Prediction Changes vs Carlton

[unplugged]

Pendlebury tagged Cripps last time we played them

Wasn't a hard tag though was it? More stop his influence at stoppages only, but between one contest and the next he was treated the same as any opposition player.

 

[Horaceg]

Thats why I qualified my comment with the expression "hard tag".

For clarification, I said we shouldn't let Cripps run free a little like last time we paid him respect when Pendles went to him.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

For clarification, I said we shouldn't let Cripps run free a little like last time we paid him respect when Pendles went to him.

Thats pretty much true every week. Pay due respect to your opponents key player(s) but dont go overboard. Dont let that affect the way you want to play and the way you want the team structured.

 

[surfer1]

Ins Sier and Murray outs Wells and Greenwood

 

[Saintly Viewed]

One change

One hundred points win

 

[Apex36]

Adams on TFS now

 

[CFC2010]

Adams on TFS now

Sam just reiterated how bad that decision was against Tay against the Dees

 

[Go Woods]

Sam just reiterated how bad that decision was against Tay against the Dees

It's a ridiculous rule. Just like the ruckman rule of having to nominate who's going up for throw ins & ball ups.

 

[jmac70]

Ins Sier and Murray outs Wells and Greenwood

I doubt Greenwood gets dropped.

 

[grayza2018]

Can't see any change that will change up the structure, so Greenwood likely to stay back and Murray to bide his time a bit longer

 

[jefffff34]

It's a ridiculous rule. Just like the ruckman rule of having to nominate who's going up for throw ins & ball ups.

As a ruckman, I like the no third man up rule (don't get smashed by reckless idiots). Having to nominate is a load of shit though.

One person per team can go up, if two go up, free kick. Easy.

 

[swoop42]

We're every chance to be top 4 by the end of this round if Port can do the right thing.

I expect us to uphold our side of the bargain.

Collingwood by 15.












GOALS!

 

[76woodenspooners]

As a ruckman, I like the no third man up rule (don't get smashed by reckless idiots). Having to nominate is a load of shit though.

One person per team can go up, if two go up, free kick. Easy.

Then what’s to stop the opposition Ruckman staying down, and you getting smashed by some reckless idiot coming at you from a direction you weren’t expecting?

Having to nominate isn’t for the umpire’s benefit, it’s for the ruckmen’s benefit.

 

[Hardas]

As a ruckman, I like the no third man up rule (don't get smashed by reckless idiots). Having to nominate is a load of shit though.

One person per team can go up, if two go up, free kick. Easy.

Amen, brother - on all counts.
[Long-retired ruckman!].

 

[surfer1]

I doubt Greenwood gets dropped.

Me to

 

[jackcass]

As a ruckman, I like the no third man up rule (don't get smashed by reckless idiots). Having to nominate is a load of shit though.

One person per team can go up, if two go up, free kick. Easy.

It's not the nomination that's the issue IMHO, the issue is that they allow time for teams to set up and then nominate. Should be as soon as the ump is ready a team either nominates or doesn't, ball is in the air and they adjudicate accordingly. It keeps the game moving.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

It's not the nomination that's the issue IMHO, the issue is that they allow time for teams to set up and then nominate. Should be as soon as the ump is ready a team either nominates or doesn't, ball is in the air and they adjudicate accordingly. It keeps the game moving.

How about get rid of nominations completely. If theres a third man up he gets pinged. If theres a fourth man up then somebody will get pinged even if the umpire has to flip a coin!!

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

As a ruckman, I like the no third man up rule (don't get smashed by reckless idiots). Having to nominate is a load of shit though.

One person per team can go up, if two go up, free kick. Easy.

This is what I never understood.

The nomination just added unnecessary complication for everyone involved.

If 2 players go up from one team, free kick. It’s so god damn simple. Let the “tactic” be the mind games involved in who is going up.

 

[Horaceg]

As a ruckman, I like the no third man up rule (don't get smashed by reckless idiots). Having to nominate is a load of shit though.

One person per team can go up, if two go up, free kick. Easy.

Seems pretty simple as long as someone does not come from outside the immediate contested area and comes over the top. If two players are in the ruck, then just penalise them.

 

[jackcass]

How about get rid of nominations completely. If theres a third man up he gets pinged. If theres a fourth man up then somebody will get pinged even if the umpire has to flip a coin!!

I don't have an issue with the nomination requirement. As someone who would contest it I'd like to know who I'm contesting against.

 

[Bad Horse]

As a ruckman, I like the no third man up rule (don't get smashed by reckless idiots). Having to nominate is a load of shit though.

One person per team can go up, if two go up, free kick. Easy.

Testify ruck brother.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I don't have an issue with the nomination requirement. As someone who would contest it I'd like to know who I'm contesting against.

Its a time waster.

 

[leahcar]

It's a ridiculous rule. Just like the ruckman rule of having to nominate who's going up for throw ins & ball ups.

It's a stupid rule but how would you know who's rucking so you don't get penalised for blocking them? Or you could just try block every player and there would be no tap?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Where is the early mail?

Who is in?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

It's a stupid rule but how would you know who's rucking so you don't get penalised for blocking them? Or you could just try block every player and there would be no tap?

Anybody blocking is contesting the ballup and therefore the third man up.