Hall/Thompson

[chef]

The only thing that has annoyed me was Eade's blatant bullshit after the game. Saying North "attacked" him in groups or that we were sniping because some of his bloke had cut heads (Dylan Addison to get weeks for cutting Gia's head, IMO). Barry got angry, put a bloke in a sleeper hold. Thompson can look after himself, so that's just a by product of the way he goes about it. Rocket needs to get his shit right, and I hope he is called on it though I suspect he won't.

He did, North went the man and not the ball. Even your own David King(while commentating) was annoyed that some of your players were ducking their heads or pulling out of contests when the ball was there to be won, but if a cheap hit was there to be taken then they they took it.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Re: Barry Hall has cracked!

Hall did nothing wrong, Thompson asked for it.

And then Barry was doing nothing at all and was getting flung and dragged by Thompson.

Really?

Let's have a look: http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=710812

Yep. Completely innocent. Poor ol Bazza Hall.

The response to this incident has done nothing but support my belief that the majority of the Australian population are mindless idiots that believe whatever they are told to believe by the media.

Baaaaaa.

 

[RoyalBlue]

He did, North went the man and not the ball. Even your own David King(while commentating) was annoyed that some of your players were ducking their heads or pulling out of contests when the ball was there to be won, but if a cheap hit was there to be taken then they they took it.

Champ, David King is not our own.

Not by a ****ing long stretch.

 

[G-Mo77]

Claims that North 'targetted' Giansiracusa are just that without any proof. I would suggest that if there was anything untoward going on it should have or will get picked up - somehow I doubt that anything will come of it.

So you're saying that he didn't get hit?

Not sure how it showed on TV but Gia was hit with a really cheap on mid way through the 4th. If there is no footage of it then it did not happen and Eade is making things up, sorry if that is not your theory but that is how it sounds.

 

[RoyalBlue]

So you're saying that he didn't get hit?

Not sure how it showed on TV but Gia was hit with a really cheap on mid way through the 4th. If there is no footage of it then it did not happen and Eade is making things up, sorry if that is not your theory but that is how it sounds.

Happened in front of us out on the wing, it was after he'd kicked it, it didn't contact his head.

Gia went down like a bag of shit.

I don't know why either side of this debate is bothering to bring it up.

 

[GarnerSmash]

So you're saying that he didn't get hit?

Not sure how it showed on TV but Gia was hit with a really cheap on mid way through the 4th. If there is no footage of it then it did not happen and Eade is making things up, sorry if that is not your theory but that is how it sounds.

You cross that white line you take what's coming as long as it is within the rules. Firrito hit both Hahn and Gia with solid bumps after they disposed of the ball, both of which the umpires saw and let go. It's football ffs. Gia got cleaned up good and proper and somehow Eade has convinced the world that North did nothing but take cheap shots at him all day long.

Deflection much??

 

[Z_K]

He did, North went the man and not the ball. Even your own David King(while commentating) was annoyed that some of your players were ducking their heads or pulling out of contests when the ball was there to be won, but if a cheap hit was there to be taken then they they took it.

He just described his own career. I hold his opinion in no higher regard than yours.

Rocket said, with reference to these big, bad North blokes (5 teenagers in the side, average age of 23 and games experience of 66, midfield average ago of about 13) targetting his defenseless bunch (oldest, most experience team in the comp) that two of them had cut heads. A reach, at best.

I have no real opinion on Barry Hall other than Scott Thompson is a pest and has been for two years and Barry Hall did what he has done for years and snapped. No-one was hurt. Thompson will do exactly the same thing next time the sides play. Barry will be no more targetted than whoever Thompson plays on next week.

 

[NQTIGER]

Browns as tough as they get and if you think otherwise then you havent watched him play much, he cops as much as he gives. Jackson was pissed cos Brown got him a good hip and shoulder earlier on . Brown verbalises the players as well, if they cant handle it they should pick a different job I reckon. Browns incident and Thompsons are hardly alike, I didnt see Brown go and knee someone while they were doing their laces up!

Look at the replay you idiot, after jackson fronted him he went squealing to the umpires.......a sniper the apple doesnt fall far from the tree.

 

[G-Mo77]

You cross that white line you take what's coming as long as it is within the rules. Firrito hit both Hahn and Gia with solid bumps after they disposed of the ball, both of which the umpires saw and let go. It's football ffs. Gia got cleaned up good and proper and somehow Eade has convinced the world that North did nothing but take cheap shots at him all day long.

Deflection much??

Oh well if they were clean bumps then they'll get off then. Were they shown on the telecast? I haven't seen it yet.

The Gia one looked late and high from my perspective though.

 

[NQTIGER]

Champ, David King is not our own.

Not by a ****ing long stretch.

well we aint claiming him either

 

[Beckers]

Barry will be no more targetted than whoever Thompson plays on next week.

And well done to Thompson for that Our defenders (looking at you Murphy and Gilham!) just invite Barry to kick bags on them every time then give him a kiss and cuddle after the game. Its a disgrace!!!!

 

[jacko57]

Oh well if they were clean bumps then they'll get off then. Were they shown on the telecast? I haven't seen it yet.

The Gia one looked late and high from my perspective though.

The bump on Hahn was as he handpassed, not even wortha free downfield. The bump on Gia was worth a free downfield (which was paid) because he connected after the kick ; not reportable because (despite what Johnno said) he didn't collect him high, and had committed to the bump before the kick.

If this is the extent of the constant 'cheap shots' that Rocket says occurred all day, I can only conclude it's a smokescreen, designed to portray Barry as the victim and somehow get him out of the suspension that's headed his way.

 

[shintemaster]

Oh well if they were clean bumps then they'll get off then. Were they shown on the telecast? I haven't seen it yet.

The Gia one looked late and high from my perspective though.

Nah. If you want to hang on to the ball that's what happens, these players understand that and deliberately wait until the last second to dispose of it in order to have the defender committ to the contest - good chance Gia will blink a little earlier next time Spud is running at him, which is the idea I guess.

Everyone complains in recent years about the bump getting outlawed, but it was an absolutely textbook bump and was allowed because of that (beyond the free obviously).

 

[Sedat!]

Maybe we were at different games.........I won't categorically say you're wrong, because you see the game from where you're sitting.

But I will say this : I have seen Hansen take enough contested marks backing into the pack this year to have no worries about his courage. A few contested balls where a Dogs player managed to get the pill? Maybe that was good play on Cooney's (or whoever's part)? I certainly saw a few North blokes (Ziebell, Swallow etc) win contested balls, I doubt you would say that means your blokes were short-stepping, right?

A couple of missed marking opportunities where 2 players left the ball for each other? Not great, but again, not what I'd call convincing proof of cowardice ; more likely, lack of talk, experience & confidence.

As for horrendous days at the office : sadly, we had more than our share under Laidley. We may have a few more under Scott, but hopefully it's short term pain for long term, gain.

Short steps was probably ther wrong choice of words by me in my earlier post. What I did see was clear hesitation and indecision from North players on several occasions when there was a disputed ball that was in stark contrast to the single-minded intent from the Bulldogs players in the same situation - I found that very surprised to see from players wearing a North Melbourne jumper. That's not to say the North players in question consistently don't attack the football but they were certainly well short of the required standard of attack on the contest on Saturday.

I find it extremely surprising that some senior North posters on this thread (not yourself), who should really know better, are actually praising the performance of the players from an intensity perspective. The Dogs have had enormous trouble against North for the best part of 6 years and the one constant from North teams is that they have pure commitment at the disputed ball and the contest - Saturday's performance from North based on that measurement was a mile off the traditional North standard and was a mile off the Bulldog standard on the day.

By the way, I have been extremely complimentary of Swallow throughout the thread. His intent at the contested ball was first-rate all day.

 

[keeno 111]

scoreboard!!!

I love your username, And your little scoreboard reply, It shows how much of a life you have.

 

[King Elvis]

Re: Scott Thompson, brave or stupid?

i think it's both brave and stupid for obvious reasons

lol at people throwing a hissy fit for pushing a player trying to do his shoelaces up though, as though this has never been done before. I'd bet large money that every single one of our clubs has had a player do this to the opposition before. never seen a port player do it but i'd bet one has. it's stupid to do because it prevents someone from being able to play, but don't act all shocked and throw around all these descriptions as if it's never happened before when a player you support has done it

No issues with it - if Hall (or any player) was allowed to retaliate.

Niggling is part of the game, but the AFL these days protect the guys who niggle, so they can do it a hell of a lot more than they used to... It used to be up to the players themselves - niggle all you want, but do it knowing full well you might cop one when the other guy has enough of it.

 

[WALL-e]

Re: Scott Thompson, brave or stupid?

No issues with it - if Hall (or any player) was allowed to retaliate.

Niggling is part of the game, but the AFL these days protect the guys who niggle, so they can do it a hell of a lot more than they used to... It used to be up to the players themselves - niggle all you want, but do it knowing full well you might cop one when the other guy has enough of it.

This for me.

If you can't retaliate, should you be able to niggle.

Fine them both for wrestling, but Thompson knew full well what would happen and got the result he wanted. Otherwise, get on with it, the players sorted it out themselves because the umpires couldn't.

 

[Last Line Hero]

It is embarrassing the hysteria that has reigned in favour of Barry Hall over the incidents that transpired in Saturday's Western Bulldogs v. North Melbourne clash.

Anyone who knows North Melbourne understands full well that Scott Thompson is a perennial pest, even his teammates will confirm that is the case. Each week, no matter who his assignment may be, Thomspon will employ an array of pesky tactics to get under the skin of and harrass his opponents, including pinching.

Frankly, there is nothing wrong with it. At all. And the uproar against his defensive mechanisms by the media and some fans has been nothing short of pathetic.

Provided that their actions are within the bounds of AFL rules, a defender can, and should have every right to do whatever they like to niggle a forward. With the game played the way it is today where key forwards are nothing short of a protected species, defenders have to take every opportunity they can to physically and or mentally manipulate an opponent, in many instances, it their only choice.

Yes, it might make players and fans alike hate him, and perhaps not respect him, but it's his perogative to do whatever neccessary (and I stress, all legally), and our job is to accept that that is just the way it is sometimes in football. Some defenders do it, some don't but it's their choice whether they do or not.

Full- backs from a by-gone era would be appalled at the criticism directed towards Scott Thompson for merely hasseling Hall in a time when you can't chop arms, place hands in the back, use your body to push- out etc. They'd tell you he was just doing what he could to bait a volatile opponent and put him off his game, they may even say it was smart on Thomspn's behalf.

Maybe Rodney Eade should just sit back, stop being so precious and look at the era Barry Hall is playing in and realise that he does have it pretty damn easy, and if he were any more protected he'd be more at risk of physical ailment doing ballet.

I'd love to see Rocket appealing for protection for full- backs when Barry Hall enforces petty tactics such as squirting them with his water bottle. As much of a gutterish "dog-act" as anything Thompson did on the weekend. But he never would would he?

May I just finish by saying that Barry Hall deserves everything he gets, after the years of blatant and malicious thuggery he has exhibited on the football field. And the fact he could not turn and face Scott Thompson like a man and shake his hand and say "that's football" after the game, when the defender came to him, was more unsportsmanly and cowardly than anything.

I wonder if he'd expected the same from Staker after he king hit him? Doubt it.

 

[King Elvis]

Re: Scott Thompson, brave or stupid?

Apart from the Sumich sleeper, Danny didn't do much. Libba did have a bit of mongrel in him agreed. However he was in that older era and he always coped a lot of punches for his dirty work on the field. Every game Libba was off with blood round his noggin which he deserved for being a niggling little bastard.

That's exactly right, and how it should be.

Niggle all you want, but when you get a touch-up in return, you wear it.

Don't run crying to the Umpires.

 

[Beckers]

May I just finish by saying that Barry Hall deserves everything he gets, after the years of blatant and malicious thuggery he has exhibited on the football field. And the fact he could not turn and face Scott Thompson like a man and shake his hand and say "that's football" after the game, when the defender came to him, was more unsportsmanly and cowardly than anything.

I wonder if he'd expected the same from Staker after he king hit him? Doubt it.

Awesome post....especially the closing paragraph. Not shaking hands after the game just goes to show that Barry is still a short fused sook!

 

[Andrew Mc]

Maybe Rodney Eade should just sit back, stop being so precious and look at the era Barry Hall is playing in and realise that he does have it pretty damn easy, and if he were any more protected he'd be more at risk of physical ailment doing ballet.

Thompson would be lucky to get a game in eras past. If he did, he'd spend a good amount of it concussed.

 

[Sedat!]

Anyone who knows North Melbourne understands full well that Scott Thompson is a perennial pest, even his teammates will confirm that is the case. Each week, no matter who his assignment may be, Thomspon will employ an array of pesky tactics to get under the skin of and harrass his opponents, including pinching.

Frankly, there is nothing wrong with it. At all. And the uproar against his defensive mechanisms by the media and some fans has been nothing short of pathetic.

Provided that their actions are within the bounds of AFL rules, a defender can, and should have every right to do whatever they like to niggle a forward. With the game played the way it is today where key forwards are nothing short of a protected species, defenders have to take every opportunity they can to physically and or mentally manipulate an opponent, in many instances, it their only choice.

Couldn't care less about 'spirit of the game' fluff being discussed about Thompson's tactics, nor do I care about Hall's history of indiscretions for which he has already been punished. All I care about is seeing the umpires apply the rules of the game consistently. That did not happen on Saturday. That the standard for this off the ball harrassment of key forwards rule was set in last year's premilinary final and carried over into the first 3-4 rounds this season (North posters who shouted indignation at Hansen's off the ball free kick in Round 2 against Reiwoldt are looking mighty stupid now), and Thompson broke this rulle 100+ times on Saturday. All the irrelevent discussion on Hall and Thompson is masking the fact the the umpires miserably failed in doing what they are actually paid to do and duly lost control of the match accordingly. I hope they all have a spell in the bush for their troubles.

 

[Flawed Genius]

firritto cleaning up giansiracusa well after he kicked the ball in the last quarter, which resulted in gia having to go off with a suspected concussion and a down the ground free kick.

Legitimate bump, don't know what you're whinging about.

 

[Mofra]

Full- backs from a by-gone era would be appalled at the criticism directed towards Scott Thompson for merely hasseling Hall in a time when you can't chop arms, place hands in the back, use your body to push- out etc. They'd tell you he was just doing what he could to bait a volatile opponent and put him off his game, they may even say it was smart on Thomspn's behalf.

Mick Martyn already disagrees with you.

If a Judd or Riewoldt had been subjected to the same treatment, they would have had multiple frees (and in Riewoldt's case, possibly a police escort by the end of the game!).

Umpires should simply exercise some consistency.

 

[memberforever]

after the years of blatant and malicious thuggery he has exhibited on the football field. .

Bit like Mooney - a thug, is that what your saying.