Review What do you mean we f**king won at Geelong?

Remove this Banner Ad

One of my main memories of a loss there was Ben Graham kicking a goal from 107m out that bounced a few times to put them in front just before the final siren.
My memory is of Gavin unsuccessfully trying to chase that ball down before it crossed the goal line. Yeah, made my pretty angry!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

They didn't even assess him did they? Surely that is worse? Absolute bullsh!t as always.

Geelong claim they did an on-ground assessment because he refused to come off.

Tin-pot league pretending to be professional.
 
I am assuming today has seen league wide supporter outrage levelled at Geelong for the non-concussion, now has some concussion stuff? Similar to the vitriol levelled at Port?
 
Stocks up: Have the Power unearthed one in Dante Visentini? The fourth gamer was one of Port's best on Friday night against the Cats, taking on veteran duo Rhys Stanley and Mark Blicavs, and winning. Stanley was subbed out before half time, and Blicavs was forced into the ruck role, while Visentini himself had a game-high 31 hit outs -- 10 of which were to advantage! He also had two clearances on the night. Ivan Soldo and Jordon Sweet have some competition...

Stocks down: Those who prematurely wrote off Ollie Wines, what did you make of his performance against the Cats? The 2021 Brownlow Medal winner was superb in the win, lifting in the absence of skipper Connor Rozee to finish the game with 33 disposals, 15 contested possessions, nine clearances, 11 score involvements, seven tackles, and a goal. Huge!

https://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_...ross-lyon-christian-petracca-essendon-bombers
 
They didn't even assess him did they? Surely that is worse? Absolute bullsh!t as always.

I heard on one of the Sunday radio broadcasts that Geelong assessed him on field and referred to the “ARC” for his assessment and was given the all clear. Since when has the ARC been available for medical assessment of players? Who’s doing the assessment?
 
Tom Atkins cited for tripping JHF in the last quarter. So that's a shot on goal Port missed out on because the umps made an actual mistake.
I'm assuming this is the trip that Atkins has been cited for. Not one of the four field umpires in Friday night's game saw anything wrong with this tripping action and therefore JHF was not awarded a free kick. Correctly not paying advantage to Geelong however for HTB on Butters is worthy of a Royal Commission. o_O

1715571343069.png
 
Last edited:
I'm so confused as to what we did wrong with Aliir if this is allowed. Can anyone explain it?

(for the record I think neither should be allowed and both were disgusting, but ours surely not as bad as theirs)
The armchair vibe is that Aliir looked visibly concussed, whereas Cameron did not go 'out cold'. Even though both are still concussion. Just going off what I've read on large sherrin
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Geelong claim they did an on-ground assessment because he refused to come off.

Tin-pot league pretending to be professional.
“refused to come off”. That is completely unacceptable but crickets from AFL House. The players union need to have a word with Cameron, oh wait Dangerfield is the Prez, isn’t he?
 
I do not disagree with you - he should have come straight to the bench instead of arguing with the club doctor
If a club doctor is having a discussion with a player on field the umpire should stop play and direct them off the field for that discussion to continue. It's not the 1980s anymore where playing out a game with concussion is a badge of honour. AFL is a joke on this matter. I hope they get sent broke with lawsuits from this incompetence
 
The armchair vibe is that Aliir looked visibly concussed, whereas Cameron did not go 'out cold'. Even though both are still concussion. Just going off what I've read on large sherrin

Aliir in the Saints game a couple of weeks ago looked fine after he hit his head (he was even waving the doctor off) and we made him leave the ground for his HIA then subbed him out.

Imagine if we hadn't?
 
9 Zak Butters (PORT)
9 Jason Horne-Francis (PORT)
3 William Rioli (PORT)
3 Ollie Wines (PORT)
3 Zach Guthrie (GEEL)
2 Tyson Stengle (GEEL)
1 Max Holmes (GEEL)
 
9 Zak Butters (PORT)
9 Jason Horne-Francis (PORT)
3 William Rioli (PORT)
3 Ollie Wines (PORT)
3 Zach Guthrie (GEEL)
2 Tyson Stengle (GEEL)
1 Max Holmes (GEEL)

I really would like to see which coach voted for who.

Given those votes, Scott and Hinkley were split on best on field, with Butters and JHF getting 5+4.

Past that, they only agreed on 1 other player being in the top five. As 2 of Rioli, Wines and Guthrie would have picked up the 3 votes, the other 2+1.

Which means for Stengle and Holmes to get votes, only 1 coach would have voted for them.

I kind of get Stengle but not Holmes.

I’m guessing Scott voted as if Geelong had won.
 
I really would like to see which coach voted for who.

Given those votes, Scott and Hinkley were split on best on field, with Butters and JHF getting 5+4.

Past that, they only agreed on 1 other player being in the top five. As 2 of Rioli, Wines and Guthrie would have picked up the 3 votes, the other 2+1.

Which means for Stengle and Holmes to get votes, only 1 coach would have voted for them.

I kind of get Stengle but not Holmes.

I’m guessing Scott voted as if Geelong had won.
do u think port had butters 5 and geelong jhf 5? im thinking geelong tagged him over butters, so it would make more sense they gave jhf 5
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top