Negating Naitanui

[bzparkes]

Doesnt change the fact that it is a shit rule brought in to curtail the ultimate big bodied ruckman (Primus) and advantage the younger athletic ruckman.

What the argument is about is that the ruckmen are taking Naitanui out instead of making a realistic attempt to go for the ball. Nothing wrong with good body work if you're still going for the ball. No different to shepherding someone out of a marking contest.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

What the argument is about is that the ruckmen are taking Naitanui out instead of making a realistic attempt to go for the ball. Nothing wrong with good body work if you're still going for the ball. No different to shepherding someone out of a marking contest.

Well at no stage on the weekend were they not making a realistic attempt to win the tap. In fact more often than not they did win the tap. What they did do is get their body between NickNat and the ball and initiate contact so that they could win the tap yet Woosha and Geish say it should have been a free?

 

[Portia]

Steve McKee made an entire career out of looking like he might go for the tap and not actually doing it.

 

[Eddie Dingle]

Steve McKee made an entire career out of looking like he might go for the tap and not actually doing it.

Obviously using the word career loosely there Porthos?

 

[Portia]

Well, you know. He did have multiple years in the AFL.

 

[bzparkes]

Well at no stage on the weekend were they not making a realistic attempt to win the tap. In fact more often than not they did win the tap. What they did do is get their body between NickNat and the ball and initiate contact so that they could win the tap yet Woosha and Geish say it should have been a free?

Like I said, I didn't watch the game so I don't know but for the head of the umpires to say there were a few frees missed, then there were a few frees missed. Noone's proposing rule changes here, just consistent umpiring.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Like I said, I didn't watch the game so I don't know but for the head of the umpires to say there were a few frees missed, then there were a few frees missed. Noone's proposing rule changes here, just consistent umpiring.

I am proposing rules changes! or at least interpretation changes.

If putting your body in between your oponent and the ball in a realistic attempt to win the centre tap is illegal (as Geish has suggested) then the contest has been swayed too far in favor of the leaner jumping jacks.

 

[bzparkes]

I am proposing rules changes! or at least interpretation changes.

If putting your body in between your oponent and the ball in a realistic attempt to win the centre tap is illegal (as Geish has suggested) then the contest has been swayed too far in favor of the leaner jumping jacks.

That's not what it's about. What it's about is that a few times, ruckmen have gone in at Naitanui to take him out of the contest and had no intention of going for the ball. Was quite noticeable against Melbourne where Jamar kept jumping at Naita with his knees and not making a realistic attempt to go for the ball. It's already illegal under the rules and there's no interpretation changes, Worsfold is just making Gieschen aware that it's happening and for some reason, the umpires aren't noticing, even though they're legetimate frees.

Understand?

 

[archiemoses]

That's not what it's about. What it's about is that a few times, ruckmen have gone in at Naitanui to take him out of the contest and had no intention of going for the ball. Was quite noticeable against Melbourne where Jamar kept jumping at Naita with his knees and not making a realistic attempt to go for the ball. It's already illegal under the rules and there's no interpretation changes, Worsfold is just making Gieschen aware that it's happening and for some reason, the umpires aren't noticing, even though they're legetimate frees.

Understand?

I understand you BZ

They are jealous they don't have anyone that can leap tall buildings.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

That's not what it's about. What it's about is that a few times, ruckmen have gone in at Naitanui to take him out of the contest and had no intention of going for the ball. Was quite noticeable against Melbourne where Jamar kept jumping at Naita with his knees and not making a realistic attempt to go for the ball. It's already illegal under the rules and there's no interpretation changes, Worsfold is just making Gieschen aware that it's happening and for some reason, the umpires aren't noticing, even though they're legetimate frees.

Understand?

I couldn't care less about Naitanui or Melbourne. Understand?!?!

If that is what they did then it should be against the rules and is.

This thread is about what happened at the PORT game. This is the Port board and you are the one trying to drag the thread off topic.

Geish has said that what the PORT players did (using the body whilst going for the ball) was against the rules and should have been a free. If that is the case the rules/interpretations need to be changed.

Understand?

 

[bzparkes]

Geish has said that what the PORT players did (using the body whilst going for the ball) was against the rules and should have been a free. If that is the case the rules/interpretations need to be changed.

I suggest you re-read what you've just written. If it's already against the rules, why do the rules/interpretations need to be changed? So it can be even more against the rules???

 

[Enviable Tradition]

I suggest you re-read what you've just written. If it's already against the rules, why do the rules/interpretations need to be changed? So it can be even more against the rules???

OMG you guys are simpletons. Because it is considered against the rules as they stand and it shouldn't be.

 

[bzparkes]

OMG you guys are simpletons. Because it is considered against the rules as they stand and it shouldn't be.

There's nothing wrong with bod contact in a ruck contest, that's not what this is about. Did you even read the article?? It's about opposition ruckmen using their bodies to block Naita's run at the ball without actually making a legitimate attempt to go for the ball themselves, which is against the rules. I didn't think this was a hard concept to understand? It's not like they said Port's ruckmen did this at every contest but Giesch did say there were a few frees that probably should've been awarded.

This isn't any different to how coaches whinge in the media about their best midfielders getting held illegally by taggers (Worsfold is good for having a sook about this one too).

 

[Enviable Tradition]

There's nothing wrong with bod contact in a ruck contest, that's not what this is about. Did you even read the article?? It's about opposition ruckmen using their bodies to block Naita's run at the ball without actually making a legitimate attempt to go for the ball themselves, which is against the rules. I didn't think this was a hard concept to understand? It's not like they said Port's ruckmen did this at every contest but Giesch did say there were a few frees that probably should've been awarded.

This isn't any different to how coaches whinge in the media about their best midfielders getting held illegally by taggers (Worsfold is good for having a sook about this one too).

And I have stated that the Port ruckman were going for the ball at the centre bouncesd on the weekend and that in fact they won the tap most of the time. Is that so hard to understand.

Now given that they went for the ball and won the taps and Geishan still thinks there is a problem with what they did then clearly the rule or the interpretation sucks.

 

[Portology]

And I have stated that the Port ruckman were going for the ball at the centre bouncesd on the weekend and that in fact they won the tap most of the time. Is that so hard to understand.

Now given that they went for the ball and won the taps and Geishan still thinks there is a problem with what they did then clearly the rule or the interpretation sucks.

Ah, who knows. This storm in a teacup may play in our favour this week. Say the Crows try a similar two man setup against us for centre bounces - just as the umps choose to interpret the dodgy rules the other way around based on the never ending whining from the West...

 

[bzparkes]

And I have stated that the Port ruckman were going for the ball at the centre bouncesd on the weekend and that in fact they won the tap most of the time. Is that so hard to understand.

Now given that they went for the ball and won the taps and Geishan still thinks there is a problem with what they did then clearly the rule or the interpretation sucks.

I'm not saying they weren't going for the ball a couple all the time but there were obviously a couple of occasions where they infringed but it wasn't picked up.

No I don't think the rule should be changed and no I don't think it's a big deal, just an issue which Woosha seems to have picked up on that obviously the umpires haven't. Free kicks are missed and given wrongly every game anyway, hardly an issue.

 

[brogan2motlop]

@eagles fans

If nic nat is going to become the superstar everyone regards him as well he is just gotta deal with this.."dirty" tactics are used all over the ground every position

no excuses, no babying, no relying on umps to bail them out...

I hear the same crap about kerr as well.

This is the AFL if your an AFL player you have to adapt and not worry about protecting rules and crying to the umpires. Every team has player that are hard done by ....BOO HOO!!

 

[240volt]

I understand you BZ

They are jealous they don't have anyone that can leap tall buildings.

you don't have anyone that can play football....take your wooden spoon and frock off

 

[wirra44]

@eagles fans

I hear the same crap about kerr as well.

i didnt see the Port Adelaide game so i wont comment on nicknat but the way kerr gets taken out on the field sometimes is bull s***. I don't know if you have been watching eagles matches at subi much but the way he sometimes gets taken out behind the ball is shocking, and i know if you had a player like kerry getting taken out week in week out you would whinge too.

 

[wirra44]

you don't have anyone that can play football

and we still beat you by 50pts at subi

 

[Enviable Tradition]

i didnt see the Port Adelaide game so i wont comment on nicknat but the way kerr gets taken out on the field sometimes is bull s***. I don't know if you have been watching eagles matches at subi much but the way he sometimes gets taken out behind the ball is shocking, and i know if you had a player like kerry getting taken out week in week out you would whinge too.

LOL. Are you serious!

We have been watching Tredrea get man handled every game for the last decade and your treatment of Pearce was as bad as anything Kerr ever gets.

 

[240volt]

and we still beat you by 50pts at subi

And the last time you beat us in Adelaide was.....?? that would be before Benny was wacked off his face so that's not this century is it sport?
Enjoy your battle for the spoon this weekend

 

[wirra44]

And the last time you beat us in Adelaide was.....?? that would be before Benny was wacked off his face so that's not this century is it sport?
Enjoy your battle for the spoon this weekend

that's irrelevant, you guys got beaten by one of the worst teams in the comp by nearly 10 goals.

anyway good luck with the showdown hope you guys win(i have money on it)

 

[240volt]

that's irrelevant, you guys got beaten by one of the worst teams in the comp by nearly 10 goals.

anyway good luck with the showdown hope you guys win(i have money on it)

Have some money on west coast for the spoon this year also.. looks like another Dynasty on the way (Spoon Dynasty) and it will last longer than the last one

 

[wirra44]

Have some money on west coast for the spoon this year also.. looks like another Dynasty on the way (Spoon Dynasty) and it will last longer than the last one

tbh i was gonna put money on us for the spoon at the start of the year for a joke but didn't end up doing it(thinking i was just gonna waste my money). How much were we for the spoon when you put money on it??