Toast Round 2 = Collingwood 135-64 Port Adelaide

Remove this Banner Ad

LOL so over an entire game there wasn't something a blues player could do that would have made that call redundant?

Pure sophistry.
Lol. Exactly my point!!

Which is why blaming umpires for a call is childish and irrelevant.

But I guess 2018 was stolen as well?

I assume I’ll now be on ignore….
 
Lol. Exactly my point!!

Which is why blaming umpires for a call is childish and irrelevant.

But I guess 2018 was stolen as well?

I assume I’ll now be on ignore….
I only bother formally ignoring genuinely annoying people

The remaining tryhards just slip into the general inconsequential category.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I only bother formally ignoring genuinely annoying people

The remaining tryhards just slip into the general inconsequential category.
Yet you respond with inconsequential and genuinely wrong assertions…

So maybe I need to assert you are a try hard and inconsequential in that umps cost us the game?
 
If the rate of high bumps and dangerous tackles doesn't abate, the league will have no choice but to further increase penalties. They need to be (seen to be) doing everything reasonably possible to protect players. And if current sentencing doesn't influence behaviours, then they will have to go harder.
This season they have gone at it like someone about to be sued.
Which is understandable, but not always going to result in the best outcome for everyone.
 
This season they have gone at it like someone about to be sued.
Which is understandable, but not always going to result in the best outcome for everyone.
Im for the policing of sling tackles, but think the Port guy was really unlucky. I don't think it was much of a sling. Elliott was responsible for a heap of the rotation with his attempt to get a kick off.
 
Yet you respond with inconsequential and genuinely wrong assertions…

So maybe I need to assert you are a try hard and inconsequential in that umps cost us the game?
michael jackson mj GIF
 
Are Port Adelaide challenging it? I think they should - to get the impact from high to medium and down to a week. Jeez Jordy was lucky in the preseason.

Different scenario imho. Hawthorn player had his arms free, just chose to try and dispose rather than protect himself in the fall. Elliott’s arm was pinned so protecting himself wasn’t an option. I’m fine with the way these incidents have played out.
 
Different scenario imho. Hawthorn player had his arms free, just chose to try and dispose rather than protect himself in the fall. Elliott’s arm was pinned so protecting himself wasn’t an option. I’m fine with the way these incidents have played out.
My view of the two is that the entire dump came from Jordy in that tackle. Whereas this one was different in that Elliott's attempt to kick had him rotating towards the ground and the Port player just went with it. I think the Port guy is really unlucky to cop two weeks for that.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

My view of the two is that the entire dump came from Jordy in that tackle. Whereas this one was different in that Elliott's attempt to kick had him rotating towards the ground and the Port player just went with it. I think the Port guy is really unlucky to cop two weeks for that.
Burton copped an extra week for the assessed potential facial disfigurement of Handsome Jamie.
 
My view of the two is that the entire dump came from Jordy in that tackle. Whereas this one was different in that Elliott's attempt to kick had him rotating towards the ground and the Port player just went with it. I think the Port guy is really unlucky to cop two weeks for that.
My view is players with the ball are always going to try and dispose of the ball, it’s up the tacklers to account for that.
 
My view of the two is that the entire dump came from Jordy in that tackle. Whereas this one was different in that Elliott's attempt to kick had him rotating towards the ground and the Port player just went with it. I think the Port guy is really unlucky to cop two weeks for that.
As far as rules go it doesn’t really come into it, but the hawks ruck fought the tackle and attempted to break it via brute strength, which meant DeGoey had to tackle strongly, whereas Elliott wasn’t trying to break to the tackle. Agree that 2 weeks for the Elliott tackle is at least 1 week too many given the precedent.
 
My view of the two is that the entire dump came from Jordy in that tackle. Whereas this one was different in that Elliott's attempt to kick had him rotating towards the ground and the Port player just went with it. I think the Port guy is really unlucky to cop two weeks for that.
Sorry, but on the back of this description I watched a replay of that tackle, and if you think Elliot trying to kick the ball had anything to do with the way he was tackled you need to get your eyes checked. Burton literally lifted him up off the ground and dumped him head first in to the ground Buckley was 100% right in his commentary. He had him cold, couldn’t handball, would have been extremely unlikely to get the kick away, all he needed to do was hold him there, or alternatively lower himself and bring Jamie down safely with him, instead he chose to dump him. It deserved every bit of 2 weeks.
 
Sorry, but on the back of this description I watched a replay of that tackle, and if you think Elliot trying to kick the ball had anything to do with the way he was tackled you need to get your eyes checked. Burton literally lifted him up off the ground and dumped him head first in to the ground Buckley was 100% right in his commentary. He had him cold, couldn’t handball, would have been extremely unlikely to get the kick away, all he needed to do was hold him there, or alternatively lower himself and bring Jamie down safely with him, instead he chose to dump him. It deserved every bit of 2 weeks.
LOL. I just watched it again and you're right. My memory of it was Elliott planting his foot and pivoting on it to snap, but in the replay that wasn't really the case. They must have editted the replay ...
 
Lol. Exactly my point!!

Which is why blaming umpires for a call is childish and irrelevant.

But I guess 2018 was stolen as well?

I assume I’ll now be on ignore….

Maynard was clearly blocked. If old weak hammies Treloar had have got that kick over Mcgovern in the first place then JDG runs into an open goal and the rest is history.
 
LOL. I just watched it again and you're right. My memory of it was Elliott planting his foot and pivoting on it to snap, but in the replay that wasn't really the case. They must have editted the replay ...
Either way 2 weeks a little harsh.
I disagree that their was intent to drive his head onto the turf.
1 week at best. I've watched it a few times as well.
 
My view of the two is that the entire dump came from Jordy in that tackle. Whereas this one was different in that Elliott's attempt to kick had him rotating towards the ground and the Port player just went with it. I think the Port guy is really unlucky to cop two weeks for that.

You are missing the point entirely.
 
Lol. Exactly my point!!

Which is why blaming umpires for a call is childish and irrelevant.

But I guess 2018 was stolen as well?

I assume I’ll now be on ignore….

I get what you're saying.

I generally sit on the fence of the "could would shoulda" stuff. Because while I agree it's hard to boil the result of a 2 hour game of football down to one isolated incident, at the same time, you kinda can?

It's weird

So for example.

  • Sydney won the Prelim by 1 solitary point
  • In the final quarter, Sydney kicked only 1 goal
  • That one goal was the result of one of the worst umpiring non-decisions the game has ever seen. A literal text book push in the back
  • Outside that one goal, we managed to successfully prevent Sydney from scoring. So much so, they needed to essentially "cheat" to do so

So for me, it's a fairly safe assumption can you kinda can boil the Prelim result down to that one call.

Again, yes, maybe we shouldn't have had such a bad first quarter. Maybe we missed too many easy shots. We let in too many easy goals.

But in the end, we don't know how Sydney would have responded to a better Collingwood first quarter. So it's trickier to say.

But we know Collingwood successfully prevented Sydney from scoring in the final quarter. To the point where Papley needed to cheat to find a way for them to score.

I'm not trying to say you're definitively wrong, or that myself/Jonb are right.

I just don't think it's a simple black and white scenario. I personally believe there are some instances where the result of a game can boil down to a single incident. Not often, but in the end, if it's costing a potential flag? I don't think the frequency matters.
 
Either way 2 weeks a little harsh.
I disagree that their was intent to drive his head onto the turf.
1 week at best. I've watched it a few times as well.

My impression was that he may not have had intent to drive his head into the turf, but he did lift him off his feet, and I think that might be why they’ve taken a dim view of the tackle.
 
My impression was that he may not have had intent to drive his head into the turf, but he did lift him off his feet, and I think that might be why they’ve taken a dim view of the tackle.
In slo mo he looks guilty as hell.
Footy is played at such a fast pace it's ridiculous.
Some of these things out of the control of players. Same with lots of bumps. Hard to slow down when running at 34KMH plus.
Such is the game.
 

Toast Round 2 = Collingwood 135-64 Port Adelaide

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top