Barnard Inclusion Concern

Remove this Banner Ad

J

jasnik

Senior List
Sep 10, 2003
214
0
SE Swampland
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Hi guys,

My first post here, so go easy! :)

I was just wondering whether anyone else besides me is concerned that Paul Barnard may have been included in the Bombers lineup just to kick a few Port heads on Saturday night. If Essendon lose, they are out and it'll be his last match, so he won't care if he gets rubbed out for 6 weeks. What's to stop Barnard from going out during the second quarter and flattening any Port players who look like they are dominating their position?

If you think this would be the first time this has happened, get out your copy of the 2000 Grand Final and watch Michael Long in action in his last game for the club. If Barnard knocks out a few key Power players, and that's enough to swing the game the Bombers' way, he'll retire a hero at Windy Hill.

Any thoughts? How can Port counteract this possible tactic? What incentives do or should the AFL have to stop this type of thing from happening?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Originally posted by jasnik
Any thoughts? How can Port counteract this possible tactic?
Click to expand...
Have someone run him through as soon as he steps off the interchange bench.
 
Originally posted by jasnik
Hi guys,

My first post here, so go easy! :)

I was just wondering whether anyone else besides me is concerned that Paul Barnard may have been included in the Bombers lineup just to kick a few Port heads on Saturday night. If Essendon lose, they are out and it'll be his last match, so he won't care if he gets rubbed out for 6 weeks. What's to stop Barnard from going out during the second quarter and flattening any Port players who look like they are dominating their position?
Click to expand...

To that i say i hope Kingers gets 14 kicks, 7 handballs and 3 goals in the first quarter before Barnard knocks him into next week (or even better next century).
 
Barnard has been selected for his physical presence, determination to win being his last game and ability to find a goal and lift in big matches.
With three tough physical players named in the forwards, its obvious where the perceived weakness of port lies in the eyes of sheedy.
 
Originally posted by dougthelegend
With three tough physical players named in the forwards, its obvious where the perceived weakness of port lies in the eyes of sheedy.
Click to expand...
Come now, you don't have three tough physical players on your entire list these days. Who are you trying to talk up?
 
Originally posted by jasnik
Hi guys,



If you think this would be the first time this has happened, get out your copy of the 2000 Grand Final and watch Michael Long in action in his last game for the club. If Barnard knocks out a few key Power players, and that's enough to swing the game the Bombers' way, he'll retire a hero at Windy Hill.
Click to expand...

Long played in 2001.

Barnard is not coming into the team to line up Port blokes but if they are thinking that then his inclusion may have already worked. Barnard is a more than just a tough guy he is a very competent footballer which I hope he proves tomorrow.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Originally posted by dougthelegend
Solomon, MJ and Barnard
Click to expand...
I can only assume that Lloyd and Hird will be lining up in the backline this week.
 
Jasnik, i think you're spot on mate! Obviously Paul Barnard has no intention of playing a quality game of football, convincing the selectors to keep him in the side if the bombers do get over the Power this week. Barnard wanting to play in the preliminary final? Ha Ha Ha that's laughable. He'll be going the bash for sure! Furthermore, I've got an inside source at the club, and he's informed me that Barnard's gonna try extra hard, just to make sure if, no, when he gets cited this week, it's for something extra violent. That way when he gets suspended, he'll be guaranteed at least a two week holiday just in case the bombers make it through to the Grand Final.

I'm sure the more switched on Port fans have already came to this conclusion. I was planning on sticking around this board for a few days, provide the port fans with a bit of insight from a bomber fan's point of view, but it's clear to me i'm not needed. Port fans knowledge of the Essendon football club is impressive.
Jasnik obviously knows everything there is to know about the bombers...

Originally posted by jasnik
If you think this would be the first time this has happened, get out your copy of the 2000 Grand Final and watch Michael Long in action in his last game for the club.
Click to expand...

Jasnik's intimate knowledge of the Essendon football club is very impressive - perhaps he can explain to me what Michael Long was doing at Windy Hill throughout the 2001 season, if the 2000 Grand Final was gonna be his last game for the club?
 
Re: Re: Barnard Inclusion Concern

Originally posted by go team
Jasnik, i think you're spot on mate! Obviously Paul Barnard has no intention of playing a quality game of football, convincing the selectors to keep him in the side if the bombers do get over the Power this week. Barnard wanting to play in the preliminary final? Ha Ha Ha that's laughable. He'll be going the bash for sure! Furthermore, I've got an inside source at the club, and he's informed me that Barnard's gonna try extra hard, just to make sure if, no when he gets cited this week, it's for something extra violent.
Click to expand...
If only I could believe it wasn't true.

Jasnik's intimate knowledge of the Essendon football club is very impressive - perhaps he can explain to me what was Michael Long doing at Windy Hill throughout the 2001 season, if the 2000 Grand Final was gonna be his last game for the club?
Click to expand...
 Did Michael Long really play in 2001? Wow.
 
Re: Re: Barnard Inclusion Concern

Originally posted by Eago77
To that i say i hope Kingers gets 14 kicks, 7 handballs and 3 goals in the first quarter before Barnard knocks him into next week (or even better next century).
Click to expand...

If Kingers gets 14 kicks, 7 handballs and 3 goals in the first quarter the last thing I would want is for Barnard to iron him out. But I would doubt that Barnard has been included simply as someone to take players out illegally. That used to be done earlier without repercussions but an action like that could even bring legal action against the player, the coach and the Essendon Football Club.
 
Re: Re: Barnard Inclusion Concern

Originally posted by go team
Jasnik's intimate knowledge of the Essendon football club is very impressive - perhaps he can explain to me what Michael Long was doing at Windy Hill throughout the 2001 season, if the 2000 Grand Final was gonna be his last game for the club?
Click to expand...

You're right, seems like he was at Essendon during 2001. I'm not sure why his impressive performances that year aren't burnt into my memory. :confused: Unless....

Maybe Hardwick and Barnard can play on one another and knock each other out. They're good mates aren't they? :D

If Port play anything like they did against the Swans last week, they're in trouble. If they play anything like they did against the Eagles a few weeks ago, bye bye bombers (again). Port will either win the game or lose the game; what the Bombers do during the match is immaterial to the outcome.
 
Originally posted by jasnik



If you think this would be the first time this has happened, get out your copy of the 2000 Grand Final and watch Michael Long in action in his last game for the club. If Barnard knocks out a few key Power players, and that's enough to swing the game the Bombers' way, he'll retire a hero at Windy Hill.
Click to expand...

What a rediculous statement....Long was a fair player for his ENTIRE career, including the 2000 Grand Final. Simmonds fumbled the ball and paid the price. I have seen a dozen identical incidents which haven't even been called up to the tribunal (with the exception of Bolton in Semi Final last year).
 
Re: Re: Re: Barnard Inclusion Concern

Originally posted by jasnik
Maybe Hardwick and Barnard can play on one another and knock each other out. They're good mates aren't they? :D
Click to expand...

i'm sure they would have gotten on pretty well... have the bombers beaten port since dimma got traded?
 
Re: Re: Barnard Inclusion Concern

Originally posted by TD
What a rediculous statement....Long was a fair player for his ENTIRE career, including the 2000 Grand Final. Simmonds fumbled the ball and paid the price. I have seen a dozen identical incidents which haven't even been called up to the tribunal (with the exception of Bolton in Semi Final last year).
Click to expand...

To say that Long was totally innocent of what happened to Simmonds in the 2000 GF is patently ridiculous. However, I do not believe it was as bad as made out to be and feel Longs' "demon eyes" may have led to the tribunal believing the strike to be intentional. Adrian Settre of Port Adelaide used to have the same problem, he would be suspended for 3 matches simply because of his intense look when he mistimed his challenge.
 
Re: Re: Barnard Inclusion Concern

Originally posted by TD
What a rediculous statement....Long was a fair player for his ENTIRE career, including the 2000 Grand Final. Simmonds fumbled the ball and paid the price. I have seen a dozen identical incidents which haven't even been called up to the tribunal (with the exception of Bolton in Semi Final last year).
Click to expand...

You’re right – Long was an extremely fair player throughout his career, which made his actions in the 2000 GF even more bizarre – but he looked like he was a man on a mission that day. Yes, he pleaded not guilty to the charge of unduly rough play, but the incident itself looked VERY bad. The Small Article I could find on the internet refers to some of the aftermath, where people were shocked at the leniency of the 4 match suspension.

The Bickley-Wakelin incident last year reminded me of the Long-Simmonds clash; a normally fair player doing something completely out of character. Anyway, my point you quoted has already proven to be wrong, as Long went on to play 7 more glorious games and kicked one goal for the Bombers in 2001.
 
Thinking about it a second time, it seems more likely this is one of Sheedys' mind games. I can't really see he or Barnard wanting to be remembered for ordering or carrying out cheap shots. But if he can get the Port players off balance for long enough and worrying about Barnard that could allow Hird, Lloyd and the other more skilled players to slip under the guard.
And it is true that Barnard could be just the kind of player for this final, irrespective of the fact it may be his last. Simply that he is the kind of player who puts a ton of pressure on an opponent, something Port were beaten by last week.
Sheedy would have also watched all Port v Swans games and Barry Hall has always had the upper hand, although not always scoring goals. Barnard is one of the Essendon forwards most like him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top