No you shouldn't, your club cheated for too many years...it will never be forgotten.
Nic Nat Complaining About Ruck Tactic.
- Thread starter baja
- Start date
- Tagged users None
No you shouldn't, your club cheated for too many years...it will never be forgotten.
kaiserchief13
Hall of Famer
- Jul 12, 2011
- 33,968
- 24,802
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Eagles, Lakers, Bayern, Trojans
Sucked in. Hopefully this equals free kicks for touching Naitanui. What Naitanui can't do, can't be done
Boxhead_31
The Greatest Team Of All
- Oct 12, 2007
- 36,823
- 51,300
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- South BHFL
If the opposing ruckmans eyes are on the ball they can do whatever they please as long as they dont cross the centre line before the ball is bounced.
If you are looking solely at the ball you can move to a position to take the other ruck man's run as long as you keep your eye on the ball as soon as eye's are taken off of the ball to check where the other ruck is your gone but if you start on the line then move into a position that effects the other ruck's run it isn't illegal
- Banned
- #105
Be careful or you will end up with the nickname "The Dobbing Duckers". It has a ring to it.
Public Enemy No1
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #106
kaiserchief13
Hall of Famer
- Jul 12, 2011
- 33,968
- 24,802
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Eagles, Lakers, Bayern, Trojans
- Banned
- #108
In Channel 10 clip the tactics employed were clearly illegal.
- Banned
- #111
So you are blindly following the accusation of another poster?
Cox does not make a habit of doing this.
LT Smash
Premiership Player
Dean Margetts doesn't need an open invitation to give West Coast a dream run. We could see an all time record free kick count next time he umpires the Eagles at Subi.
neroblack
Premiership Player
I haven't read the other posts mate. I read the article, wiped the tears away that I cried for nicnat and then made my comment. If you read the article, you'll see that Nick says that both he and Cox have been filthy about what's been going on around the ground and in the middle...not sure Cox would want to get involved in this crap.
If what was being done was actually against the rules, there would have been free kicks paid. No one has any time for people who complain when things get too hard. You don't see Clokey asking the umpires if someone else can take his kicks for goal do you?
- Banned
- #115
Firstly NN qualified his statement by saying if frees aren't paid he just has to deal with it.
Secondly this is not a tactic Cox regularly employs so why imply that?
Thirdly vision on 10 showed a number of clear, illegal infringements.
Lastly whinging seems the order of the day. We have copped it from coaches renowned for it, after each had a tight loss to us. One complained about tactics employed against Cotchin on another occasion to great effect. Players seem to regularly be on twitter (funnily enough from the same clubs), complaining about umpiring or the tribunal. When the complaints are against WC they were being lauded by some on here, this suggests in 2012 people have a lot of time for it. So it seems your post is entirely without merit.
Nic Nat currently has a problem in battles of strength against the older monster rucks. In the Sydney game however it appeared that they were crossing the line between putting a body on him and working in and under him to stop his run, often not really jumping at all in the centre contest. While I personally think this was a free kick on occasion it wasnt being paid so was disappointed Nic Nat didn't vary his angle of approach to counter it. The article clearly states that this us something he is working on.
Also regardless of who the rucks are having been a ruck and played basketball a lot myself tunnelling a player jumping for the ball is very dangerous and something that should be policed. I'm not saying the Swans went that far but weren't far off it and would be inevitable if the tactics were continued and players pushed them further
Also regardless of who the rucks are having been a ruck and played basketball a lot myself tunnelling a player jumping for the ball is very dangerous and something that should be policed. I'm not saying the Swans went that far but weren't far off it and would be inevitable if the tactics were continued and players pushed them further
People should watch the press conference. It only goes for 3 minutes.
Your second paragraph is exactly what he says.
If you read it in context you'd realise that he was talking about he and Cox being filthy about how poorly we'd been in the clearances, both in the midfield and all around the ground. He's talking about being disappointed with his players.
I don't like the tactic by Pyke but can't the Eagles make a formal complaint to the AFL?
They love to have a public whinge on the Monday. Same happened before the Derby, Kerr complained about the tactics of taggers and he received a number of soft free kicks the next week.
They love to have a public whinge on the Monday. Same happened before the Derby, Kerr complained about the tactics of taggers and he received a number of soft free kicks the next week.
- Banned
- #120
Don't contradict him with facts, because then he will have to get down off his soapbox.
Pyke did not engage in body contact to take Nat out of the contest. He got to position and turned in to give his extended arm the advantage. There is no rule that says he has to jump to give himself preferred contest just ensure he's making one. Nic Nat supposed to be an athlete. If he couldn't get to that spot first, in his half of the circle than he had to lift his intensity. There was one were Pyke pushed his body in that should have been paid but mostly it was just a clever tactic that the Eagles should think of how to overcome.
People on BF love getting on their high horses when an article is released involving a player or coach's single statement being blown out of proportion (WC fans included).
Don't you realise that sports media will always take one tiny statement and stick a big ol sensationalist headline on it?! Why go into moral meltdown because one poster starts a thread that paraphrases what he thinks might be implied by an AFL.com nothing piece?
Don't you realise that sports media will always take one tiny statement and stick a big ol sensationalist headline on it?! Why go into moral meltdown because one poster starts a thread that paraphrases what he thinks might be implied by an AFL.com nothing piece?
- Banned
- #123
Eh? One other incident where he was asked due to the Ablett/Cotchin thing and he didn't receive any favourable treatment for it. Kerr gets mauled regularly and far outside of the rules. Hasn't and probably won't change any time soon.
So you agree with what I said? Do you even read the posts or just see west coast supporter and jump?
I read what you wrote and I disagree with it
I disagree with what you wrote not because of who you support but because what you wrote was wrong. You said they crossing the line by putting the body into him and thats not right, they just worked to the postion harder.
