Autopsy AFL 2021 Round 4 - Port v Tigers Fri April 9th 7:50pm EST (AO) Tigercast link in OP!

[Boston tiger]

Tigers fans in here whinging when edwards took out two of our best players with illegal tackles.

Not to forget when duursma was pushed into the fence. Later tackled after he got rid of it and injured.

butters tackled by the legs and injured.

imagine the outcry if that happened to dusty and Cotchin. Victoria would be marching on Adelaide oval with pitchforks.

Lynch only had to touch someone’s shoulder with one of his knee hairs for the whole world to go into melt down. Just ask our boy Duursma.

 

[AstuteTiger]

Thats a pretty pathetic percentage of a claimed 100k membership. I mean Port just had a 33k attendance turn up with our 50k members.

Please learn how the MCG works then talk, you come across quite clueless. It's broken up into 3. Public reserve, MCC and AFL reserve. It wouldn't matter if we had 300K members they wouldn't be all allowed in.

You do realise that the biggest home & away attendance in Vc against an interstate side is by Richmond 77K v Brisbane. You do realise that the biggest crowd in a final against an absolute minnow in GWS was by you guessed it Richmond 95K V GWS (90K tiger supporters).

 

[AstuteTiger]

See this is why Richmond fans think they got screwed over by the umps. They think that there is nothing illegal in tackling a player that doesn't have the ball.

You literally are the clueless one on big footy, it is not whether we think we got screwed we did get screwed by the umps, that's not even debatable.
You are complaining about what? a split second umpiring decision, just shows how pathetic you port supporters are. You had 22 frees, received goals by umpiring decisions (ball over the line, butters ducking, houli mark which got pinned for holding the ball that never gets paid, the player gets the benefit of the doubt in that situation and you still pick one that may have been a free. Ilir ilir grabbing Lynch by the jumper/throat area in the last 5 mins clear as day but not for the umps.

Oh, you say Duursma didn't have the ball he was about to kick the ball as he got tackled, what did you want Edwards to do let him kick it, seriously wake the * up, you talk utter rubbish.

Last years GF, Dangerfield knocks out Vlastuin in the 1st 5 mins with an elbow, it was a split-second decision to lift his elbow, it happens one can only imagine if it happened to one of your players you would be having a sook.

 

[AstuteTiger]

Will Duursma play that game? Maybe he shouldn’t. Seems to have pretty bad luck against the Tigers... injured knee this time, dropped a premiership last time.

View attachment 1099446

* that was hilarious tin foil duursma acting tough against Lynch and then KARMA goes bang with that simple dropped chest mark.
Did you see Rozee's face when he dropped it

 

[Stealth69]

What did you think of Dusty's throat fend off directly leading to a goal? Honest q.

I actually didn't see it tbh

Did miss a few minutes here and there moving around

I can point to 3-4 definite s**t calls like Alir body slamming Reiwoldt, Gray picking up ball outside the boundary and Fantasia kicking the resultant goal, Houli getting pinged for a touched call 50 meters away, especially with crowd noise wouldn't have heard it and Dusty getting pinged for a tackle when he didn't have the ball but these I've let slide because you get these calls during a game and I realise in every game one team especially losing team will cry foul

My vice is Gray definitely handballed a rushed behind and defenders were well away from him ie he had plenty of time to boot ball away or handball elsewhere.

It won't change result and won't change our opinions.
It will get ugly when any unlucky defender gets pinged for something similar and costs them the game...

 

[philthy05]

Oh, you say Duursma didn't have the ball he was about to kick the ball as he got tackled, what did you want Edwards to do let him kick it, seriously wake the fu** up, you talk utter rubbish.

I’ve already shown you clear as day footage that duursma had disposed of the ball before edwards tackled him.

stop lying.

 

[BF Tiger]

I’ve already shown you clear as day footage that duursma had disposed of the ball before edwards tackled him.

stop lying.

Don’t be a f**kwit. It was a split second footballing action that had a very unfortunate result. Edwards was committed to the contest before the ball was disposed and is allowed to try to impact the disposal. If Duursma takes another step the kick isn’t even made. Edwards had every right to make that contest and if you want that removed from the game then maybe a non-contact sport is what you’re after.

 

[philthy05]

Don’t be a f**kwit. It was a split second footballing action that had a very unfortunate result. Edwards was committed to the contest before the ball was disposed and is allowed to try to impact the disposal. If Duursma takes another step the kick isn’t even made. Edwards had every right to make that contest and if you want that removed from the game then maybe a non-contact sport is what you’re after.

ive already proved bound a doubt with visual evidence that duursma had disposed of the ball but your mate here is still pushing the duursma had the ball narrative. I pointed this out.

 

[AstuteTiger]

I’ve already shown you clear as day footage that duursma had disposed of the ball before edwards tackled him.

stop lying.

Lying? lol Do u think what u say is gospel, lmfooooo and I showed you duursma gets tackled as he's kicking it, the footage doesn't lie but you seem to. For the last time, look where the ball is and also look where Edwards's arm is. Why are we still discussing this? You deem it a missed free? and you're still carrying on. Ok, whatever the reason let's just leave it there. Enjoy your win, a great game and who knows we may meet you again in the finals if we are both good enough to make it.

 

[BF Tiger]

ive already proved bound a doubt with visual evidence that duursma had disposed of the ball but your mate here is still pushing the duursma had the ball narrative. I pointed this out.

Like I said, don’t be a f**kwit. Do you or do you not accept it was a legitimate footballing action that Edwards had every right to attempt? Change the time of impact so that it happens literally 1/10th of a second earlier and Duursma doesn’t get the kick away cleanly.

 

[philthy05]

Like I said, don’t be a f**kwit. Do you or do you not accept it was a legitimate footballing action that Edwards had every right to attempt? Change the time of impact so that it happens literally 1/10th of a second earlier and Duursma doesn’t get the kick away cleanly.

I called this out earlier. Edwards tackle was late. No if’s or buts about it. Was after duursma disposed of the ball. Anyone claiming duursma was in possession, which astute tiger has repeatedly done, is wrong.

I broken down the incident here in detail. Of particular concern was where edwards had the chance to end the tackle but continues on with it and injures duursma in the second part of the tackle.

Want to bet on it?


Here is X in the action of kicking the ball. The pick dot on the right edge of screen is edwards hand. He isn’t even in the immediate area here.
View attachment 1098930

Here is edwards tackling X. Duursma clearly is not in possession of the ball. This is just the beginning of the tackle
View attachment 1098932

Here is edwards following through with the tackle well after X has disposed of it. He could have let go here but made a decision to follow through.
View attachment 1098935
here is where the tackle finished. Edwards has followed through and brought X down resulting in him leaving the ground injured. Note that duursma has been slung from one side of edwards to the other in the second part of this tackle. View attachment 1098938
The whole thing happened incredibly quickly. You could argue that edwards might not have had time to pull up after duursma got rid of the ball, but that doesn’t explain why edwards followed through with the tackle, especially when he had the opportunity before he brought X around his body and to the ground. The real problem here is that edwards was not only late, but he had the option to end the tackle halfway through but instead follows through. This is the action that resulted in duursmas injury.

you are wrong. Duurs was not in possession. It was a late and reckless tackle that injured one of the best players on the ground at a key time in the game.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

If you want to go down that road here are two photos from Friday night of Richmond players being held who don't have the ball? Sure, the hold on Dusty is minor, but it's definitely there - a hand holding his shoulder/bicep region while the othe rhand looks to be pushing him in the back. And Cotchin is continuing to be tackled after disposing of the ball, just like Edwards did to Duursma.

But do we really want to go down that road?

View attachment 1099499View attachment 1099500

Martin isn't being held.

And Cotchin had possession of the ball when he was tackled there. Duursma didn't have the ball anymore when Edwards grabbed him. Thats a pretty obvious difference.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

fu** that was hilarious tin foil duursma acting tough against Lynch and then KARMA goes bang with that simple dropped chest mark.
Did you see Rozee's face when he dropped it

This is how detached Richmond fans are from reality.

After Duursma kicked a goal, the flog in the whole situation was Lynch who ran over 50m to get in Duursma's face.

 

[LIONS15v]

Nope

Haha, whatever helps you sleep at night

So surely you'll be commenting on it when it does favour tigers next time

Thank you very much for your 100% completely impartial contributions. Your input is highly valued in this forum.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Please learn how the MCG works then talk, you come across quite clueless. It's broken up into 3. Public reserve, MCC and AFL reserve. It wouldn't matter if we had 300K members they wouldn't be all allowed in.

You do realise that the biggest home & away attendance in Vc against an interstate side is by Richmond 77K v Brisbane. You do realise that the biggest crowd in a final against an absolute minnow in GWS was by you guessed it Richmond 95K V GWS (90K tiger supporters).

So what you're saying is that 77k Richmond supporters can turn up to a match, so your comment about the public reserve, MCC and AFL reservce is a bit of crap? And I'm giving the benefit of the doubt on finals being special otherwise it appears that those reserves don't stop 90k bandwagoners from turning up.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Is it more or less pathetic than using tarps to cover vacant seats?

The tarps were for selling advertising to try and "grow the pie" as the SANFL demanded. Since they refused to give Port Adealide access to a clean ground that sponsorship advertising could be sold at.

 

[Boston tiger]

This is how detached Richmond fans are from reality.

After Duursma kicked a goal, the flog in the whole situation was Lynch who ran over 50m to get in Duursma's face.

The bloke was having some kind of episode after kicking the match winner in the first quarter.... no one was safe.

 

[AstuteTiger]

So what you're saying is that 77k Richmond supporters can turn up to a match, so your comment about the public reserve, MCC and AFL reservce is a bit of crap? And I'm giving the benefit of the doubt on finals being special otherwise it appears that those reserves don't stop 90k bandwagoners from turning up.

No, I didn't say 77K tiger fans, brissy also had a good turnout maybe 10K at a guess. We also have members in the AFL and MCC reserve but of course, most of our members are seated in the public reserve. MCC allows generous away members access also, where as AO, Optus Stasium etc due to reduced seating capacity only allow a certain % to away fans. We are talking crowds and memberships in the wrong thread. If you want to talk crowds do it in the attendance thread or membership thread and ill happily chat more. Let's stay on-topic on the actual game port v tiges.

 

[AstuteTiger]

This is how detached Richmond fans are from reality.

After Duursma kicked a goal, the flog in the whole situation was Lynch who ran over 50m to get in Duursma's face.

Stop talking s**t seriously. The only person detached from reality, the truth is you!!! What's up with you port supporters who just blatantly bend the truth.
Tom Lynch did NOT run up to duursma, you got one word right though, FLOG and that's the arrow man himself who sprinted up to lynch and got in his face.
What an absolute douche bag but KARMA got duursma later on when he dropped a soda.

One word of advice stop making up furphies. Only one person was the aggressor and his name wasn't Tom Lynch.
Check out the link below from the AFL and read their title heading. It doesn't corroborate your version of events.

 

[BF Tiger]

The tarps were for selling advertising to try and "grow the pie" as the SANFL demanded. Since they refused to give Port Adealide access to a clean ground that sponsorship advertising could be sold at.

Just lucky you had all those vacant seats to put them over I guess.

 

[BF Tiger]

This is how detached Richmond fans are from reality.

After Duursma kicked a goal, the flog in the whole situation was Lynch who ran over 50m to get in Duursma's face.

Maybe you just remembered it incorrectly. A bit of PTSD or something from Richmond winning a third flag in four years.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Maybe you just remembered it incorrectly. A bit of PTSD or something from Richmond winning a third flag in four years.

Notice how they're up near Port's forward line... When the kick was taken Lynch was back at Richmond's forward 50. He ran down the ground mouthing off at Duursma to create this situation.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Stop talking sh*t seriously. The only person detached from reality, the truth is you!!! What's up with you port supporters who just blatantly bend the truth.
Tom Lynch did NOT run up to duursma, you got one word right though, FLOG and that's the arrow man himself who sprinted up to lynch and got in his face.
What an absolute douche bag but KARMA got duursma later on when he dropped a soda.

One word of advice stop making up furphies. Only one person was the aggressor and his name wasn't Tom Lynch.
Check out the link below from the AFL and read their title heading. It doesn't corroborate your version of events.

I guess Tom Lynch was pulled from Richmond's forward 50 by a black hole or something then. You clowns are relying on an AFL tweet thats misrepresenting what occured. If you were at the game you would've how inaccurate that tweet is.

 

[HTT]

Haha, whatever helps you sleep at night

So surely you'll be commenting on it when it does favour tigers next time

Thank you very much for your 100% completely impartial contributions. Your input is highly valued in this forum.

Do you have an actual reason you oppose my suggestion or is it just ‘muh you go for Richmond your opinion doesn’t count’?
Because that’s the only argument you’ve given so far.

 

[BF Tiger]

Notice how they're up near Port's forward line... When the kick was taken Lynch was back at Richmond's forward 50. He ran down the ground mouthing off at Duursma to create this situation.

That’s not what the footage shows.

And if you want to mention inflammatory mouthing off maybe Hamish Hartlett needs to brought up.