Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Thread X

[lamaros]

Garry Lyon is the worst commentator in the country.

I feel angry when I am tricked into reading about him by the sub-editors and their stupid headlines. Waste of everything.

 

[eth-dog]

Other than frequently giving Lalalalalabumba a bath during his days at EFC< I have no idea and was wondering the same thing.

I think you mean Heath Shaw

 

[Kong]

Does anyone know why monfries was getting booed on Sunday night? Didn't think he'd done anything to Collingwood...but I might be wrong!

Because Collingwood.

 

[Bomberblitzer]

Does anyone know why monfries was getting booed on Sunday night? Didn't think he'd done anything to Collingwood...but I might be wrong!

In the Port v. Collingwood final last year Monfries made Shaw and his mates look like a pack of idiots. Can only assume that's why.

 

[Zach Package]

for the record, Shaw made Shaw look like a pack of idiots

 

[Childish Gambino]

Can someone please explain the SJ situation for me? The way I see it is it is now okay to knee someone in the guts as long as they have broken ribs? Seriously....

 

[Pweter]

Can someone please explain the SJ situation for me? The way I see it is it is now okay to knee someone in the guts as long as they have broken ribs? Seriously....

SJ wasn't "kneeing" Thompson, he didn't even drop his knees into Thompson. He was pinning Thompson to the ground using his legs, then when one of the knees hit a broken rib Thompson reacted.

Gamesmanship. Play on.

 

[Childish Gambino]

SJ wasn't "kneeing" Thompson, he didn't even drop his knees into Thompson. He was pinning Thompson to the ground using his legs, then when one of the knees hit a broken rib Thompson reacted.

Gamesmanship. Play on.

Yes, he did. Initially he was leaning on him then he lifted his knee and dropped it into his guts.

 

[Childish Gambino]

Gamesmanship. Play on.

Gamesmanship would not be kneeing your opponent in the guts.

 

[Pweter]

Yes, he did. Initially he was leaning on him then he lifted his knee and dropped it into his guts.

I saw nothing in it and would've been pissed if an Essendon player got done for it.

That's how I look on the output of the MRP - would I feel robbed if one of my players got done for that?

Sadly I never get to feel the opposite, such as would I be elated if an Essendon player got off for a late spoil that busted the face of the opposition, especially when Fyfe got 2 for an accidental head clash. If it were a Bomber and not Daniel Merrett I expect there would've been a minimum 3 match suspension.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Can someone please explain the SJ situation for me? The way I see it is it is now okay to knee someone in the guts as long as they have broken ribs? Seriously....

It was self-defence because he did it before he could have been choked. The Petrie Defence.

 

[Stopher]

Let's be honest though, though Steve Johnson has a long rap sheet, the total injuries suffered as a result of those combined offences might have been barely enough to knock Lindsay Thomas over. You could argue his reputation did him no favours with the MRP in this instance (as well as Thompson's reaction).

Daniel Merrett is a whole different thing altogether. Off the top of my head, I can remember his sling on Hurley last year that concussed the Bomber, his shocking elbow to David Swallow's face that luckily (and I stress that word) didn't fracture a cheekbone and/or eye socket, then his 'accidental' punch that splattered Pedersen's nose across his face. Exactly how did he get any benefit of the doubt whatsoever? And isn't there a grading of negligent or reckless for this type of action?

As for Conca, Robbo and Bob Murphy said a similar thing for this type of thug act, that being that there should be more than a default 'intentional' added onto a charge because it is off the ball and that is it. So 'not in play' should be an extra component on top of 'intentional', ie extra points and subsequent weeks, not for them to morph into the same thing.

 

[mike14]

Good to see the AFL stopping the ads at the Adelaide Oval asking people to donate to World Vision humanitarian aid to Gaza appeal because it's too 'political'. Absolutely stupid

 

[Kong]

Good to see the AFL stopping the ads at the Adelaide Oval asking people to donate to World Vision humanitarian aid to Gaza appeal because it's too 'political'. Absolutely stupid

They are muppets.

 

[Pweter]

This is an interesting read

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-06/the-big-step-up

On form to date, Brisbane absolutely nailed last years draft.

 

[222EB]

Yes, he did. Initially he was leaning on him then he lifted his knee and dropped it into his guts.

Scott Thompson is a cheating dog just like Thomas Boomer Petrie & Firrito.
Everytime he goes to ground with an opponent he holds them down in a subtle way so the ump wont notice and his opponent cant get back in action.

That's how it would of started with SJ and that's why he got kneed in the guts.

 

[rines]

As for Conca, Robbo and Bob Murphy said a similar thing for this type of thug act, that being that there should be more than a default 'intentional' added onto a charge because it is off the ball and that is it. So 'not in play' should be an extra component on top of 'intentional', ie extra points and subsequent weeks, not for them to morph into the same thing.

Good post.. but that is the key part.. there should be an 'off the ball' component that adds weeks at a minimum.. and not used for sheperds 5 mtrs from the ball carrier or 2 seconds after the ball left his hands.. but when it is clearly 'behind the play'.. or a dog act in general parlance.

I understand there was some niggle.. but this hero runs up behind a player who is interchanging off the field and elbows him in the head.. weak as piss imho.

 

[Beerfish]

Good post.. but that is the key part.. there should be an 'off the ball' component that adds weeks at a minimum.. and not used for sheperds 5 mtrs from the ball carrier or 2 seconds after the ball left his hands.. but when it is clearly 'behind the play'.. or a dog act in general parlance.

I understand there was some niggle.. but this hero runs up behind a player who is interchanging off the field and elbows him in the head.. weak as piss imho.

Yep. There's something very wrong with a system that gives Goddard two weeks for the elbow to Cornes, allows Murphy to get off for the same thing on Crowley, gives Conca the same penalty as Goddard for something that might very well see him with a criminal record on the street and completely exonerates Merrett.

 

[Stopher]

Yep. There's something very wrong with a system that gives Goddard two weeks for the elbow to Cornes, allows Murphy to get off for the same thing on Crowley, gives Conca the same penalty as Goddard for something that might very well see him with a criminal record on the street and completely exonerates Merrett.

And did its best to do a bloke for barely more than leaning into a guy with his shin.

 

[Doss]

Be grateful for small mercies...remember when players were copping suspensions for umpire contact?

Pretty much ruined Todd Curley's career.

 

[Yoda_]

This is an interesting read

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-06/the-big-step-up

On form to date, Brisbane absolutely nailed last years draft.

And then directly under them is...




... Carlton


oh the difference in development is incredible.

Kudos to Brisbane for throwing there kids in the deep end and allowing the better ones to continue swimming and shielding the immature ones.

 

[pepsi]

I saw nothing in it and would've been pissed if an Essendon player got done for it.

That's how I look on the output of the MRP - would I feel robbed if one of my players got done for that?.

That's a great way of looking at it. Use common sense when making decisions. SJ was not deserving of a suspension and either was merrett. He went for the spoil, made contact with the ball and unfortunately collected the other players nose on the way through.

It's a contact sport and incidental contact occurs. It does not mean you should be suspended for it. Should be for dog acts like what conca did.

 

[rines]

The MRP was introduced to try and prevent the problems that plagued the old tribunal days.. and somehow it has made it worse..

The whole system in now a complete friggen joke.

I'd prefer a panel of 5 - made up of 5 'recently' retired players (within the last 10 years and over 50 games experience) who sit on the tribunal for no less than 3 years and no more than 6 years. All panel members must have substantially played for different clubs.

Players can elect ONE person to represent them but NOT a lawyer. Medical reports from both club doctors are admissible as well as statements from both players and any TV footage. Players can produce footage of 3 'similar' incidents they believe are closest to their infringement. The AFL umpires counsel can produce 3 incidents they believe are closest to the infringement.

I think if you had a system like that.. it would reduce the BS factor by half and increase consistency.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

That's a great way of looking at it. Use common sense when making decisions. SJ was not deserving of a suspension and either was merrett. He went for the spoil, made contact with the ball and unfortunately collected the other players nose on the way through.

It's a contact sport and incidental contact occurs. It does not mean you should be suspended for it. Should be for dog acts like what conca did.

I have no issue with him getting off, because you have to divorce the player from the act when judging it, but there was nothing incidental about the Merrett elbow. That campaigner of a man meant every bit of that.

 

[pepsi]

I have no issue with him getting off, because you have to divorce the player from the act when judging it, but there was nothing incidental about the Merrett elbow. That campaigner of a man meant every bit of that.

You could be right. He does have a history of going the man and not the ball.