Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Has the AFL opened pandoras box?
By not citing Goddard for dropping the knees onto a collingwood players head, and not citing three players, including two magpies, for head high contact, two of whom opened up their opponents with the contact, has the AFL basically declared open slather on an opponents head? I think they have.
I agree GT, that sort of behaviour was stamped out when Captain Blood retired, and I highly doubt if he would have participated in the practice. kicking or kneeing an opponent has always been against the unwritten code where I was taught to play the game, and I was taught by some tough footballers.
Well thought out answer lexi, but I have to disagree in part, they have created a very dangerous precedent with their failure, and as for lopsided, their was two on each side in my opinion that should have got at the very least a reprimand.
6 Answers
- LexicographerLv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
How to answer this one mmmmm. The crazy saga of 2010 continues - a drawn GF where in the interests of players, clubs, supporters of both clubs & the AFL everyone would like to see the same 2 teams play off again next week - just fairness. Clubs will shuffle one or 2 in and/or out of line-ups and this is normal week to week stuff BUT if the AFL stepped in and handed 3 or 4 suspensions
then there would really be a furore.. and a lopsided replay.
So I think the AFL has looked at the 2010 GF and made a "judgement call" in the best interests of all & sundry, given the minor level of injury sustained which will leave all involved on either side available for GF Mark 11.
Is it technically right ? - NO.
Has the AFL opened pandora's box. ? NO
Just a one-off directive for a very unique set of circumstances - this league's first drawn GF.
I dare say that had there been a result last Saturday then the tribunal would in action as usual.
- QuandaryLv 71 decade ago
I wouldn't be surprised if there were reprimands in the background, you know ... 'quiet understandings'.
I really didn't think Goddard's was a 'dog act' unless the reference is to another incident that I didn't see. The one I saw, I thought was clumsy like the J-Pod's effort a few weeks previous and that got him a week on the bench.
Wouldn't it have fueled the argument though, as Goddard would have been able to play extra time and was on fire? If he was stamped out then the argument would have really flared up. And honestly I reckon it would suck severely. Perhaps the answer would be to suspend them from next season start and treat the Granny as "extraordinary"
- Anonymous1 decade ago
The AFL has just showed that it is too scared to make tough decisions on suspensions, especially in a Grand Final.
Can you imagine how much controversy it would create.
- Romper StomperLv 71 decade ago
It seems the umpires were directed by the league not to make reports, as these incidents through the year would of been reportable, i don't mind that they weren't though, as i believe our game is becoming too soft, some of the reports this season were a joke, let em go i say, but make the same rules for the season proper too.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
Soon you won't be able to go within 3 feet of a player soon i completely agree with you
