No it isn't. He wasn't driven head first into the ground. That is a fantasy and a fairytale. The only reason mckinnon's head came into contact with the turf was because he bent it at a wierd angle. If he'd kept his head in it's original position he'd have been put on his back, got up and played the ball. That's the point. It's not Mckinnons fault, f*ck no, but it wasn't down to a devil tackle from melbourne either. It was an accident.

It was an illegal tackle. It took the judiciary 10 minutes to decide that.

Anyone with an ounce of common decency would immediately accept responsibility for their actions and show remorse and contrition.

All we have seen from Melbourne is blame shifting.

If you look at the interview with Bennett, the Knights were trying to make no comment on all of this and concentrate on the more important task of looking after his wellbeing, but as Bennett said, "We owed it to Alex" to not have the blame for this put onto the guy who is in no position to reply and is the clear victim.

Melbourne's response has been the ugly, ugly face of self interest and refusing to take responsibility for their actions.

This whole thing should be behind us now, but not because it was glossed over and minimised by people like you, but because adult and ethical people should have owned their guilt and atoned by now.

Whether the tacklers intended it, he was heading to the floor with his legs higher than his head.

He shouldn't have to make a decision of where to put his head to avoid injury.

Rubbish, yes players should be penalised for taking attackers over the horizontal, and actually yellow carded if the attacking player is facing downwards, but C Smith was trying to protect a v.young person, who's career was under threat, and his life is some regards. As has bn said, the NRL has to take a lot of responsibility for the situation that A McKinnon is in, they should have bn more harsh on over the horizontal tackles.

Well done.

You have tremendous compassion for the guy who has no injuries and no lasting effects from this incident, and callous disregard for the guy who may be crippled for life.

No, I'm thinking of a young guy who could be suffering psychologically due to the accident, he shouldn't and I hope he doesn't.



Regarding A McKinnon, I'm sure he'll walk again, Gwyn Jones can, and it looked a similar injury.

Sorry but why shouldn't Mclean have it on his conscience? He chose to use a technique banned for being dangerous.

I would rather abit of psychological damage and a bit of counseling to make me better than two years therapy learning how to walk and wipe my own .



What i would love to klnow is how the media in OZ are reporting it

.



How parents looking at signing their kids up for sport are viewing it





It was an illegal tackle and it was punished.



Whether it was overpunished ifrom the point of the individual player is somewhat irrelevant.



Sometimes the credibility of the sport is more important.



I can just imagine how it would have gone down in the press if it had been a case of



" Cripple a player have three weeks off"



Although some s on here would have been happier with



" Cripple a player and have 10 minutes rest"

The attitude of some not only in oz but on here is absolutely repugnant & utterly disgusting.

Whining that the tackler is young and he will have the guilt on his conscience, so he should! It's a bit like saying a car crash victim is to blame for trying to avoid a smash from the guilty party and being crippled, those of you victim blaming and feeling sorry for McLean should hang your heads in shame, as for Melbourne, vile doesn't even cover it







A tackle that has been banned for years for the very reason of avoiding injuries such as this was acted out by 3 'tacklers', not only are the players involved guilty (of course that whom lifted between the legs is the main culprit) but the referee is complicit in allowing the tackle to carry on, from the second the arm was bewteen the legs the referre should have whistled or shouted them to put the player down.



As for the reports in the Oz press of it being a terrible 'accident', no it fecking well wasn't an 'accident', an accident by definition implies an unavoidable scenario, this was totally and utterly avoidable by both the person whom made the tackle into what it was and the officials by not stopping it at the first opportunity when you see the arm through the leg..accident my

McClean is second into the tackle if not joint first(he makes initial contact at the same time as number 14 and well before number

.



There is no way on earth any serious person could say he was 3rd into the tackle. Nevermind 3rd man into a stationary tackle. Watch it again.

Quote Cronus="Cronus"Some bizarre statements on here: he was imitating Inglis, McLean is a scapegoat, the ref should have stopped the tackle, it's just as much the NRL's fault... As for the tackle, doesn't matter if it was marginal or not. He was tipped over and his neck has been broken. Simple as that. He tucked his head because he was about to be driven head-first into the turf. There was nothing he could do but try and move his head out the way - an instinctive survival reaction - which of course led to his neck bearing the weight of the impact with the ground. As for McLean, as I've said there's no way he would have intended such an injury, but he was lifting to send a message of domination to his opponent. The ban is about right for me. It was an illegal tackle but the terrible outcome was accidental. However, it was still an accident brought on by their actions. As for all these hundreds of similar unpunished tackles we apparently see go unpunished in the NRL (ie, the attacker being lifted past the horizontal), I'd love to see a few of them, because whenever I see someone tipped over head-first, there is generally a penalty or worse. It's an easy bandwagon to jump on, but in reality that just isn't the truth.'" Try watching a few more games. The Melbourne - Newcastle game in which this incident took place had several identical tackles from both sets of defenders. This only doesn't happen all the time if you only count tackles that look spectacular or result in broken necks as tackles that go beyond the horizontal. Every serious person knows that the 3rd man in regularly lifts the legs and players regularly go past the horizontal. The problem I think for a lot of people, yourself included, is that if there was no injury and no slow-motion replays of the incident in question you wouldn't have noticed it in the first place. Therefore it's futile to cite the tens of other examples that happen on a game by game basis. www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYx_AkSVWvI (a week after, wasn't suspended) And here's a couple of pics I found online from this round of games. Baring in mind Getty Images maybe has pics from 20 tackles for each game - if you were to look at snapshots of every single tackle you'd find an untold number of tackles past the horizontal.

Quote Cronus="Cronus"Some bizarre statements on here: he was imitating Inglis, McLean is a scapegoat, the ref should have stopped the tackle, it's just as much the NRL's fault... As for the tackle, doesn't matter if it was marginal or not. He was tipped over and his neck has been broken. Simple as that. He tucked his head because he was about to be driven head-first into the turf. There was nothing he could do but try and move his head out the way - an instinctive survival reaction - which of course led to his neck bearing the weight of the impact with the ground. As for McLean, as I've said there's no way he would have intended such an injury, but he was lifting to send a message of domination to his opponent. The ban is about right for me. It was an illegal tackle but the terrible outcome was accidental. However, it was still an accident brought on by their actions. As for all these hundreds of similar unpunished tackles we apparently see go unpunished in the NRL (ie, the attacker being lifted past the horizontal), I'd love to see a few of them, because whenever I see someone tipped over head-first, there is generally a penalty or worse. It's an easy bandwagon to jump on, but in reality that just isn't the truth.'" Try watching a few more games. The Melbourne - Newcastle game in which this incident took place had several identical tackles from both sets of defenders. This only doesn't happen all the time if you only count tackles that look spectacular or result in broken necks as tackles that go beyond the horizontal. Every serious person knows that the 3rd man in regularly lifts the legs and players regularly go past the horizontal. The problem I think for a lot of people, yourself included, is that if there was no injury and no slow-motion replays of the incident in question you wouldn't have noticed it in the first place. Therefore it's futile to cite the tens of other examples that happen on a game by game basis. www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYx_AkSVWvI (a week after, wasn't suspended) And here's a couple of pics I found online from this round of games. Baring in mind Getty Images maybe has pics from 20 tackles for each game - if you were to look at snapshots of every single tackle you'd find an untold number of tackles past the horizontal.