hardtack

Life Member
  • Content count

    7,798
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

hardtack last won the day on December 24 2014

hardtack had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5,533 Excellent

About hardtack

  • Rank
    Red and Blue
  • Birthday March 26

Previous Fields

  • Favourite Player(s)
    No favourites... it's about the Team and Paul La Roos

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sydney
  • Interests
    Not interested in anything
  1. For those talking of replacements for Garlett (and possibly Viney), this from the article linked to in the comments above: Gawn expected small forward Jeff Garlett (hamstring) to be fine to face the Swans and he doesn't expect courageous co-captain Jack Viney (shoulder) to be in any doubt either. "He'll need his shoulder off the bone to miss a Friday night game," Gawn said. Gawn expected small forward Jeff Garlett (hamstring) to be fine to face the Swans and he doesn't expect courageous co-captain Jack Viney (shoulder) to be in any doubt either. "He'll need his shoulder off the bone to miss a Friday night game," Gawn said.
  2. He was hit, but I think the fact that his head did not noticeably move much, indicated very slight contact, and even at normal speed, the whole thing looked almost like it was in slow motion - that is why people are saying he dived. Me?...I have no idea whether he was genuinely stunned and went down or whether he over reacted. One thing is certain though, and that is that Schofield should get weeks (not a week and definitely not a fine) for intent... as far as I'm concerned (and I've said this many times before), the intent is what should be looked at first and acted upon; NOT the impact.
  3. It affects how we formulate the facts, and considering the hit didn't look particularly solid, those "facts" would be based on that. In saying that, I'm not condoning what the West Coast player did.
  4. Adelaide are faring no better as they have a 6 day turn around (we have 7) and have to play Geelong.
  5. I didn't get to watch the game live as my band was playing, but when I got home my son showed me video of the TMac goal and that Oliver incident. I had no context to work from and didn't realise it was after the siren had sounded (I had had a few beers), but the slight gap from when contact was made and when Oliver went down, did have me thinking it was a dive. On viewing my Foxtel recording replay of the game this morning however, it did look like is happened in one motion, albeit slow motion. Like another poster, I can't help thinking that if it had been a West Coast player (or a Selwood perhaps) who had copped the hit, there would be plenty here crying "dive".
  6. Begins at 7:40pm East Coast time .
  7. There is not one player in the entire competition that I can think of, who deserves that moment more. If it's this year, in which case I won't be able to attend, I hope to hear that roar from here in my Sydney home.
  8. That'll teach me to respond without reading to the end of the topic! And you did a better job.... now that hurts!
  9. Surely you meant to say: Tantum in Demonland!
  10. I wouldn't be surprised if Watts is rested, in which case I imagine Pedersen would be moved forward with Gawn coming back in. Wagner could come into the back line and Salem moved to the midfield to help cover the loss of Jones.
  11. Semantics...where have I misrepresented weather as climate change? If you call the bleaching of the reef or the collapsing of glaciers to an extent never seen before weather, then you may have a fair point... but I'd like to see empirical evidence to support that.
  12. That is hardly the point. If they want to eliminate these undisciplined acts from the game, then they need to act on the intent, not the outcome; and in Shuey's case, the intent was most definitely there.
  13. Your words, not mine: "You have exaggerated or in your words used "hyperbole" to misrepresent weather as climate change.". So that was just hyperbole then?
  14. I would be happy to admit it IF I was wrong. However, your lack of comprehension skills are evidenced by the fact that you seem to think my words are used to misrepresent climate change when it's patently obvious they are not... would you care to explain exactly how my words misrepresent climate change?
  15. I did explain what I meant by my response to DC that you jumped on (as was to be expected), so which part of "I condone it as a means of leaving the likes of yourself less wriggle room with that ridiculous "cyclical event" argument." didn't you understand Wrecker? As I said, comprehension doesn't seem to be one of your strengths.