Remove this Banner Ad

The Non-Essendon Thread V

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Actually, I don't agree with either North or Geelong.

North are just trying to be difficult and fight city hall in some sort of misbegotten crusade, but GFC should have contested the Johnson charge if they thought it was wrong (and they did).
 
I think Geelong were correct not to challenge. You can't take the risk around finals. I actually really enjoy the way the whole Geelong footy club operates. They got knocked out of finals Saturday but are holding off on their mad Monday untill their VFL guys finish. Think that shows a club that is all about the whole organization. Everyone moving in the same direction.
 
Anyone sense the sh*t storm developing but instead of it being Collingwood v Carlton its going to be chiefly Malthouse v Maguire?

Mick: i'll teach you to phase me out when i was in my prime for Figjam Buckley...
Eddie: You touch any of my players and ill go ape
Mick: oh its on! first up, Cloke

to be continued.....
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Macca18 said:
Quentin Lynch (surprisingly in my opinion) had his charge downgraded at the tribunal this evening is now allowed to play against the Pies this weekend. Good news for them.

In equally pleasing news, North Melbourne fresh off their 16 goal loss on the weekend, were unsuccessful in challenging the Brent Harvey charge against Daniel Kerr and the suspension was upgraded from 3 to 4 weeks. He is now currently challenging the other charge on Selwood which is currently a 1 week suspension. So 5 weeks all up at the moment if there is no change...

"OH THE AFL CONSPIRACY AGAINST US!"
Click to expand...

You must be so happy with this little present coming as it does smack between your birthday and Christmas.
 
If I could give a stuff, I'd dig out all that juicy North supporter sentiment from 2011 that it was better to miss the finals than get flogged and utterly humiliated in an Elimination Final.

I don't give a stuff, but it'd probably be interesting.
 
Lord Nicholson said:
If I could give a stuff, I'd dig out all that juicy North supporter sentiment from 2011 that it was better to miss the finals than get flogged and utterly humiliated in an Elimination Final.

I don't give a stuff, but it'd probably be interesting.
Click to expand...

I have arguments prepared for that!
 
Phone, was it you that made a comment about Maxwell and his bump more than 5 metres off the ball?

Reading Maxwell's comments about it, he stated that he does that plenty of times a game: blocking a forward from running into the fity.

I also heard Buckley say that his players do it approximately 100 times a game.

Don't the rules state you need to be within 5 metres of play to block somebody?
 
Howard Moon said:
Anyone sense the sh*t storm developing but instead of it being Collingwood v Carlton its going to be chiefly Malthouse v Maguire?

Mick: i'll teach you to phase me out when i was in my prime for Figjam Buckley...
Eddie: You touch any of my players and ill go ape
Mick: oh its on! first up, Cloke

to be continued.....
Click to expand...


Eddie McGuire claims Malthouse pursuing Cloke is inapproriate...

what the??

Pull your head in.. you dumped him, he is getting on with his life. You are now the OPPOSITION.
 
Howard Moon said:
Eddie McGuire claims Malthouse pursuing Cloke is inapproriate...

what the??

Pull your head in.. you dumped him, he is getting on with his life. You are now the OPPOSITION.
Click to expand...

Still waiting for someone to bring up how he got Malthouse out of WCE to Eddie's face.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Kong said:
AFL conspired against you, we secretly love/loathe you, Essendon supporters are spoiled rich kids etc etc.

Yeah mate, we've heard your rubbish before.

Next.
Click to expand...

Oh no, it was heaps better than that.
 
DawOfSuspension said:
You must be so happy with this little present coming as it does smack between your birthday and Christmas.
Click to expand...

scotty.gif
 
Kong said:
Phone, was it you that made a comment about Maxwell and his bump more than 5 metres off the ball?

Reading Maxwell's comments about it, he stated that he does that plenty of times a game: blocking a forward from running into the fity.

I also heard Buckley say that his players do it approximately 100 times a game.

Don't the rules state you need to be within 5 metres of play to block somebody?
Click to expand...

To me it seems that like a lot of rules this one is still around yet they don't enforce it. Similar to the blocking the player running onto the next play rule. There was a time they paid that too much. Now they never pay it. Actually saw it paid once a few weeks ago but it is largely ignored these days. Then you see blocking free kicks paid at stoppages.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Mercurial89 said:
To me it seems that like a lot of rules this one is still around yet they don't enforce it. Similar to the blocking the player running onto the next play rule. There was a time they paid that too much. Now they never pay it. Actually saw it paid once a few weeks ago but it is largely ignored these days. Then you see blocking free kicks paid at stoppages.
Click to expand...
As long as the umpires ignore it, I'll continue to be envious of Collingwood and how much their players (often illegally) work for each other.

Even in Round 23, when they were pretty ordinary overall, their blocking for each other was phenomenal, while our players, even the better ones, were rarely if ever, looking to provide the same sort of protection.

They're the worst in the league, by far, Collingwood, as far as blatant cheating and scragging goes, and it does my head in, but I can't fault them for their endeavour.

I wish our players were that dedicated for more than 8 or 9 rounds.
 
Kong said:
As long as the umpires ignore it, I'll continue to be envious of Collingwood and how much their players (often illegally) work for each other.

Even in Round 23, when they were pretty ordinary overall, their blocking for each other was phenomenal, while our players, even the better ones, were rarely if ever, looking to provide the same sort of protection.

They're the worst in the league, by far, Collingwood, as far as blatant cheating and scragging goes, and it does my head in, but I can't fault them for their endeavour.

I wish our players were that dedicated for more than 8 or 9 rounds.
Click to expand...

It frustrates me that I know as soon as we start doing it, the AFL will crack down on it.
 
frustrating aint the world!

they dont hide away from it either... EVERY kick out they have a roaming teammate standing a few meters away ready to block the man on the mark so they can get an extra 10/15m before they kick. Some times i scream at the TV for us to wake the fu*k up and do something about it.

edit. maybe they can leave a man out of the zone that can man this guy up?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Harlequin
MVP RND 11: Essendon v Richmond
Replies
10
Views
271
Seb78
Seb78
Harlequin
MVP RND 10: Essendon V Freo
Replies
9
Views
241
Calthorpe14
Calthorpe14
Harlequin
MVP RND 12: Essendon V West Coast
Replies
5
Views
87
brutus76
brutus76
Harlequin
MVP RND 8: Essendon V Brisbane
Replies
7
Views
227
SpeckieMcVeigh
S
Harlequin
MVP RND 7: Essendon v Collingwood
Replies
6
Views
187
Blind Turn
Blind Turn
Harlequin
MVP RND 6: Essendon V Gold Coast
Replies
7
Views
240
ydc55
Y
Harlequin
    • Like
MVP RND 5: Essendon v Melbourne FC
Replies
15
Views
337
ydc55
Y

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom