Autopsy Geelong lose to Port by 11 points

[Spearman]

There was not a single thing gutless about it.. And to be honest i would love to see every single one of our players play with that intent and aggression.
The best teams in any sport play on the edge, if you can impact a contest or get your opponent you do.

I think in order to know if it was a good hit or not we have to ask, "What would Max Rooke have done?"

 

[Spearman]

Agree to disagree

I didn’t see it as a contest , rather a player smashing into a kid side on who had his hands on the ball mid air and was unable to defend himself.

that's why its called a hospital pass.
I find it interesting in Aussie Rules that you can hit/tackle hard but not too hard. As if you need a slide rule to calculate the amount of force you are generating with the momentum you have build up... It was that shepherd on Koschitzke I think, where someone ruled that because he was so unaware the guy should have pulled up a bit, or something like that. You can tackle someone, but can't really lay your shoulder into their breadbasket football style.
So you can hit a guy reaching up, in the side but not the back?

 

[Strange Cat]

that's why its called a hospital pass.
I find it interesting in Aussie Rules that you can hit/tackle hard but not too hard. As if you need a slide rule to calculate the amount of force you are generating with the momentum you have build up... It was that shepherd on Koschitzke I think, where someone ruled that because he was so unaware the guy should have pulled up a bit, or something like that. You can tackle someone, but can't really lay your shoulder into their breadbasket football style.
So you can hit a guy reaching up, in the side but not the back?

That’s a better way of what I was attempting to say with my posts

I felt that the shoulder into the ribs was enough force to do some damage considering he was mid air and taking a mark unaware of the side hit.

Luckily it didn’t result in an injury but was it a necessary fair hit?

I would say no when you consider everything prior to the hit, but port were running around at the time hitting our players and trying to act tough.

 

[Spearman]

That’s a better way of what I was attempting to say with my posts

I felt that the shoulder into the ribs was enough force to do some damage considering he was mid air and taking a mark unaware of the side hit.

Luckily it didn’t result in an injury but was it a necessary fair hit?

I would say no when you consider everything prior to the hit, but port were running around at the time hitting our players and trying to act tough.

Where's Ruggles when you need him.

 

[Hinkley29]

I thought I did too, but now that looks like a mirage.

Again, so one bad performance erases 3 months of evidence that the team has changed?

Ok

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

Again, so one bad performance erases 3 months of evidence that the team has changed?

Ok

My Point of view has been well covered in this thread. I can't be bothered going back over it.

 

[Nickoo]

There was not a single thing gutless about it.. And to be honest i would love to see every single one of our players play with that intent and aggression.
The best teams in any sport play on the edge, if you can impact a contest or get your opponent you do.

What if he lost a kidney? Lucky he didn’t get a broken rib. He had no intense eyes for the ball. So his only intent was to hurt. Prefer intent for the ball. Lindsay Thomas got done for the same thing last year. It’s easy to snipe, hard to do things knowing you are going to get hurt.

But I do get and agree your intent about a lack of intent from Geelong satnight. Hope we rag doll Adel this week and they do same to port week after.

Hawthorn were always a team known to play on the edge but I only know them as snipers and dirty players. Are we saying that that’s what it takes Geelong to go ‘next level’? That’s a huge comment and deserves its own Fred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Willo_]

I think in order to know if it was a good hit or not we have to ask, "What would Max Rooke have done?"

Rooke, Scarlo, Moons and Dasher all would have done the exact same thing Hartlett did


And we all would have loved the s**t out of it

 

[Max Milburn]

Rooke, Scarlo, Moons and Dasher all would have done the exact same thing Hartlett did


And we all would have loved the **** out of it

You betcha.

 

[you pick one]

I thought Stewart's two big tackles were terrific,Just what I'd been waiting for all year and both got penalized,tuff calls.

 

[you pick one]

Rooke, Scarlo, Moons and Dasher all would have done the exact same thing Hartlett did


And we all would have loved the **** out of it

James Kelly would have cut him in half.

 

[you pick one]

That’s a better way of what I was attempting to say with my posts

I felt that the shoulder into the ribs was enough force to do some damage considering he was mid air and taking a mark unaware of the side hit.

Luckily it didn’t result in an injury but was it a necessary fair hit?

I would say no when you consider everything prior to the hit, but port were running around at the time hitting our players and trying to act tough.

He wasn't taking a mark for starters it was a shitfull hand ball I think from Kolojazthingo,Henry was set up and taken out quite legitimately,the perfect hit in my eyes.

 

[And_ROOS]

No eyes on the ball, cannons into his back, clearly not his side like others claimed, was never going for the ball.

Complete dog act, and had Hawkins done that he would have gotten a minimum FK and 50, and probably a week.

Still a dog act. Hospital handball? Absolutely. But still a s**t thing Hartlett did.

 

[you pick one]

View attachment 698973

No eyes on the ball, cannons into his back, clearly not his side like others claimed, was never going for the ball.

Complete dog act, and had Hawkins done that he would have gotten a minimum FK and 50, and probably a week.

Still a dog act. Hospital handball? Absolutely. But still a **** thing Hartlett did.

That's 3 or 4 frames to early,useless still shot.

 

[Cattery]

My Point of view has been well covered in this thread. I can't be bothered going back over it.

Can't say I blame ya mate, think what you say below is fairly straight forward (and we won't know till September whether you're correct or not) don't think it really needs multiple posts to try disproving what is really just a prediction from you.

And I really can't see how anybody could argue with your statement that Geelong are good in the H&A season and poor in finals, that kinda stands out like the proverbial I would have thought.

In it's simplest form
Geelong are bad in Finals after being good in H&A
Geelong lose every game after the bye
In order to correct the Finals problem, I want to see sufficient change.
Losing after the bye is the key indicator we haven't made sufficient change
So, my prediction is, Geelong will still be bad in Finals.

 

[Partridge]

Rooke, Scarlo, Moons and Dasher all would have done the exact same thing Hartlett did

And we all would have loved the **** out of it

Forget those guys, I'll raise it to Gary Ablett senior, Garry Hocking, Damian Bourke, even Ray Card.

Nothing wrong with it. At all.

 

[Hinkley29]

Forget those guys, I'll raise it to Gary Ablett senior, Garry Hocking, Damian Bourke, even Ray Card.

Nothing wrong with it. At all.

The game and expectations of player on field conduct has changed a lot since those guys played. Pretty meaningless comparison really.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

Geez I copped it in this thread.

 

[And_ROOS]

Geez I copped it in this thread.

"In it's simplest form
Geelong are bad in Finals after being good in H&A
Geelong lose every game after the bye
In order to correct the Finals problem, I want to see sufficient change.
Losing after the bye is the key indicator we haven't made sufficient change
So, my prediction is, Geelong will still be bad in Finals."

I have been saying this as well since the bye, and lo and behold look at Fridays result...