Player Watch Scott Lycett

Remove this Banner Ad

Ports1870

Club Legend
Jul 31, 2017
2,393
5,181
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I’m revising expectation from 3-1 to 2-2 now, fingers crossed 3-1
Needs to be 3-1. Freo and Collingwood we should not be losing whatsoever. And if we are genuine threat even with our injuries we should win at least one of the dogs or cats game as they are both at home as well. Not gonna be easy but needs to happen
 

MrMeaner

Norm Smith Medallist
Jan 15, 2004
8,996
11,940
Melbourne
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Understand all of this but feel like they are targeting the wrong part of the game.

Yes, Lycett's tackle went a bit overboard and had bad consequences. So he gets 4. But Dangerfield's bump went too far as well but only got 3. Which of these is more of a football act and which of these is more of a cheap shot?

And then you've got Fritsch throwing an elbow at an opponent and getting 0 because the guy wasn't concussed.

It's all over the shop.
I agree with all that. I’m not a fan of the MRO and tribunal looking at the consequence, ignoring intervening acts, luck and the potential for harm in other conduct.

I just don’t think we’ve been made an example of here - at least by the Tribunal. The media is another matter. It always is.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

PJ Power

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 13, 2003
22,861
30,674
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Needs to be 3-1. Freo and Collingwood we should not be losing whatsoever. And if we are genuine threat even with our injuries we should win at least one of the dogs or cats game as they are both at home as well. Not gonna be easy but needs to happen
I think this is really fair.
Lycett's influence can't be under-estimated and we're already down a couple of key mids in Butters and Duursma (and maybe Houston for this week), but this is the time for our depth to shine.

Our forward and back lines are still very much intact. We still have inside presence in the midfield with Boak and Wines in ripping form, Drew continuing to emerge and SPP working his way back. We just need break-even efforts from Hayes or Ladhams that prevent the opposition rucks from dominating. This also applies at ground level and in aerial contests around the ground where Lycett is generally very competitive.
 

melanChronic

Club Legend
Apr 1, 2009
2,883
4,711
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I also reckon this same board was running with the "duty of care" and "he should be aware of his strength" when Nic Nat got done for a tackle on Amon
Naitinui got one week and the media went up in unison outrage saying 'the tackle is dead', 'what was he supposed to do?', 'he's just a big boy' etc.

Lycett gets 4 and the fraternity are all 'should count himself lucky', 'I would've given him 5', 'an example had to be set'.
 

tribey

One-Eyed Vaccinated Boys Club Member
Mar 9, 2003
63,208
166,020
Queen St & Peter Rd
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
NUFC, YES.
Port players hold a lot of suspension records - Pickett most weeks for a bump, Lycett most weeks for a ‘sling’ tackle, Kornes most weeks for a push, Poole most weeks for a tummy tap, P.Burgoyne most weeks for a ‘spear’ tackle etc
Matt Thomas most weeks for getting shoved into an umpire by an opponent.
 

Powerage

Club Legend
Aug 14, 2014
1,744
2,200
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Could you please explain the joke in those photos? I don't understand.
It amuses me how much Tex mimics Freddie Mercury so I posted the collage with that in mind. I didn't really intend a 'joke' in the photos...sorry if you thought I did. It was a complete disconnect from my comment that I'm sure Scottie was quaking in his boots at the prospect of taking on Tex.

Like it or don't...I'm not gonna lose any sleep either way. Even though it is 3am ;)
 

EskimoPAFC

Norm Smith Medallist
Dec 17, 2017
8,795
21,217
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Given the last big tackle like that got 4 weeks i'd say they have been consistent with this decision
Agree it was consistent with the ANB tackle. Thats kind of the point, players with less "good bloke" status that play for "smaller clubs" like Lycett and ANB get similar punishments. In the eyes of the media Melbourne and Port are very similar clubs.

Burgoyne on Danger last year was much worse than either and he didnt even get a game.

Im 100% fine with this being 4. We absolutely must protect the head, if you look at the state of rugby union in the UK thats where we are heading if we dont.

Whats annoying though is that we all know that later in the season Cotchin or Selwood or someone else like that will do something just as bad and be given an endless list of excuses before they get off so they can play their big game.
 

Byrons Firen

Norm Smith Medallist
Dec 4, 2013
9,195
17,773
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
the maggies
What's done is done.

On the neighbours board a few days back was a post along the lines of, well if you're going to be as lippy and annoying as Ned is you've got to

expect to be sat on your arse every now n again. Maybe Slyce lost it and added a few ergs who knows but to me it's come on down Sam Hayes,

who I hope gets a decent go because he's earnt it. I'll never forget his first game for us Rd1 night game at the Bay and he was impressive.

Yeah we lost that game but I thought sheesh we've found a player here.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

backtozero

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 26, 2020
6,780
15,428
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Naitinui got one week and the media went up in unison outrage saying 'the tackle is dead', 'what was he supposed to do?', 'he's just a big boy' etc.

Lycett gets 4 and the fraternity are all 'should count himself lucky', 'I would've given him 5', 'an example had to be set'.
Also, Nicnat unapologetically said "I'm not going to change the way I play"
Compare with Lycett who has apologised several times.
 

Macca_1870

Team Captain
May 1, 2014
593
895
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Understand all of this but feel like they are targeting the wrong part of the game.

Yes, Lycett's tackle went a bit overboard and had bad consequences. So he gets 4. But Dangerfield's bump went too far as well but only got 3. Which of these is more of a football act and which of these is more of a cheap shot?

And then you've got Fritsch throwing an elbow at an opponent and getting 0 because the guy wasn't concussed.

It's all over the shop.
I have no problem with Lycett receiving 4 weeks. He makes the split second decision to wrap up McHenry and drop the knees, and we are not having this discussion.

The bug bear for me is not that a poorly executed tackle gets 4, it's the fact that 2 blatant raised elbows within a week of each other receive 0 and 1 respectively. Sometimes the MRP sanction based on action, other times they sanction based on outcome.
 

VineValerian

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 10, 2014
5,965
7,114
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Man Utd, Celtic, Tanunda
I have no problem with Lycett receiving 4 weeks. He makes the split second decision to wrap up McHenry and drop the knees, and we are not having this discussion.

The bug bear for me is not that a poorly executed tackle gets 4, it's the fact that 2 blatant raised elbows within a week of each other receive 0 and 1 respectively. Sometimes the MRP sanction based on action, other times they sanction based on outcome.
Lycett's action was considerably less violent than Neale-Bullen's.
And McHenry's injury was far less severe than the Crows player in that Dees game.

Comparatively, SL should get 3 games. Or NB should have gotten 5 to 6 games.

Based on Fritsch, etc then SL should have gotten 1 game, but realistically SL should be penalised more than that. But so should those other cases!!!!

Bloody hell, some players running around at the moment seem to have been kissed on the old todger by a fairy.
 

philreich

Hall of Famer
Mar 2, 2014
41,205
93,694
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I agree with all that. I’m not a fan of the MRO and tribunal looking at the consequence, ignoring intervening acts, luck and the potential for harm in other conduct.

I just don’t think we’ve been made an example of here - at least by the Tribunal. The media is another matter. It always is.
The media is a joke - would Butters have copped 2 weeks last year if the TV commentators hadn't hung him out to dry? Meanwhile, please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't a commentator once describe a Tom Lynch indiscretion as "out of character"? Yeah about as out of character as Stephen Rowe saying something stupid!!!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad