MIDFIELDER Nathan Jones says he’s certain AFL players don’t deliberately ‘sling tackle’ their opponents with malicious intent.
Speaking in the wake of Port Adelaide forward Jay Schulz not being charged by the match review panel for rough conduct – something the AFL later conceded was an error – Jones said players didn’t set out to deliberately hurt players in sling tackles, but acknowledged the onus was on the tackler.
“I don’t think they want to injure a player – in terms of driving their heads into the ground. We’re taught to tackle aggressively and we’re taught to really get at the opponent and I think it’s a bit of an unfortunate thing,” he said.
“I can understand why we want to take it away from the game – it’s not something that we want to see, but with Jeremy [Howe’s] tackle on the weekend, there was no intent there – I think it was just an unfortunate incident.
“I think the AFL has cleared it up to a certain degree and the responsibility lies, in the end, with the player [tackling] – and the result of the injury that occurs, particularly with a concussion or KO.”
“If you elect to sling, roll or rotate and tackle [a player] into the ground, and they hit their head and you’ve got their arms pinned, the responsibility lies on the tackler and you’re going to be penalised – that’s how I see it anyway.”
Jones praised AFL general manager of football operations Mark Evans for getting on the front foot about the Schulz incident.
“I thought it was terrific that Mark Evans came out and acknowledged that they made a mistake with the Schulz one,” he said.
“That left everyone in a little bit of limbo, in terms of having a really clear understanding of what the go is – and what will be penalised and what won’t, in terms of suspension or whatever.
“In the end, there is probably a touch of grey area, but as far I see it, if you elect to sling, and concuss or knock out a player, you’re due diligence and level of care for the opponent you’re tackling – those stakes will be raised and you’ll be held to account.”
