Oddities In The AFL Round 14 2023

[@cuesportclips11]

If that first tackle is a suspension at all. I will never watch another AFL game again, on god.

[@toby4235]

It isn’t and won’t be

[@minirobo7904]

The MRO already put out a statement. "It was the view of the MRO that Berry discharged his duty of care in the manner he took Hayward to ground and that his actions were not unreasonable in the circumstances,"

[@toby4235]

The MRO already cleared Berry a day ago to play against the saints. This is what they had to say: *It was the view of the MRO that Berry discharged his duty of care in the manner he took Hayward to ground and that his actions were not unreasonable in the circumstances*

[@ethanwilliam7793]

Tackling feels 50/50 now. There are definitely still legitimately poor tackles that needlessly endanger players, but some of the calls recently have been disgraceful. There are unavoidable dangers when participating in a contact sport, especially one as rough as Australian Rules Football, and that's the unfortunate fact of the matter.

[@vaxanity]

From memory that trip. I thought the reverse angle on replay he tripped over his own feet.

[@billybootscraff7163]

he def tripped over his own feet

[@jackrutten2919]

yeah if you watch it, it looks close but didnt connect

[@kizzassports8591]

It baffles me how a deliberate elbow into Rioli gets a fine yet mansell running at the ball full pace (Last week vs Fremantle) (GOING FOR THE BALL) gets 3 weeks. The ball was well gone when Milera elbowed Rioli the choice was made. And Mansell was going for the ball the whole time. These corrupt AFL people in charge only care about the damage it has on the player receiving the bump/elbow/tackle. Rioli gets up ok = fine. Fremantle blokes headband comes off and he is on the floor for a while cause he can’t handle a fair hip and shoulder = 3 weeks. Even the commentator said “shoulder on shoulder” when the Mansell incident happened. Unbelievable, actually it’s believable because the AFL are so corrupt.

[@EliteJerk]

Lol that wasnt deliberate, its slippery as fuck and you can see the elbow slide up his arm. Maybe use your eyes before sperging out about your perceived "unfairness".

[@jackrutten2919]

i agree

[@samysull333]

@@EliteJerk you’re a flog if you reckon that’s not deliberate. 🤡🤡🤡

[@xGhilex]

that last one was most definitely holding the ball idk what your on about

[@pjckle]

You're*

[@xGhilex]

@@pjckle i dont give a shit

[@Adam-dm1se]

Sorry perhaps I'm blind. No matter how many times I watch the Dougal Howard clip I see no trip. He doesn't come close to making contact with Baker

[@chrisc3797]

if you watch the slowed down one, Howard's foot kicks Baker's right foot into his other leg causing the trip. It goes pretty fast, but it's there.

[@Adam-dm1se]

@@chrisc3797there really doesn’t look to be much contact but the angle is tricky. I’m probably wrong

[@chadchadderton]

dougs is an ex-port player so old mate was gonna be on his case regardless of if the trip happened or not...

[@adandap]

That North goal assist looked a whole lot like a throw to me.

[@thesecretwombat056]

it can't be a throw if it is being slapped downwards, which it was

[@adandap]

@@thesecretwombat056 I'm pretty sure I can throw something downwards! To me it looked more like a push of the ball rather than a slap.

[@DjjohnnyFTW]

@@adandap A push is still legal, throw requires a handled action of the ball, scoop and lift or grab

[@thesecretwombat056]

@@adandap when did I say that you can't throw something downwards???? A throw requires you to have a certain level of control of the ball, this includes generaly an action of lifting the ball in some way fro your initial contact, such as a scoop. The only way that one can assume enough control to be determined as a throw without lifting the ball is to catch the ball which isn't done in this case

[@edbambach164]

was that last one not clearly holding the ball?

[@charlieww7]

Best Oddities video so far.. W

[@LodgicalThoughts]

The florent HTB has never made sense to me. Surely that’s incorrect disposal, which is hardly ever paid.

[@ThandrieDavis]

3:00 he didn't leap up and drive the forearm into the head, so, only one week? fair enough

[@cammorgan7849]

when the ball spills in the tackle with prior opportunity I think it almost always gets paid?

[@EchoFoxtrott1]

umpires these days also see the raising of the arm to take on the tackler as having prior oportunity and given that he ran several metres before it was definitely there.

[@Codewordthecerealkiller0]

All tackles should be legalized Chicken wing and high tackles are not dangerous at all. Same with sling tackled

[@anbroggo9364]

i understand being frustrated with the rules at the moment, but that is no reason to be an absolute muppet and suggest this

[@papleylivesrentfreeinurhead]

@@anbroggo9364 he’s a collingwood fan he’s a little slow but hopefully he’ll get there 👍

[@themoderngamer3335]

that florent call is most definitely holding the ball lmfao. if you have clear as day prior opportunity and you dont dispose of it correctly its holding the ball every day of the week. It's only play on when its knocked out if the player has no prior and is making an attempt to dispose legally.

[@ashsnipesxxxx2]

It's this guys youtube name and he doesnt know what it is. HTB Everyday of the week! Watching it live was hilarious!

[@StuPV]

The rule explicitly stipulates that holding the ball (and, incidentally, incorrect disposal) are only valid calls when a legal tackle is made. The argument here is that there was no legal tackle, the guy just knocked the ball out of his hands but didn't actually tackle him. Umpire, and i'd be inclined to agree, has adjudicated that a tackle was made and then broken (even if it was for a fraction of a second) - the defensive player isn't going for a bump or a strip, he tries to tackle and is fended and the ball comes loose in that action, so it's fair to rule that he made a legal tackle for that fraction of a second.

[@themoderngamer3335]

@@StuPV i see what you're saying but umpires regularly interchange holding the ball and incorrect disposal calls. Both are for free kicks and for an incorrect disposal a legal tackle does not have to be made. I understand you're looking at it from a technical view but the creator of this video is clearly not and simply misunderstanding the rules.

[@Yantka]

Surely berry doesn’t get anything for that, what’s happening to our game 🫠

[@toby4235]

He hasn’t and won’t

[@eddiebowman7892]

Les goooo

[@rerooar]

Rules are gunna have to change, if a player is grabbed and try's to spin around it should be holding the ball straight away. Players are using this to get frees, stupid and dangerous, what is the tackler supposed to do? Let him go? Stupid. If they get booked for a dangerous tackle they should still get the free for holding the ball, so they get reported but still get the free, this might help to stop players spinning like this.

[@holdingthebull]

Or even some of the time when its eventually classed as a dangerous tackle and the tackler gets 1 week for it, the umpire doesn't even award a free kick. So it's not worth a free kick but its worth a week or more suspension. Sometimes the rules just really don't make sense

[@Codewordthecerealkiller0]

Also AFL fans are hypocrites. They think that the AFL suspending players for normal tackles is soft which it is but also wanted De Goey out for a normal bump

[@chadchadderton]

de goeys bump wasn't normal, thats why. i agree SOME of the commentary around it was poor, but he got the right length of suspension.

[@papleylivesrentfreeinurhead]

in what way was it normal? it should’ve been longer as should wicks bump this week and mansell who was in a contest, unlike the other 2, was given 3

[@Codewordthecerealkiller0]

@@papleylivesrentfreeinurhead De Goey bumped him with the ball in hand aka it's legal