Question for Michele...

[M29]

What do you think should happen to Tony Lockett after toad slamming his opponent (Waiklen) into the ground? Leaving him concussed.

I look forward to your reply...

 

[Michele]

Originally posted by M29
What do you think should happen to Tony Lockett after toad slamming his opponent (Waiklen) into the ground? Leaving him concussed.

I look forward to your reply...

M29, I only just logged on today (Wednesday) and my question....why me, after all Lockett plays for Sydney doesn't he? I look after MY team. And that is not Sydney.

Last night's news showed that footage, from a few angles, just prior to Lockett's hearing. My opinion from the first angle shown - not guilty! Lockett's arm goes over ****lin's head, down his face and both are falling forward, momentum carrying them both forward.

This action was completely different from the Lloyd/Shannon Watt incident - if that is what you are trying to compare. Lloyd pulled Shannon BACKWARDS, causing him to fall and hit his head on the ground. And the resulting full seizure was truly awful to watch.

As to a general comment, I for one, do not like to see heavy contact made - even though footy, by its nature is a contact sport.
A very good example - a ? Johnson ironing out John Blakey.. Others thought it was a "perfect" hip and shoulder.

I also didn't like .....wait for it.....Hird being collected (I don't remember who) either. It is a blight on our game.

Hope my answer was worth waiting for.

Michele

 

[Dave]

Re: Re: Question for Michele...

Originally posted by Michele
This action was completely different from the Lloyd/Shannon Watt incident - if that is what you are trying to compare. Lloyd pulled Shannon BACKWARDS, causing him to fall and hit his head on the ground. And the resulting full seizure was truly awful to watch.

That it was. As was Osbornes up in Sydney in '93. These things happpen.

As to a general comment, I for one, do not like to see heavy contact made - even though footy, by its nature is a contact sport.

That's quite funny considering the reputation the side you follow had for playing tough hard footy. I guess you don't like watching Byron Pickett then either eh?

A very good example - a ? Johnson ironing out John Blakey.. Others thought it was a "perfect" hip and shoulder.

And they were right.

 

[Michele]

Dave,

I'll keep your answer in mind when an Essendon player is knocked out cold.....an extremely fair player and I'll remind myself that it was a "perfectly executed" hip and shoulder - only the player was KOed. (Does Essendon have any - extremely fair players?)

Then I might just wonder why every"perfectly executed" hip and shoulder doesn't leave those recipients 'out cold'.

Aside from Hird (who IS protected by the umpires) who would you say is Essendon's Johnny Blakey?

Byron is simply 'brilliant' to watch.

Michele

 

[Jars458]

Michele

You must remember that Dave is an Essendon supporter and can therefore NOT EVER admit that his team/coach/players/CEO have done anything wrong

Anyone who says they have must be trolling!

if a player is knocked out I can't see how it can have been "fair" given that any head high contact is illegal.

If such contact was deliberate or reckless then it is also worthy of a suspension.

 

[Michele]

Re: Re: Re: Question for Michele...

Originally posted by Dave



That's quite funny considering the reputation the side you follow had for playing tough hard footy. I guess you don't like watching Byron Pickett then either eh?

"TOUGH hard footy" (for which North is renowned - and Sheedy acknowledged, he modelled Essendon on North) is NOT the same as ROUGH hard footy.

 

[Danny Chook Fan Club]

Dave, what did you think of Dermott Brereton's hip and shoulder on Paul Van Der Haar in the 1989 Second Semi Final, when he was knocked out cold and taken off on a stretcher?

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Michele
Dave,

I'll keep your answer in mind when an Essendon player is knocked out cold.....an extremely fair player and I'll remind myself that it was a "perfectly executed" hip and shoulder - only the player was KOed.

You do that. If it's legit I have no problem with it, ala Brereton & Van Der Haar in '89. Footy's a man's game (no offence) and the physical part of it is something I enjoy as both player and spectator (no smart arse comments from the peanut gallery please!). As a player I've dished it out and recieved it and that's just part of footy. As a spectator I appreciate a good bump or shirtfornt as much as a speccie or long bomb from 60. Each to their own I guess.

(Does Essendon have any - extremely fair players?)

Yeah, they'd be the ones continually labelled "soft"

Then I might just wonder why every"perfectly executed" hip and shoulder doesn't leave that player 'out cold'.

Every bump is different, so you'd expect the results to be different. I'm not sure what you're angling at here.

Aside from Hird (who IS protected by the umpires)

No more so than your captain.

who would you say is Essendon's Johnny Blakey?

Mark Mercuri. Paul Samon Sean Wellman.

Byron is simply 'brilliant' to watch.

So you missed his bump on Krummel, amongst others, or did that not consitute "heavy contact"?

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Jars458
You must remember that Dave is an Essendon supporter and can therefore NOT EVER admit that his team/coach/players/CEO have done anything wrong

Bull****. I've posted on numerous occasion here criticising them when they have.

Anyone who says they have must be trolling!

As I said, I KNOW rooboy better'n you.

if a player is knocked out I can't see how it can have been "fair" given that any head high contact is illegal.

If a player gets bumped and his head hits the ground. If there is a clash of heads - who's responsible for that, contact is made to both players head.

If such contact was deliberate or reckless then it is also worthy of a suspension.

Agreed.

 

[Dave]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Question for Michele...

Originally posted by Michele
"TOUGH hard footy" (for which North is renowned - and Sheedy acknowledged, he modelled Essendon on North)

And which Nth modelled on West Coast/Hawthorn who modelled it on......

is NOT the same as ROUGH hard footy.

Quite true. Are you suggesting your team has never played ROUGH hard footy?

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Danny Chook Fan Club
Dave, what did you think of Dermott Brereton's hip and shoulder on Paul Van Der Haar in the 1989 Second Semi Final, when he was knocked out cold and taken off on a stretcher?

heck! Talked about ganged up on!

For the record, when it happened I thought it was a great bump. Was I happy to see it happen to one of my teams players? Nup, who is? Did I think Brereton should have been suspended? Nup.

 

[Danny Chook Fan Club]

Originally posted by Dave
heck! Talked about ganged up on!

For the record, when it happened I thought it was a great bump. Was I happy to see it happen to one of my teams players? Nup, who is? Did I think Brereton should have been suspended? Nup.

Dorothy Dixer my good man. Funny thing was that you answered it before I asked it!

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Danny Chook Fan Club
Dorothy Dixer my good man.

Aha, I should've spotted that

Funny thing was that you answered it before I asked it!

Yeah, was the first thing that came to mind. Probably the most famous case in our recent history. He bagged a few that day IIRC.

 

[Danny Chook Fan Club]

Yeah, he "tackled" Daisy (read: absolutely buried him, too high, in the back and probably unduly rough play and got holding the ball, first free he'd had in seven years) and sent him off as well. Bombers were in front, suddenly had no bench, Bungy turns up, game over.

 

[Michele]

Originally posted by Dave


You do that. If it's legit I have no problem with it, ala Brereton & Van Der Haar in '89. Footy's a man's game (no offence) and the physical part of it is something I enjoy as both player and spectator (no smart arse comments from the peanut gallery please!). As a player I've dished it out and recieved it and that's just part of footy. As a spectator I appreciate a good bump or shirtfornt as much as a speccie or long bomb from 60. Each to their own I guess.



Yeah, they'd be the ones continually labelled "soft"



Every bump is different, so you'd expect the results to be different. I'm not sure what you're angling at here.



No more so than your captain.



Mark Mercuri. Paul Samon Sean Wellman.



So you missed his bump on Krummel, amongst others, or did that not consitute "heavy contact"?

a. No offence taken. There is more to footy than just the 'pigskin' - I like the tight shorts on the guys. And the speccie! Or the long bomb.

b. Rough - Roger Merrett. Tough ARCH.

c. Agree each bump would be different, but if a hip an shoulder "perfectly executed" ie elbows down and contact only on the body, not near the head - how can a player be KOed?

d. Surely you jest! CAREY getting favourable treatment from the umpires - any umpire. He didn't even win the Brownlow (1998) when everyone said Carey was a shoe-in. And he DID have a brilliant year.

e. Yeah, I can go along with Mercs., Salmon, but not Wellman.

d. Yes, contact was made. If you are able, look at that incident again. I believe Byron could also easily have taken the ball, but then he would be in the same situation as Krummel. As I said earlier, I know footy is a contact sport, but I only like contact with no resulting consequences.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Danny Chook Fan Club
Yeah, he "tackled" Daisy (read: absolutely buried him, too high, in the back and probably unduly rough play and got holding the ball, first free he'd had in seven years) and sent him off as well.

Yeah, he said last year he rammed his head into the ground and then held him up so the ump didn't realise he was ko'd.

Bombers were in front, suddenly had no bench, Bungy turns up, game over.

Don't remind me. Bloody Antrobus!

 

[Michele]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question for Michele...

Originally posted by Dave



And which Nth modelled on West Coast/Hawthorn who modelled it on......



Quite true. Are you suggesting your team has never played ROUGH hard footy?

......Perhaps you missed North's "Glorious Seventies"


Denis, would throw a hissy fit. He wants TOUGH footy with no tribunal apperances. And the curly-headed wonder does go off.

 

[Danny Chook Fan Club]

Originally posted by Michele
c. Agree each bump would be different, but if a hip an shoulder "perfectly executed" ie elbows down and contact only on the body, not near the head - how can a player be KOed?

...

d. Yes, contact was made. If you are able, look at that incident again. I believe Byron could also easily have taken the ball, but then he would be in the same situation as Krummel. As I said earlier, I know footy is a contact sport, but I only like contact with no resulting consequences.

A bit inconsistent here. Pickett hit Krummel with nothing but hip and shoulder and knocked him rotten - Crumber got taken off on a stretcher, completely unconscious.

And you're right, Pickett could easily have taken the ball. But he went straight past it and took out a man who had his head down over the footy.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Michele
a. No offence taken. There is more to footy than just the 'pigskin' - I like the tight shorts on the guys. And the speccie! Or the long bomb.

As I said, each to thier own. That's part of the appeal of the game, it's fot more than one thing to appeal to people.

Rough - Roger Merrett. Tough ARCH.

What's that got to do with fair dons players? Granted Merret was rough, but all teams have had players like that, as have they had tough nuts like Archer.

c. Agree each bump would be different, but if a hip an shoulder "perfectly executed" ie elbows down and contact only on the body, not near the head - how can a player be KOed?

In the one you mentioned I believe the players clashed heads and Blakey also hit his head on the ground, resulting in a KO. How can you blame one player or another for a clash of heads?

d. Surely you jest! CAREY getting favourable treatment from the umpires - any umpire. He didn't even win the Brownlow (1998) when everyone said Carey was a shoe-in. And he DID have a brilliant year.

I never jest. He doesn't get a free ride, but neither does Hird.

Yeah, I can go along with Mercs., Salmon, but not Wellman.

The bump last year presumably? It's the only time I've seen him do anything like that and it was not exactly malicious.

d. Yes, contact was made. If you are able, look at that incident again. I believe Byron could also easily have taken the ball, but then he would be in the same situation as Krummel.

Yeah, so he made a choice. That doesn't alter the nature of the bump.

As I said earlier, I know footy is a contact sport, but I only like contact with no resulting consequences.

Ah, so it's the result that makes it rough, not the intent. That's not quite the way I see it.

 

[Michele]

Originally posted by Danny Chook Fan Club
.

And you're right, Pickett could easily have taken the ball. But he went straight past it and took out a man who had his head down over the footy.

DCFC

Do you work are are intending to work in the media or politics?

I said Pickett could have easily taken the ball (meaning he is a very quick, agile and slick player)......and I added.....".but he would then have been in the same situation" (as Krummel) In other words he could attack or be attacked.

And I don't particularly like either situation.

 

[Michele]

Dave,

North supporters were very upset when Johnny Blakey went down. I don't know if there was a clash of heads - I do know Blakes was out before he hit ground.

North supporters thought the incident very 'unfair', others including Blakey, thought and stated publically, no malice was intended.

Intent v rough play. I suppose that can come down to the individual player. By that, I mean the skill and talent level of individual fooballers.

The guy from the WC - can't think of his name - the player who took out our fantastic VC, Stevo. His was a clumnsy and a stupid act by a not very polished footballer. And Stevo was not his first victim.

Lockett's v Caven? Intent or rough play. Bereton v Tallis. Ditto.
Hird v ??. Robert Harvey v ????

 

[Danny Chook Fan Club]

Originally posted by Michele
Do you work are are intending to work in the media or politics?

I said Pickett could have easily taken the ball (meaning he is a very quick, agile and slick player)......and I added.....".but he would then have been in the same situation" (as Krummel) In other words he could attack or be attacked.

And I don't particularly like either situation.

I was part of the "Children's Parliament" in 1990 - the sh|tting rotten deputy speaker who chaired it said I "had the makings of a future politician". To this day, it remains the single greatest insult I have suffered.

But back to the point. Some players are more inclined to impose physical pressure than others. Krummel was a ball player who didn't lay a tackle if he could help it. Pickett takes every available opportunity to apply physical pressure, and stretches the laws to their very limit in doing so.

Me - I don't have a problem with it. Within reason, it's part of the game.

However, I am gobsmacked that someone can criticise Mark Johnson for one of the best, fairest, legal and perfectly executed hip and shoulder, and then come up with some mitigating circumstances for a much worse attack.

 

[Michele]

Originally posted by Danny Chook Fan Club
I was part of the "Children's Parliament" in 1990 - the sh|tting rotten deputy speaker who chaired it said I "had the makings of a future politician". To this day, it remains the single greatest insult I have suffered.

But back to the point. Some players are more inclined to impose physical pressure than others. Krummel was a ball player who didn't lay a tackle if he could help it. Pickett takes every available opportunity to apply physical pressure, and stretches the laws to their very limit in doing so.

Me - I don't have a problem with it. Within reason, it's part of the game.

However, I am gobsmacked that someone can criticise Mark Johnson for one of the best, fairest, legal and perfectly executed hip and shoulder, and then come up with some mitigating circumstances for a much worse attack.

Well DCFC, you do sometimes equovicate and perhaps the speaker was correct.

You are "gobsamcked" - 2 players, 2 KOs and yet you fully agree - and appreciate one incident, but not the other.
One was a Hawthorn player - your team and the other, 2 neutral teams.

From my point of view, both involved MY team but I liked neither incident.

 

[Zed]

Michele
you are fighting an honourable battle.
Now please go to the kangaroos board and vote against choppy being kicked off the island.

 

[Danny Chook Fan Club]

We appear to be at cross purposes. I thought I clearly pointed out that I have no problem with proper hip and shoulders (which both the Johnson/Blakey and Pickett/Krummel ones were).

The way I read it, you dislike both incidents, yet partially exonerate your player on the spurious basis that it was a pre-emptive strike while decrying the other clash when your player was injured. That's where I perceive the inconsistency.

Tell me if I'm wrong.