Jump to content

sue

Members
  • Content count

    3,339
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

sue last won the day on August 26 2016

sue had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,459 Excellent

About sue

  • Rank
    Master Demon

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

6,522 profile views
  1. Cotchin out?

    No it's not. The player going for the mark only incidentally knees someone in the head and there is no way of establishing that he deliberately kneed him in order to get the ball. In a case like Cotchin's it may be possible to establish that he deliberately cleaned an opponent up in order to get the ball. I'm personally not saying he did or didn't, just that it is not the same principle.
  2. Cotchin out?

    I find this quote from the Afl website puzzling: I don't see where the benefit of the doubt is. If you decide to both bump front-on and collect the ball, then you have clearly done the former to help you with the latter and a penalty should follow. I don't see why purposely doing both simultaneously provides any doubt to benefit from. (I'm not commenting on what happened in the Cotchin case, just the logic of the author.) It could be argued if you take a mark running backwards and take out the opponent coming towards the ball you are not in trouble, so why should you in this case. However that situation is somewhat different, the marking player has not decided to bump in order to get the ball, he is just going for the ball and a collision is unavoidable. Ditto for kneeing someone in the head to take a speccy.
  3. Cotchin out?

    Personally I can't judge from the video and the AFL 'rules' and 'precedents' if he deserves to be rubbed out. Doubtless I'd be tempted to look at it more forgivingly if it was a Melbourne player. But if it was a Demon player in some home & away game, I'd be happy to escape with a fine given the video and the concussion (it's clear he was stunned at the time). The dilemma for the AFL is the huge effect of a fine in this case. Couldn't happen to a more deserving organization.
  4. Cotchin out?

    I see that an MRP member has been commenting on the situation before the MRP meets. Totally inappropriate but that's what you expect from the 'professional' AFL sadly. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-24/bump-or-brace-the-question-that-will-determine-cotchins-fate/8979586
  5. Cotchin out?

    I haven't seen the Ellis bump yet, but the cynic in me says he'll be the scapegoat and be rubbed out for 12 weeks to help justify letting Cotchin off.
  6. AFL Finals Week 3 - Prelims

    Rubbish. We may have been run by simians, but that list doesn't provide evidence of it. Trengove & $cully were widey thought to be 1 & 2. Stop beating yourself up.
  7. Guess the Crowd...GWS v Eagles

    17 teams? While a bye during the season may be uncontroversial, they'd be a lot of fuss if a team about to play in the finals had a bye in the last round. Similarly the team that missed round 1 might be miffed since they'd be playing a team in round 2 that already had some real match experience.
  8. Guess the Crowd...GWS v Eagles

    I have no love for Richmond but I hope they win on the weekend. This is purely on the basis of the happiness for the greatest number of fellow footy supporters. If GWS win about 30 players, their families, some paid staff, some paid supporters and a few actual supporters, a total of maybe 2K people will be happy. Compare that to the number of Richmond fans. However much you might find them distasteful, they are footy fans.
  9. Tomas Bugg Opens Up

    No the AFL won't crackdown as long as those idiot TV commentators fawn over how competetoive and manly it is to push and shove and kidney punch before the game. All the umpires have to do is award a free kick (consistently) to the first one they see, regardless as to how unfair it is and the players will think of some other way to show how competitive they are.
  10. AFL Finals - Week 2

    If a coach isn't teaching players how to benefit from any current rules/interpretations then he should be sacked.
  11. Guess the Crowd...GWS v Eagles

    Perhaps that balances a whole year of home ground advantage that other vic clubs don't really have anymore.
  12. AFL Finals - Week 2

    It's not just incidental high contact where frees are given where perhaps they shouldn't be. The lightest jumper tug which has no effect on the player being tugged is paid, yet all sorts of wrestling, throwing opponents away as the ball arrives leads to a toss up as to who if anyone gets the free. In both cases the free gets paid because there is an obvious signal that something illegal has happened so it is easy for the umpires to make a decision. Unlike the jumper tug where it may be difficult to judge if the player has been impeded by the tug, it should be relatively easy for umpires to judge a light incidental brush over the shoulder as having no effect on the player and so not pay a free. But I can't see that happening because the AFL likes to pretend the head is sacrosant though I'm still waiting for a free to be paid for dangerous ducking. Wasn't the AFL going to crack down on ducking because of injury concerns? If umpires paid a few frees for ducking (rather than just shouting 'he ducked' so I'm not paying the over-the-shoulder free as they do now), I expect we'd see a lot less ducking.
  13. Guess the Crowd...GWS v Eagles

    And I expect the AFL will be happy to distort the competition for those 20 years. Regardless of whether you think extending AFL this way is a good, bad, wise or stupid idea, it means pain to other weaker teams for the foreseeable future, but lots of fun and loot for the empire builders.
  14. Assistant Coaches

    Maybe, maybe not. Being a good kick doesn't necessarily mean you can identify and fix problems that others have.
  15. Amusing Read

    Plucky heroes, villains, clichés and fetishes – how scriptwriters see the end of the 2017 AFL season
×