Jump to content

btdemon

Oliver is no 'stager'!

Recommended Posts

Right so if one of the players walked up and did exactly the same thing to an umpire, then that would be fine?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I note that the font of all knowledge, the HS, says the Eagle will be cleared due to insufficient force!

Insufficient to KO him? Insufficient to break his jaw?

A "gentle" elbow to the jaw is OK?  

So all this BS from AFL HQ about punching and hitting being a blight on the game is just that, BS. 

Edited by monoccular
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, DaveyJones'sLocker said:

We are not blaming the victim we are discussing if he exaggerated contact. Because let's be honest if the siren had not gone, we would be discussing if the victim was in fact a cheat .

You are not serious are you?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the AFL make itself look any more foolish ?? :wacko:

(Well there is always next week I suppose, but for now they've reached the current zenith )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get this, didn't Clarry get elbowed in the jaw at half time, everybody seems to forget that Schofield elbowed him and connected.

As for that [censored] Damien Martyn grow up and start acting your age.

Fair dinkum just another cowboy from the Wild West.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Schofield gets 2 down to 1.  Deemed intentional.  The right call IMV.

So rubbish to all the media who tried to make it a Clayton story!

Edited by Lucifer's Hero
  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The attention this gets annoys me after such a great come from behind win. Oliver had nothing to gain with the siren gone and no free kicks on offer. Secondly how about we place a bit of attention on the 27-16 free count in an even and tightly contested match. Go Dees

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Schofield gets 2 down to 1.  Deemed intentional.  The right call IMV.

So rubbish to all the media who tried to make it a Clayton story!

I think the actions deserves a week but I reckon they might contest this one on lack of force. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GoDees1984 said:

The attention this gets annoys me after such a great come from behind win. Oliver had nothing to gain with the siren gone and no free kicks on offer. Secondly how about we place a bit of attention on the 27-16 free count in an even and tightly contested match. Go Dees

I think, as the frees were 11-11 at half time, the point is not the 27-16 full-game count, but the 16-5 second-half count.

Lopsided free counts never create a PR problem for the AFL, so it doesn't seem to bother them in the slightest.

Neither, it seems, does an intentional elbow to the face.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2017 at 10:35 AM, Nasher said:

What was his motivation for diving?

Maybe he wanted a free during the half time break.  The reason they stage is for a free.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DaveyJones'sLocker said:

I think the actions deserves a week but I reckon they might contest this one on lack of force. 

Oh, lack of force as proven by the fact that Oliver is a diver I suppose.  What a load of crud. Looks like the MRP finally makes a right call and then I read that.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously the MRP considered it intentional and maybe now the clowns that heaped it on Clarrie will apologise, doubt it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DaveyJones'sLocker said:

I think the actions deserves a week but I reckon they might contest this one on lack of force. 

FMD.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, DaveyJones'sLocker said:

I think the actions deserves a week but I reckon they might contest this one on lack of force. 

doubt it. he's not a good enough player to worry about - lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Viney's incident was looked at, but thrown out as he had both arms outstretched and was competing for the ball.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Agggghhhhhhhhh why is F log censored again... it's not a freaking swear word!!!

maybe because it means f'n log?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last week I said you can hit a Melbourne player and get off. Now it appears you can elbow a Melbourne player and it is his fault for falling down.It has been claimed Clarry was staging for a free even when frees were not on offer due to this being after the siren. If Schofield had kept his elbow down the issue would not have happened. Who is the victim? Obviously Schofield. Maybe Clarry is soft and should take up playing cricket.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dante said:

Obviously the MRP considered it intentional and maybe now the clowns that heaped it on Clarrie will apologise, doubt it.

As they say... don't hold breath my friend.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DaveyJones'sLocker said:

I think the actions deserves a week but I reckon they might contest this one on lack of force. 

How do you know that it was lack of force he's a 90+ kilo man throwing an elbow FMD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John Lord ,good lord your as old as me.

I remember as a kid getting in the rooms at half time seeing john lord having a smoke.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was listening to robbo on sen podcast, he had clarry in his dislikes and a caller rang up and said watch boxing as you can cop just a glancing blow on your chin and it can stun you to the point of falling over, it sort of changed Robbos mind on it, I bet he goes into bat for clarry on afl360 tonight bookmark it

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow - the mrp actually rubbed out someone for hitting a melbourne player. gobsmacked (npi)

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, John Lord said:

Last week I said you can hit a Melbourne player and get off. Now it appears you can elbow a Melbourne player and it is his fault for falling down.It has been claimed Clarry was staging for a free even when frees were not on offer due to this being after the siren. If Schofield had kept his elbow down the issue would not have happened. Who is the victim? Obviously Schofield. Maybe Clarry is soft and should take up playing cricket.

An Essendon supporter greeted me at work this morning by telling me Oliver needs to take a good hard look at himself.

That caused the first twitch in my eye, I returned serve with the points you stated, Schofield being the real issue here and I couldn't care less if Oliver dived or did not. 

His next response was, nah mate Schofield only did what Jones, Viney and Bugg have been doing all year. Well, that was enough for both eyes to start twitching, I had to stop my task immediately before a verbal spat ignited, found the smoking balcony and sucked down a quick Winnie Blue whilst jumping on Demonland to calm down.

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

wow - the mrp actually rubbed out someone for hitting a melbourne player. gobsmacked (npi)

Yes dc it is a little hard to come to grips with.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×