Remove this Banner Ad

Rumour Dangerous Ribs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phantom21
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Phantom21

Phantom21

Senior List
Suspended
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Posts
245
Reaction score
52
AFL Club
Adelaide
I am confident that unfortunately Danger has broken a rib or at the very least sustained a hairline fracture when Tex landed on him. There is just no way you could have Tex land on a person and not break something.

Fingers crossed he may still play R1.
 
Is that what you are basing it on? That Tex landing on him must mean he's injured? Surely you would want some info before starting a injury thread
 
Elite Crow said:
Is that what you are basing it on? That Tex landing on him must mean he's injured? Surely you would want some info before starting a injury thread
Click to expand...

True and I respect that.

In fairness he does have a rib issue which he stated he was sore after the Tex landing.

The extent of that issue Im sure will be determined. Will Adelaide play him if its a small fracture? Possibly.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Phantom21 said:
I am confident that unfortunately Danger has broken a rib or at the very least sustained a hairline fracture when Tex landed on him. There is just no way you could have Tex land on a person and not break something.

Fingers crossed he may still play R1.
Click to expand...

Personally, even though Tex is a Sherman Tank I'd be sending him for an x-ray after any bodily collision with Dangerfield.
 
Mattrox said:
Personally, even though Tex is a Sherman Tank I'd be sending him for an x-ray after any bodily collision with Dangerfield.
Click to expand...
Are you saying Tex is in abbundance and is generally useless? o_O
 
Mattrox said:
Solidly built. Virtually bullet proof.
Click to expand...
You do know the Sherman Tank is one of the most useless tanks ever and could be destroyed by 1 hit?
 
Dirty Bird said:
You do know the Sherman Tank is one of the most useless tanks ever and could be destroyed by 1 hit?
Click to expand...

It's a saying.

I'm glad this is a world war 2 historical society were we have to be pedantic to the last letter and not a footy forum where everyday sayings can be used to describe a situation.
 
Mattrox said:
It's a saying.

I'm glad this is a world war 2 historical society were we have to be pedantic to the last letter and not a footy forum where everyday sayings can be used to describe a situation.
Click to expand...
Well, change it to a Panzer V "Panther"
One of the 2 best all-round tanks in WWII.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Dirty Bird said:
You do know the Sherman Tank is one of the most useless tanks ever and could be destroyed by 1 hit?
Click to expand...

Yeah but Shermans were easy to produce. Sheer numbers made up for the weaknesses in its design. ;)

But your right that comparing Tex to a Sherman isn't really fair. I'd say he's more of a Panther Mark V. :thumbsu:

Dirty Bird said:
Well, change it to a Panzer V "Panther"
One of the 2 best all-round tanks in WWII.
Click to expand...

Wow you beat me to it :thumbsu:
 
Phantom21 said:
I am confident that unfortunately Danger has broken a rib or at the very least sustained a hairline fracture when Tex landed on him. There is just no way you could have Tex land on a person and not break something.

Fingers crossed he may still play R1.
Click to expand...
No problem then, as Danger is much more than simply a person.
 
Dirty Bird said:
Well, change it to a Panzer V "Panther"
One of the 2 best all-round tanks in WWII.
Click to expand...

Actually, the Panther was rubbish. It was over engineered, and had massive issues with the drive train, that would disintegrate if you tried to neutral turn, or even drove it quickly. Like the Tiger, it has an overblown reputation thanks largely to the History Hitler Channel. Strong frontal armour and a high power gun aren't the only things that make a great tank.

The Sherman on the other hand was a very good tank, especially the definitive M4A3E8 "Easy Eight" version. It was reliable, versatile, cheap on fuel, and cheap to manufacture. For best all-around tank I would have accepted Sherman, T-34 or Panzer IV as a correct answer - the late war stuff the Soviets put out was terrifying, but scarcely got a chance to fight.

It's amusing that you fault the Sherman for exploding after one hit, when the Panther, Tiger and even King Tiger would equally burn up in a single hit from a Soviet 122 or 152mm round, or a US 90mm, or a British 17pdr. All tanks blow up with one penetrating hit, that's the point - and those Soviet rounds didn't even have to do that, the shock from the HE explosion would shatter low quality German armour plate, blow off turrets and kill the crew with the shock wave.

Strongly suggest reading this article about post-war evaluations of the Panther, from an excellent researcher attached to the company that makes this game.

All of this is totally unrelated to Walker and Dangerfield
 
NTRabbit said:
Actually, the Panther was rubbish. It was over engineered, and had massive issues with the drive train, that would disintegrate if you tried to neutral turn, or even drove it quickly. The only thing it had going for it was a good suspension system, and very good ability to pass over soft terrain for a tank of that weight. Like the Tiger, it has an overblown reputation thanks largely to the History Hitler Channel

The Sherman on the other hand was a very good tank, especially the definitive M4A3E8 "Easy Eight" version. It was reliable, versatile, cheap on fuel, and cheap to manufacture.

Strongly suggest reading this article about post-war evaluations of the Panther, from an excellent researcher attached to the company that makes this game.
Click to expand...

The early Panthers we're rushed into combat and Germans hadn't ironed out all the bugs. They improved the Panther's considerably in a small time amount of time though. By the end of the war they we're a very effective tank that was hampered by the fact Germany we're losing the war. It doesn't matter how good your tanks are when the army has no air-support and are in full retreat.

Sherman was an awesome tank though. Agree with all the points you made.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Mr_Moogle said:
The early Panthers we're rushed into combat and Germans hadn't ironed out all the bugs. They improved the Panther's considerably in a small time amount of time though. By the end of the war they we're a very effective tank that was hampered by the fact Germany we're losing the war. It doesn't matter how good your tanks are when the army has no air-support and are in full retreat.

Sherman was an awesome tank though. Agree with all the points you made.
Click to expand...

The problems with the final drive and engine reliability were never ironed out, as evidenced by the French tests, and the armour quality got worse as the war went on. The use of interleaved road wheels also made field maintenance a nightmare, as with the Tiger.

By the end of the war they were effective in that they had a good long range gun and were fighting almost entirely from defensive positions against the Soviets, where they didn't really need to drive anywhere but backwards, but holding on any longer would have seen them facing the IS-3, which was totally frontally invulnerable to the Panther gun at any range, while being at least as mobile, and having an order of magnitude higher firepower. In the West, they were unable to cope with the terrain as well, and like all German armour were punished by total Allied air superiority.
 
Mr_Moogle said:
Yeah but Shermans were easy to produce. Sheer numbers made up for the weaknesses in its design. ;)

But your right that comparing Tex to a Sherman isn't really fair. I'd say he's more of a Panther Mark V. :thumbsu:



Wow you beat me to it :thumbsu:
Click to expand...
If its numbers for effectiveness ill take a T-34/85
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom