player into the turf.

[Topdog]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

See for me I reckon the Sydney one is actually worthy of a suspension. The Port one is pure momentum and whilst a push in the back, isnt close to a suspension. Geelong one is just a great tackle.

[Twodogs]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

The players are not letting go of the ball (not all the time, occasionally) and the tackler keeps tackling harder and slinging players to the ground. Just watch a few games and keep this in mind. Players are instructed to create a stoppage because some teams (we are one) are good at stoppages.

Cheers mate. I thought so.

[Bornadog]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

See for me I reckon the Sydney one is actually worthy of a suspension. The Port one is pure momentum and whilst a push in the back, isnt close to a suspension. Geelong one is just a great tackle.

I think a week's suspension is harsh, but you have to admit his tackling is fierce and will result in some serious injury. He should have been tapped on the shoulder and told that he doesn't need to slam players into the ground. What is wrong with just grabbing a player and holding them.

[westdog54]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

I think a week's suspension is harsh, but you have to admit his tackling is fierce and will result in some serious injury. He should have been tapped on the shoulder and told that he doesn't need to slam players into the ground. What is wrong with just grabbing a player and holding them.

Better yet, if he hits the tackle lower initially, as he did with the Geelong tackle, he's got no issues.

West Coast could do worse than pair him up with the Western Force for a tackling workshop.

[Scraggers]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

NicNat could have held the tackle and dropped to his knees, not given away a free kick and not be in his current predicament. Instead he lifted and leapt and gave away a free and is suspended.

I disagree ... The full vision shows Nic Nat in a ruck contest then follow through (from a tap to the oppostion) to tackling him. It is a fluid motion and not a pre-determined action. Therefore his momentum would have prevented him from dropping to his knees.

[Greystache]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

Hang on. What's prior opportunity and holding the ball in got to do with sling tackles and rag dolling blokes? Are you saying they are tackling harder or longer because the tackler knows the player with the ball will just hold it?

Nothing. Players tackle longer now because the tackler is trained to pin the arms so the player can't release the ball. The old method of grabbing a player around the waist, or by the jumper, as they used to do is totally ineffective in the modern era and you may as well just try to corral the ball carrier. As you're suggesting, prior opportunity has nothing to do with it.

[SonofScray]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

See for me I reckon the Sydney one is actually worthy of a suspension. The Port one is pure momentum and whilst a push in the back, isnt close to a suspension. Geelong one is just a great tackle.

Cats tackle was great. Other two are in the back. I think there could be room to pay a 50m penalty if it was deemed to be excessive, but not necessarily late, or high contact.

In any case, too much emphasis on these types of actions in play and not enough on what we call Roughing / unsportsmanlike conduct in ice hockey. It isn't unreasonable to think someone might get hurt in the application of the skills of the game. There is no excuse for making contact with an umpire, shoving, elbowing, punching blokes off the ball, or when play is called dead etc.

[Axe Man]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

Reading the thread title I thought this was going to be a whole different discussion.

[Testekill]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

Now if only this ruling had happened while fatarse Mumford was playing.

[GVGjr]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

I'm not outraged by the decision but I think it was the wrong outcome. Had he not made the effort he did I think he would have been singled out by the coaching team.

[Twodogs]

Re: Nic Nat's Tackle

Cats tackle was great. Other two are in the back. I think there could be room to pay a 50m penalty if it was deemed to be excessive, but not necessarily late, or high contact.

In any case, too much emphasis on these types of actions in play and not enough on what we call Roughing / unsportsmanlike conduct in ice hockey. It isn't unreasonable to think someone might get hurt in the application of the skills of the game. There is no excuse for making contact with an umpire, shoving, elbowing, punching blokes off the ball, or when play is called dead etc.

Yep I agree SoS. The coathanger, the sly elbow, the ankletap, the shirtfront, the rough snipe and the rest of the euphemisms we have for violence all have to relics of the past. Because of the pace the game is played at (and knowing more and more about brain trauma) those sort of impact injuries are much more dangerous.