Hit on Groat

ImageImageImage
Kickoff:
Venue: Sydney Football Stadium
Telecast:
User avatar
diedpretty
Member
Member
Posts: 2176
Joined: Thu 16 Jul, 2009 7:31 am
Location: port macquarie

Re: Hit on Groat

Post by diedpretty » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:09 pm

tiger91 wrote:I may be going over the top be I think a shoulder charge gone wrong like tonight, should see the offending player marched for the game with a predetermined period on the sidelines (say 2 - 3 weeks).

That way it's either coached out of the players, or taught with a safe technique... Not a player using their body as a missile at the opposing player.


Posted using RoarFEED 2012

Why do u think rugby union banned shoulder charges - most of yhem go wrong - they should be banned in league as well.


Hit or Miss
Member
Member
Posts: 319
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 3:40 am
Location: Stanhope Gardens

Post by Hit or Miss » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:11 pm

LaT wrote:
Hit or Miss wrote:
LaT wrote:
18thman wrote:I thought it was a good tackle.....am I the only one? As someone mentioned, shoulder charges have yet to be outlawed. Also, have we forgotten Simon Dwyers great hit on Waerea-Hargreaves?
Great point.

We can't all cheer Dwyers hit and then cry when we are on the receiving end.
Only thing is the rules were changed after Dwyers hit. It was a Legal shot in 2010. Still, if it was done now we would have no arguments to it being a bad hit.


Posted using RoarFEED 2012
Interesting. I don't remember a rule change, any links to it?
Did a google search and can't find anything. I do remember a change and only a couple of weeks ago Phil Gould said in a call of a game that Pritchards hit was legal 2 years ago. Unfortunately I can't back the rule change with evidence.


Posted using RoarFEED 2012

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9106
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:14 pm

Don't see how it was Groat's fault. He ran about 2 metres before Teo launched himself. Intent isn't the issue (you'd hope) but the bottom line is Teo made direct contact with Groat's head with his shoulder. He wasn't wrong-footed, it didn't slip up, he hit him flush on the jaw. Personally it was a send off for mine. If that was his wrist it would have been a send off, why should the shoulder be different?

User avatar
tigergirlz
Member
Member
Posts: 2627
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 10:09 pm

Post by tigergirlz » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:16 pm

Reality is it was put on report, we lost a player due to concussion and there was no real consequence for the Broncos (I do not think a free interchange is a fair swap). I am not going to argue the legality of the particular tackle tonight, but if a ref considers it illegal then the team that suffers as a result should not be the concussed player's team

tigertye
Member
Member
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun 20 Mar, 2011 11:59 pm

Post by tigertye » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:19 pm

shane2801 wrote:
18thman wrote:I thought it was a good tackle.....am I the only one? As someone mentioned, shoulder charges have yet to be outlawed. Also, have we forgotten Simon Dwyers great hit on Waerea-Hargreaves?
I'm with you 18th Man. Not worth anything but applause. As the above posts mention, if the NRL are serious then the shoulder charge needs to be outlawed.
I was at the game and yet to see the replay. Looked like a pretty decent hit to be honest. Replays will show either a shoulder that has slid up off the chest and hit the chin or he has just gone straight for the chin.

The JWH shot was high but only caused because at the last second he lowered his body for impact and copped a massive shoulder off Dwyer.

It looked like a similar sort of hit. And really just unlucky for Groat.

But like I said I haven't seen the full replay apart from the screen at the game.


Posted using RoarFEED 2012


User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9106
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:19 pm

I liked Izotope's idea - a replacement (rather than interchange) for an 18th man if the injured player can't continue. Obviously if you did that the injured player couldn't come back on.

User avatar
foreveratiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 11590
Joined: Mon 27 Jun, 2011 8:03 pm

Post by foreveratiger » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:20 pm

i think there must be a system in place for all clubs, e.g you have 4 interchange players + 2 reserves , how it would work ? Groat can't continue so 1 of your reserves being Junior Moors takes Groat's position on the bench with Teo getting 5 minutes in the sin bin. we got disadvantaged tonight with one player less and Teo playing on.
It depends who you talk to on this Forum, if you are Optimistic? it's because your delusional and need a reality check. If you are Pessimistic? Your accused of being a negative Nancy and to go and follow another Club.

User avatar
LaT
Member
Member
Posts: 3468
Joined: Fri 07 Jan, 2011 4:55 pm
Location: NSW
Contact:

Post by LaT » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:21 pm

Yossarian wrote:Don't see how it was Groat's fault. He ran about 2 metres before Teo launched himself. Intent isn't the issue (you'd hope) but the bottom line is Teo made direct contact with Groat's head with his shoulder. He wasn't wrong-footed, it didn't slip up, he hit him flush on the jaw. Personally it was a send off for mine. If that was his wrist it would have been a send off, why should the shoulder be different?
Nobody said it was Groats fault.
TigPies till I die!

I say, I say I resemble that remark!

Demonborger
Member
Member
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri 09 Oct, 2009 3:26 pm

Post by Demonborger » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:21 pm

Intent is not sufficient and it is possible to disguise intent.
Competency is what is the issue, it was an incompetent tackle from a professional

Hit or Miss
Member
Member
Posts: 319
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 3:40 am
Location: Stanhope Gardens

Post by Hit or Miss » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:24 pm

Demonborger wrote:Intent is not sufficient and it is possible to disguise intent.
Competency is what is the issue, it was an incompetent tackle from a professional
Well said. It don't matter if you meant it. It's should be judged on "Did you do it"


Posted using RoarFEED 2012

Marshall_magic
Member
Member
Posts: 4193
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 5:33 pm

Post by Marshall_magic » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:24 pm

biggest tigers fan wrote:I think if someone goes on report and its deemed bad enough,i reckon they should be off for 20 minutes or in this case teo goes off with groat and sits out as long as he does.
I don't agree with that. What's stopping a team with a player that's A-Ok after a hit like that leaving the player off the field to keep a better opposition player off the field.

I do think a 5 minute sin binning for reportable offences is a fair outcome.

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9106
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:27 pm

LaT wrote:
Yossarian wrote:Don't see how it was Groat's fault. He ran about 2 metres before Teo launched himself. Intent isn't the issue (you'd hope) but the bottom line is Teo made direct contact with Groat's head with his shoulder. He wasn't wrong-footed, it didn't slip up, he hit him flush on the jaw. Personally it was a send off for mine. If that was his wrist it would have been a send off, why should the shoulder be different?
Nobody said it was Groats fault.
Sorry let me rephrase. I don't see how Groat "contributed" to the tackle...

User avatar
innsaneink
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 25567
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:49 pm
Location: ...ahead of you....

Post by innsaneink » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:28 pm

Yossarian wrote:Don't see how it was Groat's fault. He ran about 2 metres before Teo launched himself. Intent isn't the issue (you'd hope) but the bottom line is Teo made direct contact with Groat's head with his shoulder. He wasn't wrong-footed, it didn't slip up, he hit him flush on the jaw. Personally it was a send off for mine. If that was his wrist it would have been a send off, why should the shoulder be different?
So do you think Dwyer shouldve been sent for his shot on JWH?

Send off is over reaction big time imo....if anything its a careless act

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9106
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:29 pm

Marshall_magic wrote:
biggest tigers fan wrote:I think if someone goes on report and its deemed bad enough,i reckon they should be off for 20 minutes or in this case teo goes off with groat and sits out as long as he does.
I don't agree with that. What's stopping a team with a player that's A-Ok after a hit like that leaving the player off the field to keep a better opposition player off the field.

I do think a 5 minute sin binning for reportable offences is a fair outcome.
Maybe the good player will stop clocking people in the head! These things are pretty closely watched on replay so it isn't easy to fake it. Besides if you smack someone in the melon you really can't complain too much...

User avatar
Centaur
Member
Member
Posts: 1572
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 2:35 pm

Post by Centaur » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:31 pm

JWH fell into Dwyers tackle. Groat was running standing tall.

Copped it square on the chin. Extremely dangerous hit.


Posted using RoarFEED 2012

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9106
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:33 pm

innsaneink wrote:
Yossarian wrote:Don't see how it was Groat's fault. He ran about 2 metres before Teo launched himself. Intent isn't the issue (you'd hope) but the bottom line is Teo made direct contact with Groat's head with his shoulder. He wasn't wrong-footed, it didn't slip up, he hit him flush on the jaw. Personally it was a send off for mine. If that was his wrist it would have been a send off, why should the shoulder be different?
So do you think Dwyer shouldve been sent for his shot on JWH?

Send off is over reaction big time imo....if anything its a careless act
Just my opinion Ink. As I said intent isn't the underlying issue for a send-off, careless is more than enough. Personally I think the Dwyer hit on JWH wasn't the same as tonight's hit. The contact to the head wasn't as flush, Dwyer didn't charge in like Teo did (from memory he was head on).

My point is you can't have people coming in like that and making contact in the head of other players and KOing them. And that goes for our players too. Players need protection.

User avatar
LaT
Member
Member
Posts: 3468
Joined: Fri 07 Jan, 2011 4:55 pm
Location: NSW
Contact:

Post by LaT » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:33 pm

Yossarian wrote:
LaT wrote:
Yossarian wrote:Don't see how it was Groat's fault. He ran about 2 metres before Teo launched himself. Intent isn't the issue (you'd hope) but the bottom line is Teo made direct contact with Groat's head with his shoulder. He wasn't wrong-footed, it didn't slip up, he hit him flush on the jaw. Personally it was a send off for mine. If that was his wrist it would have been a send off, why should the shoulder be different?
Nobody said it was Groats fault.
Sorry let me rephrase. I don't see how Groat "contributed" to the tackle...
Ever wonder why Martin Lang copped so many head highs?

The way a player runs, his style or movement towards the defender can contribute.

Judiciary takes this into account all the time.

Nobody is saying Groat is 50% responsible though, but its a factor.
TigPies till I die!

I say, I say I resemble that remark!

User avatar
dermo
Member
Member
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun 20 Feb, 2011 3:02 pm

Post by dermo » Fri 06 Apr, 2012 11:38 pm

Just like to say, say what you want about Sam Thaiday (personally reckon hes a great player and enjoy his aggression) but it was great to see as soon as he realised Groat was out cold he started putting his neck in a stable position and called for the trainers straight away

Post Reply
cron