Damien Barrett is at it again

[Norm De Guerre]

Really? Let’s not be snowflakes here.

Yes. Nobody should stoop to such low-brow comedy to demean another human being.

Its unbecoming of the op and of this board.

 

[Leon]

Further thoughts:


The Wood vs. Hannebery incident I have remarked upon in innumerable threads about our glorious premiership, yet here I go again.

Hannebery was not “soft” in the incident. He went in hard but Easton beat him to it. Not a slight on him. Two players going in hard, one of them was slightly quicker to it and beat him. Happens countless times in every game, footy at its purest.

The posters who have said that the free kick should not have been paid are correct. The rule says contact below the knee. Easton clearly got him on the knee, not below.

And further still, and again I have made this argument on innumerable threads, but the Wood vs. Hannebery incident simply highlights why the contact below the knee rule is stupid. Let’s assume for a moment that Hannebery did get a free kick in the incident.

Umpire: “Here Dan, even though you were second to the ball in a contest, you were hit on the leg, so here’s a free kick. Easton, even though you went in for the ball and won the ball cleanly, you made contact with Dan’s leg, so stand the mark.”

Completely stupid and goes against every natural instinct a player has.

There was also a similar incident just before half time in the GF where McLean got a free which technically he shouldn’t have and the Sydney player should have under the current contact below the knee rule - but also shows why the rule is so stupid. McLean gets to the ball first and cleanly wins it but the Sydney player who is second to the ball and trips over McLean incompetently apparently deserves the free kick because McLean made contact with his legs.

In essence, the contact below the knee rule punishes players that are first to the ball and rewards the player who got beaten. So, so stupid, and I still am shitty with the AFL for bringing it in (along with others - I am also still filthy about 3rd man up being banned)

So in summary:

- Dan Hannebery is not soft, he was just beaten to the ball in a contest. No big deal.

- Play on was the correct decision in the Wood vs. Hannebery incident as Easton did not make contact below the knee.

- The contact below the knee rule is freaking stupid

- Damien Barrett is a nauseating, Norf supporting, bottom feeding troll (already commented on)

 

[BrisDog]

Yes. Nobody should stoop to such low-brow comedy to demean another human being.

Its unbecoming of the op and of this board.

Jesus - show me to the Christian Weekly for pleasant thoughts on wildflowers and dewy grass

 

[RedWhite&Blue]

Yea that was clearly NOT a free.
If Syfney are going to whine about any descision then the moment just after Hannerbury went off when Dale Morris dove on the ball and slide with it into a sydney players legs was probably one we got away with. Apart from that they’ve got no other excuses even though if you ask them they’ll whine and whine and whine some more. Longmire should have been dragged over the coals for his schoolgirl performance of whinging after the game.

 

[freddy mercury]

He has had a Vendetta for our club for at least the last 6 years. I know how you guys are feeling. Never reports anything remotely positive.

 

[Dazb86]

He has had a Vendetta for our club for at least the last 6 years. I know how you guys are feeling. Never reports anything remotely positive.

I feel like most clubs supporters would share the same sentiment. He's a gossip journo.

 

[ossie_21]

I enjoyed it better when it hit off-season and he was on holidays

 

[ScragCity]

Further thoughts:


The Wood vs. Hannebery incident I have remarked upon in innumerable threads about our glorious premiership, yet here I go again.

Hannebery was not “soft” in the incident. He went in hard but Easton beat him to it. Not a slight on him. Two players going in hard, one of them was slightly quicker to it and beat him. Happens countless times in every game, footy at its purest.

The posters who have said that the free kick should not have been paid are correct. The rule says contact below the knee. Easton clearly got him on the knee, not below.

And further still, and again I have made this argument on innumerable threads, but the Wood vs. Hannebery incident simply highlights why the contact below the knee rule is stupid. Let’s assume for a moment that Hannebery did get a free kick in the incident.

Umpire: “Here Dan, even though you were second to the ball in a contest, you were hit on the leg, so here’s a free kick. Easton, even though you went in for the ball and won the ball cleanly, you made contact with Dan’s leg, so stand the mark.”

Completely stupid and goes against every natural instinct a player has.

There was also a similar incident just before half time in the GF where McLean got a free which technically he shouldn’t have and the Sydney player should have under the current contact below the knee rule - but also shows why the rule is so stupid. McLean gets to the ball first and cleanly wins it but the Sydney player who is second to the ball and trips over McLean incompetently apparently deserves the free kick because McLean made contact with his legs.

In essence, the contact below the knee rule punishes players that are first to the ball and rewards the player who got beaten. So, so stupid, and I still am shitty with the AFL for bringing it in (along with others - I am also still filthy about 3rd man up being banned)

So in summary:

- Dan Hannebery is not soft, he was just beaten to the ball in a contest. No big deal.

- Play on was the correct decision in the Wood vs. Hannebery incident as Easton did not make contact below the knee.

- The contact below the knee rule is freaking stupid

- Damien Barrett is a nauseating, Norf supporting, bottom feeding troll (already commented on)

It seems like players have already started exploiting this rule by intentionally running into the player who is down picking up the footy. It's really not going to be a good look for the game if this starts to become the norm but you'd be silly not to take advantage of it as a player.

 

[TempletonTheRat]

It seems like players have already started exploiting this rule by intentionally running into the player who is down picking up the footy. It's really not going to be a good look for the game if this starts to become the norm but you'd be silly not to take advantage of it as a player.

as in the start of the game against Port - McLean is hunting the ball - Gray runs into McLean and gets the free kick

 

[Leon]

Yea that was clearly NOT a free.
If Syfney are going to whine about any descision then the moment just after Hannerbury went off when Dale Morris dove on the ball and slide with it into a sydney players legs was probably one we got away with. Apart from that they’ve got no other excuses even though if you ask them they’ll whine and whine and whine some more. Longmire should have been dragged over the coals for his schoolgirl performance of whinging after the game.

That one (Dale Morris vs. whatever sydney player it was) is another that just shows how stupid the rule is.

Morris was desperate as hell and beat the Sydney player easily but apparently Sydney deserved the free kick after being beaten to the ball.

Ludicrous.

 

[ScragCity]

as in the start of the game against Port - McLean is hunting the ball - Gray runs into McLean and gets the free kick

That was the most ridiculous one I’ve seen. Mclean was still on his feet, bent down to pick up the ball and Gray blatantly ran into him, injuring McLean’s shoulder and received a free for it.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

That one (Dale Morris vs. whatever sydney player it was) is another that just shows how stupid the rule is.

Morris was desperate as hell and beat the Sydney player easily but apparently Sydney deserved the free kick after being beaten to the ball.

Ludicrous.

Umpire: “Here Dan, even though you were second to the ball in a contest, you were hit on the leg, so here’s a free kick. Easton, even though you went in for the ball and won the ball cleanly, you made contact with Dan’s leg, so stand the mark.”

It happens time and time and time again, every week. The rule needs to be revisited and re-thunk, like the hands in the back rule has been.

 

[Bulldogs Legend]

The rule states you can't slide in. Wood never slid, Hannebury ran into him as they both got to the ball at the same time.

And I cn never understand why anyone thinks its a good idea to reward someone secound to the ball. Wood was there first because he was clearly more desperate and unfortunately for Dan H he got injured but it was in no way Eastons fault.

 

[Bulldogs Legend]

Jesus - show me to the Christian Weekly for pleasant thoughts on wildflowers and dewy grass

Just follow Scomo!

 

[BrisDog]

Just follow Scomo!

Sorry mate, busy on Sunday mornings trying to get her namesake out of my bed

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Jesus - show me to the Christian Weekly for pleasant thoughts on wildflowers and dewy grass

 

[BrisDog]

So clever

 

[worbod]

What did Bevo do to Barrett at the Brownlow? Which year was this?

Wasn't Barrett a cricket journo in his early days? Looks as though he failed there too.

 

[Roscoe_au]

Wonder whether Barrett's attitude would be any different if Hannebery was a little more front on and his knee broke Wood's rib? 5 more degrees to his left and Wood (who still would have won the ball) would be laying on the ground and Hannebery would be getting scrutinized post-match for kneeing a player on the ground.

Game of inches, boys. God knows that nerdy twerp Barrett could do with a few #nameofbarrettssextape

 

[BrisDog]

What did Bevo do to Barrett at the Brownlow? Which year was this?

Wasn't Barrett a cricket journo in his early days? Looks as though he failed there too.

2015 - head butted him, stomped on his glasses then threw him into the urinal.

 

[Scary_Foot_9]

What did Bevo do to Barrett at the Brownlow? Which year was this?

Wasn't Barrett a cricket journo in his early days? Looks as though he failed there too.

It was post the Talia Affair. Numerous unconfirmed reports say that Bevo told Barrett his reporting was a crock of s**t and Talia's camp was using him as glorified PR (they were).

 

[dogwatch]

2015 - head butted him, stomped on his glasses then threw him into the urinal.

That earned him the three votes didn't it?