Don't worry Kev if you never heard of Freyette's law of coupled motions. Not everyone buys into it (Does the Evidence Support the Existence of Lumbar Spine Coupled Motion? A Critical Review of the Literature- JOSPT April '07). I just find it a convenient way of describing and documenting spinal dysfunction. So much for that.
Brian asked why I chose a right stride stance. Good question. In this case, if I started with the head in neutral, I would have used up most of my left cervical rotation. In osteopathic terminology, I would have already been into the interbarrier zone. Going through it would have been painful, and forced the motion to other cervical segments that had more motion.
Extension was the most painful motion for this athlete, so I chose to address the other two planes first. I do believe in Freyette's 3rd law-that if motion in one plane is restricted, it will influence the other two. So, I can improve extension ROM indirectly by going after frontal & transverse planes first (and it worked, by the way).
In summary, the point of the post was influencing the cervical spine indirectly by way of the T-Spine. It's completely safe, because unlike a manipulation, the athlete is doing the correction, is in complete control, and can stop it any time he wants.