AFL Autopsy Loss to Richmond - Rd 11 2018

[Stopher]

Just quietly, Baguley turns barely 90 degrees and Martin is in trouble for tunnelling. Fine lines.

 

[Summer Nights]

Well I do not have the time to go back and watch every game again on my phone or any other device I own.
So you must be right. Hurley is the greatest defender ever who never gets goals kicked on him, picks up every man and also has no one even have any goal assists on him or points kicked on him. Shit we better pay in $5,000,000 a season next time his contract comes up.
Of course you have listed everyone who has kicked a goal on him so not only I am just making up stuff to suite myself everyone else is also wrong and Hurley has simply been in electric form this year. Give him the Brownlow now. Well done. Maybe we can sign you as our next coach.

Lol I thought you said to leave it be?

 

[MarkG]

Mark they tackled him.
It’s what players do in our game.
Players tackle with intent and ferocity. Sometimes players get hurt, thankfully most of the time they don’t.

It’s natural for teams to monster players that have question marks hanging over their heads regarding softness. I’ve seen our own club do it.

However the notion that they deliberately set out to injure or maim a player is just plain wrong and way off the mark.

Sorry mate.

It is more than just softness that they monster players for.. also if they are carrying injuries. Curnow on Ablett when he was at the Suns, Baker on Stevie J are examples. The way that Martin charged into Baguley makes me wonder if Bags was sore in the ribs pre this game.

If you read what I said it was "take him out". I didn't specifically say they set about to injure him. But read into it whatever you like. Jay20 read this as deliberately injuring him.

Some players play with sore spots, such as Dylan Shiel for GWS and David Zaharakis.
Both have heavy padding on their shoulders.

Tigers took out Shiel in last years preliminary final, crunched him on his sore shoulder in a similar way to what they did to Zaka. Shiel played the game out, but you could see that he was sore and played below par for the rest of the game.

Zaka went off the ground with what may or may not be a broken collarbone. He was crunched on his sore shoulder. The Tigers took him out (removed him from being an influence on the game).

If Tigers can remove one of your prime ball movers from the contest, they will set about getting that job done. As will many other teams.

 

[JayJ20]

Was Martin going for the ball when he hit Baguley in the gut?

I specifically highlighted the Zaharakis incident in my post. Martin was going for the man and not the ball. Don't think he set out to seriously injure Baguley, but that was pretty dangerous.

Zaharakis however went for the ball, couple of players landed on him in a tackle and he hit the ground in an awkward position. That's not deliberately trying to injure him.

Sure mate. And McIntosh didn't deliberately backhand Merrett in the JLT and Martin didn't deliberately charge Baguley.

They were brutal at Zaharakis every time he went near the ball.

It wasn't just Zaharakis. They were brutal for the majority of the game. It's why they won by 71 points. They were physically imposing and strong in the contest.

Being strong around the contest is considered to be a positive. Deliberately injuring players is called sniping

 

[Summer Nights]

The problem with this team is that they seem to believe it will all just come together at the right time. It doesn’t work like that. You have to make it happen.

 

[BrunoV]

Putting my dislike of Baguley to the side, I thought that Martin's bump was more than fair enough and perfectly executed (because it hurt and there is no conceivable way he can get reported for it unless the AFL changes the rules on the fly).

We keep hearing that 'it's okay to bump' and the AFL has even reversed the position in relation to contact to the head.

There is no point at which I'd want to see Martin suspended or even disciplined for that action. If it were a neutral occurrence and the player in Martin's position was suspended all we'd be hearing about is 'the death of the game' or some other hyperbole.

 

[Blind Turn]

Putting my dislike of Baguley to the side, I thought that Martin's bump was more than fair enough and perfectly executed (because it hurt and there is no conceivable way he can get reported for it unless the AFL changes the rules on the fly).

We keep hearing that 'it's okay to bump' and the AFL has even reversed the position in relation to contact to the head.

There is no point at which I'd want to see Martin suspended or even disciplined for that action. If it were a neutral occurrence and the player in Martin's position was suspended all we'd be hearing about is 'the death of the game' or some other hyperbole.

Without having looked at the rule book, what constitutes a ‘charge’ these days? Is there a consideration for when the player has the choice to tackle? I would have thought the tackle was an option for sure. When a player is opened up like Baguley was there are real dangers of internal trauma. And I love a good fair bump as much as the next bloke.

 

[Mootsy]

I don’t like saying it, but our senior group is where this team falls apart. The best 22 just doesn’t work currently. So it’s not best 22.

I think the recruiting since the saga has been great and the SSS recruits. All great.

We need to start letting go of senior players that don’t give consistent efforts and start recruiting more naturally skilled footballers and ball winners.

Also give games to players performing, vfl or not. Rookie or senior.

We need a Mitchell type midfielder and just confident footballers.

Enough of gifting players 10 seasons of mediocrity.

Imagine if you as a player struggles for ten years, even you would be questioning why you are being selected at all. You’d be thinking, maybe I should be doing something else so Essendon football club can move forwards.

 

[mike14]

Without having looked at the rule book, what constitutes a ‘charge’ these days? Is there a consideration for when the player has the choice to tackle? I would have thought the tackle was an option for sure. When a player is opened up like Baguley was there are real dangers of internal trauma. And I love a good fair bump as much as the next bloke.

As is the usual case with the AFL rulebook, the definition of a charge isn't really that helpful:
15.4.4
Charge or Charging
(a) A Charge means an act of a Player colliding with an opposition
Player where the amount of physical force used is unreasonable
or unnecessary in the circumstances, irrespective of whether the
Player is or is not in possession of the football or whether the
Player is within 5 metres of the football.
(b) Without limiting the general application of Law 15.4.4 (a), a
Charge occurs when a Player unreasonably or unnecessarily
collides with an opposition Player:
(i) who is not within 5 metres of the football;
(ii) who, although within 5 metres of the football, is not in
the immediate contest for the football and would not
reasonably expect such contact;
(iii) who is attempting to Mark the football or who has Marked
the football or been awarded a Free Kick;
(i v) after that Player has disposed of the football;
(v) who is Shepherding another Player on their Team; or
(v i) before the football is brought into play

Was it 'unnecessary' 'unreasonable'? I have no idea how an umpire is meant to judge that.
If Baguley have been taken high then it would have been a reportable incident (and I'd be interested to see the ruling if he'd never taken possession). As it wasn't, it has to be considered a bump and then the only time 'unreasonable' contact comes in to it is when you have your head down over the ball.

 

[Beerfish]

Putting my dislike of Baguley to the side, I thought that Martin's bump was more than fair enough and perfectly executed (because it hurt and there is no conceivable way he can get reported for it unless the AFL changes the rules on the fly).

We keep hearing that 'it's okay to bump' and the AFL has even reversed the position in relation to contact to the head.

There is no point at which I'd want to see Martin suspended or even disciplined for that action. If it were a neutral occurrence and the player in Martin's position was suspended all we'd be hearing about is 'the death of the game' or some other hyperbole.

Yeah I was fine with that too. I'd much rather see them get pinged for dropping the ball/incorrect disposal which never seemed to happen.

No doubting we're our own worst enemies though.

 

[VelvetSledge]

I've had time to cool off on the performance now. I was super frustrated and angry but some perspective is nice.

Looking at our form heading into the Geelong game, if you told me that we would win 2 of our next 3 then I would have taken that in a heartbeat.

Can only try to get back on track against Brisbane, who, while look much better, shouldn't be a match for us if we're on.

 

[DonsRule]

Putting my dislike of Baguley to the side, I thought that Martin's bump was more than fair enough and perfectly executed (because it hurt and there is no conceivable way he can get reported for it unless the AFL changes the rules on the fly).

We keep hearing that 'it's okay to bump' and the AFL has even reversed the position in relation to contact to the head.

There is no point at which I'd want to see Martin suspended or even disciplined for that action. If it were a neutral occurrence and the player in Martin's position was suspended all we'd be hearing about is 'the death of the game' or some other hyperbole.

Yep, I had no issue with that at all.

I think we need some players that are going to go harder at the man a little like that.

I think in that kinda of incident Martin (or anyone) needs to be careful if you run through them too hard, taking their feet some under them it could be dangerous but I don't think this was anything like that. Martin did try to 'hurt' Bags but I think he was limited enough in it too.

I think most of us would have been happy that was one of our players doing it to him..

 

[Bombermania]

I thought the Martin bump was fine, people seem to forget that juniors are taught to bump before they learn to tackle because it is deemed safer.

I hated that rule and every time talk about the bump comes up it reminds me of when I was playing in under 10s and I laid what could only be described as a beautiful tackle, yet was pinged because you were only allowed to bump until under 11s.

The irony of people talking about the aggression from Richmond is that we often marvel at the brute force of the 2000 side which would have lined Dusty up after that bump.

 

[eDPS]

This is a cracker

 

[Mootsy]

Amazing! Just, Amazing!

 

[TheDinosaur]

first comment on the night (after a tirade of umpire/afl abuse) was "this will be a shooting stars meme in no time"

 

[peternorth]

Hi,

I come in peace.

Had the unfortunate experience of sitting close to an intoxicated west coast supporter, and his freo mate, the other night. Although the eagle was barracking for your team, the inappropriate language with kids behind us was disgusting (c bombs galore). What shocked people around us, myself included, was his cheering for Tipungwuti, calling him "black predator". Now I myself have likened him to the Predator for his haircut and fearless approach....but whether its PC or not, the word "black" just made it cringeworthy and unpleasant. I take it it's likely supporters call him predator, but one hopes that "black predator" with such connotation is few and far between.

 

[Runk]

Hi,

I come in peace.

Had the unfortunate experience of sitting close to an intoxicated west coast supporter, and his freo mate, the other night. Although the eagle was barracking for your team, the inappropriate language with kids behind us was disgusting (c bombs galore). What shocked people around us, myself included, was his cheering for Tipungwuti, calling him "black predator". Now I myself have likened him to the Predator for his haircut and fearless approach....but whether its PC or not, the word "black" just made it cringeworthy and unpleasant. I take it it's likely supporters call him predator, but one hopes that "black predator" with such connotation is few and far between.

Tbh I've never heard him be called that.
We used to refer to Michael 'Pig' Hibberd as Predator for a while on here with an outstanding shit your pants tackle on Marc Murphy a few years ago.
I hope that kid has been given a few choice words by someone who would know better nonetheless.

 

[Maddogm]

Rance fined for staging

 

[Lore]

Hi,

I come in peace.

Had the unfortunate experience of sitting close to an intoxicated west coast supporter, and his freo mate, the other night. Although the eagle was barracking for your team, the inappropriate language with kids behind us was disgusting (c bombs galore). What shocked people around us, myself included, was his cheering for Tipungwuti, calling him "black predator". Now I myself have likened him to the Predator for his haircut and fearless approach....but whether its PC or not, the word "black" just made it cringeworthy and unpleasant. I take it it's likely supporters call him predator, but one hopes that "black predator" with such connotation is few and far between.

Seems unusual. I usually sit in general admission and don't hear nearly as many racist comments about him as I might have expected. I've seen security remove people for less offensive stuff than "black predator", usually see them prowling about a few times a game. I also have a reserved seat but that area is even tamer (I sit in reserved when I'm alone or in GA if I go with others). Most people just yell TIPPAAA or WALLAAA every time he gets near it, and that's about the end of it. Most of the silly racist comments I usually hear in front of the TV from people in their 70s or 80s "that little black one goes alright" type of thing. Younger people typically know better.

 

[sameolds33]

I specifically highlighted the Zaharakis incident in my post. Martin was going for the man and not the ball. Don't think he set out to seriously injure Baguley, but that was pretty dangerous.

Zaharakis however went for the ball, couple of players landed on him in a tackle and he hit the ground in an awkward position. That's not deliberately trying to injure him.


It wasn't just Zaharakis. They were brutal for the majority of the game. It's why they won by 71 points. They were physically imposing and strong in the contest.

Being strong around the contest is considered to be a positive. Deliberately injuring players is called sniping

So how does Nic Nat's bump fit into this analysis?

 

[peternorth]

Seems unusual. I usually sit in general admission and don't hear nearly as many racist comments about him as I might have expected. I've seen security remove people for less offensive stuff than "black predator", usually see them prowling about a few times a game. I also have a reserved seat but that area is even tamer (I sit in reserved when I'm alone or in GA if I go with others). Most people just yell TIPPAAA or WALLAAA every time he gets near it, and that's about the end of it. Most of the silly racist comments I usually hear in front of the TV from people in their 70s or 80s "that little black one goes alright" type of thing. Younger people typically know better.

The bloke was in his 40s. But I see what you mean.

I love the way tippa goes about it though. great for the game

 

[Runk]

The bloke was in his 40s. But I see what you mean.

I love the way tippa goes about it though. great for the game

Are you Luke Darcy?

 

[threeleggedgoat]

Are you Luke Darcy?

Absolutely elite observation

 

[peternorth]

Are you Luke Darcy?

He does sound like Darce, doesn't he?