Jump to content


Recommended Posts

One would be hard pressed to funny a more blatant effort of squibbing.

It's hard to take people seriously when they don't understand the game.

It's even harder to take people seriously when they are so sure they are right that they dismiss a contrary opinion so arrogantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's even harder to take people seriously when they are so sure they are right that they dismiss a contrary opinion so arrogantly.

A player only ducks his head like that when he's expecting contact from behind.

Perhaps you can also explain why he decided not to try to take the mark ? Attempting to take the mark, a straight forward one at that, meant that contact from behind was much more likely. Knocking it away lessened his exposure to forceful contact. Hot potato hot potato. His self preservation act was obvious and deplorable.

That said, he has opportunities to rectify this embarrassing moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's decisions like taking Pederson that Neeld finds himself without a job.

Not really. Pedersen, Rodan and Gillies were the poster boys for Neeld's moneyball recruiting failure but .....

The inability to develop midfielders (Trengove, Sylvia, Gysberts just to name a few) and half forward rotation types (Blease, Tapscott, Bail) led to us having such a horrible midfield, with no ball winning or using ability. In turn that led to Neeld's downfall.

Using the last few spots on the list for a bit of key position depth and leadership even if it failed was hardly a disaster. Most clubs have a few hits and misses with those types of players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A player only ducks his head like that when he's expecting contact from behind.

Perhaps you can also explain why he decided not to try to take the mark ? Attempting to take the mark, a straight forward one at that, meant that contact from behind was much more likely. Knocking it away lessened his exposure to forceful contact. Hot potato hot potato. His self preservation act was obvious and deplorable.

That said, he has opportunities to rectify this embarrassing moment.

If you actually read my original post you will see the answers to your question. I gave a possible 'good' explanation for what he did. And concluded that while I wouldn't stake life on it being correct (i.e. shock horror, you may be right), I'd give him the benefit of the doubt.

You can be as dogmatic as you like that you are right, but there is no need to accuse anyone with a contrary opinion of knowing nothing about the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


If you actually read my original post you will see the answers to your question. I gave a possible 'good' explanation for what he did. And concluded that while I wouldn't stake life on it being correct (i.e. shock horror, you may be right), I'd give him the benefit of the doubt.

You can be as dogmatic as you like that you are right, but there is no need to accuse anyone with a contrary opinion of knowing nothing about the game.

"It is clear he knocks it down before he ducks and then goes backwards and sideways. It seems to me possible he was trying to be clever by using a a fast play to the crumber and then shepherd the oppo player coming towards him. And looked clumsy.''

This was your diagnosis of the unfortunate effort. I asked you ''why didn't he take the mark ?''. Where is your answer ? He wasn't being clever knocking away a ball that he could easily mark. Taking the mark was the best and only logical decision for Pedersen. The only reason he bunted the ball away and ducked his head is that he wasn't sure who was behind him and was desperate to avoid a hit to his noggin.

Also, if the ball was kicked by a Melbourne player I doubt he would have ducked and knocked the ball away. He would have assumed that he was in the clear hence the ball being passed to him. His uncertainty came because the ball was kicked by an opposition player and he wasn't certain who was behind him. Clearly he would have assumed that the target of the kicker was close by, hence his self-preservation and awkward footy moment.

I get that you still won't get it.

Edited by The Myth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It is clear he knocks it down before he ducks and then goes backwards and sideways. It seems to me possible he was trying to be clever by using a a fast play to the crumber and then shepherd the oppo player coming towards him. And looked clumsy.''

This was your diagnosis of the unfortunate effort. I asked you ''why didn't he take the mark ?''. Where is your answer. He wasn't being clever knocking away a ball that he could easily mark. Taking the mark was the best and only logical decision for Pedersen. The only reason he bunted the ball away and ducked his head is that he wasn't sure who was behind him and was desperate to avoid a hit to his noggin.

Also, if the ball was kicked by a Melbourne player I doubt he would have ducked and knocked the ball away. He would have assumed that he was in the clear hence the ball being passed to him. His uncertainty came because the ball was kicked by an opposition player and he wasn't certain who was behind him. Clearly he would have assumed that the target of the kicker was close by, hence his self-preservation and awkward footy moment.

I get that you still won't get it.

My answer to your allegedly unanswered question of 'why didn't he take the mark' was in my original post where I wrote: "It seems to me possible he was trying to be clever by using a fast play to the crumber and then shepherd the oppo player coming towards him."

When writing that sentence originally I had started to add "instead of taking a mark and thus slowing down the play". But I deleted that because I thought that was implicit from the italicised words in the above sentence.

If I took the same attitude to you as you did to me, I'd now write 'Only an [censored] would not see the obvious inference'.

But I'll just say: I guess you missed the inference. Looks like I should have spelt out what I meant more.

Edited by sue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One other possibility is that he misinterpreted the umpires call of "play on" in his ear as the ball was kicked. Thinking the mark would not be paid he knocked the ball to advantage. I guess the only person who really knows is Pedersen himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't believe that you blokes are arguing about one incident that happened nearly 12 months ago....

Gee it must be the off season and there is no one to bag at this time of the year....

Fair Dinkum.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't believe that you blokes are arguing about one incident that happened nearly 12 months ago....

Gee it must be the off season and there is no one to bag at this time of the year....

Fair Dinkum.....

Bossdog, you can't expect to see any new stuff at this time of year. In cases like this where it is relevant to the coming season (in a minor way), re-hashing/re-interpreting old stuff does have its uses (other than dealing with the terminal boredom of no footy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My answer to your allegedly unanswered question of 'why didn't he take the mark' was in my original post where I wrote: "It seems to me possible he was trying to be clever by using a fast play to the crumber and then shepherd the oppo player coming towards him."

When writing that sentence originally I had started to add "instead of taking a mark and thus slowing down the play". But I deleted that because I thought that was implicit from the italicised words in the above sentence.

If I took the same attitude to you as you did to me, I'd now write 'Only an [censored] would not see the obvious inference'.

But I'll just say: I guess you missed the inference. Looks like I should have spelt out what I meant more.

No player in the AFL would avoid taking an uncontested mark in the middle of the ground.

Seemingly you can't bring yourself to accept the bleeding obvious. It only makes you look like you don't understand footy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No player in the AFL would avoid taking an uncontested mark in the middle of the ground.

...

Well there's were we'll disagree. I've seen cocky Geelong players do it from time to time (maybe only once a game or two). It looks great when it comes off as it speeds up the play and leave the oppos flat-footed. It takes confidence and skill which maybe Pedo doesn't have IF that was what he was trying to do.

I'm also inclined to give Pedo the benefit of the doubt because I don't recall seeing him do it again.

Edited by sue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. Pedersen, Rodan and Gillies were the poster boys for Neeld's moneyball recruiting failure but .....

The inability to develop midfielders (Trengove, Sylvia, Gysberts just to name a few) and half forward rotation types (Blease, Tapscott, Bail) led to us having such a horrible midfield, with no ball winning or using ability. In turn that led to Neeld's downfall.

Using the last few spots on the list for a bit of key position depth and leadership even if it failed was hardly a disaster. Most clubs have a few hits and misses with those types of players.

How can you blame Neeld for not developing Sylvia, if Daniher and Bailey Failed its not Neelds fault, Neelds without a job because he recruited spuds pure and simple and not only where they spuds he put them On long contracts, he deserves to be on Newstart.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there's were we'll disagree. I've seen cocky Geelong players do it from time to time (maybe only once a game or two). It looks great when it comes off as it speeds up the play and leave the oppos flat-footed. It takes confidence and skill which maybe Pedo doesn't have IF that was what he was trying to do.

I'm also inclined to give Pedo the benefit of the doubt because I don't recall seeing him do it again.

I appreciate you giving him the benefit of the doubt Sue but from playing a lot of footy there is no player in the world who would risk tapping an uncontested mark down to someone to keep the play moving. Also, there is no coach in the world who would recommend this as the risk is simply to great for only a small reward (gaining a quarter of a second).

I have seen Stevey J move the ball on similiar many times but when he does it the ball is still in motion and its not an uncontested marking situation.

Pedo looked scared here, nothing less nothing more. If I was an opposition player I would have absolutely given it to him here and make him remember it, if I was a team mate after watching that I would have been nothing less than incredibly embarrassed. Just like I was as a supporter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


My issue with him is not that he's scared it's that he simply isn't good enough.

He showed nothing to suggest he was up to AFL standard and I doubt he will.

Hope you are wrong 'Robbie' but his performance to date says you are right on the mark. At 27 yo going into next season he's had plenty of opportunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No player in the AFL would avoid taking an uncontested mark in the middle of the ground.

Seemingly you can't bring yourself to accept the bleeding obvious. It only makes you look like you don't understand footy.

FFS, make your point, have your little snipe, then drop it.

You're the king of "I don't care what anyone thinks", yet you're like a dog with a bone when anyone disagrees with you. If in reality you didn't care, you wouldn't even deign to reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FFS, make your point, have your little snipe, then drop it.

You're the king of "I don't care what anyone thinks", yet you're like a dog with a bone when anyone disagrees with you. If in reality you didn't care, you wouldn't even deign to reply.

My daily care factor determines my output. You won't be surprised to learn that it won't be governed by you, or anyone else.

Although I'm flattered that you and others get so agitated by my offerings that they feel the need to enter the fray when it doesn't concern you.

I clearly occupy your thoughts far more than you mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    REDEEM by Meggs

    How will Mick Stinear and his dwindling list of fit and available Demons respond to last week’s 65-point capitulation to the Bombers, the team’s biggest loss in history?   As a minimum he will expect genuine effort from all of his players when Melbourne takes on the GWS Giants at Ikon Park this Thursday.  Happily, the ground remains a favourite Melbourne venue of players and spectators alike and will provide an opportunity for the Demons to redeem themselves. Injuries to star play

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    EASYBEATS by Meggs

    A beautiful sunny Friday afternoon, with a light breeze and a strong Windy Hill crowd set the scene, inviting one team to seize the day and take the important four points on offer. For the Demons it was not a good Friday, easily beaten by an all-time largest losing margin of 65 points.   Essendon threw themselves into action today, winning most of the contests and had three early goals with Daria Bannister on fire.  In contrast the Demons were dropping marks, hesitant in close and comm

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 9

    DEFUSE THE BOMBERS by Meggs

    Last Saturday’s crushing loss to Fremantle, after being three goals ahead at three quarter time, should be motivation enough to bounce back for this very winnable Round 5 clash at Windy Hill. A first-time venue for the Melbourne AFLW team, this should be a familiar suburban, windy, footy environment for the players.   Essendon were brave and competitive last week against ladder leader Adelaide at Sturt’s home ground. A familiar name, Maddison Gay, was the Bombers best player with

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 33

    BLOW THE SIREN by Meggs

    Fremantle hosted the Demons on a sunny 20-degree Saturdayafternoon winning the toss and electing to defend in the first quarter against the 3-goal breeze favouring the Parry Street end. There was method here, as this would give the comeback queens, the Dockers, last use of the breeze. The Melbourne Coach had promised an improved performance, and we did start better than previous weeks, winning the ball out of the middle, using the breeze advantage and connecting to the forwards. 

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    GETAWAY by Meggs

    Calling all fit players. Expect every available Melbourne player to board the Virgin cross-continent flight to Perth for this Round 4 clash on Saturday afternoon at Fremantle Oval. It promises to be keenly contested, though Fremantle is the bookies clear favourite.  If we lose, finals could be remoter than Rottnest Island especially following on from the Dees 50-point dismantlement by North Melbourne last Sunday.  There are 8 remaining matches, over the next 7 weeks.  To Meggs’

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    DRUBBING by Meggs

    With Casey Fields basking in sunshine, an enthusiastic throng of young Demons fans formed a guard of honour for the evergreen and much admired 75-gamer Paxy Paxman. As the home team ran out to play, Paxy’s banner promised that the Demons would bounce back from last week’s loss to Brisbane and reign supreme.   Disappointingly, the Kangaroos dominated the match to win by 50 points, but our Paxy certainly did her bit.  She was clearly our best player, sweeping well in defence.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 4

    GARNER STRENGTH by Meggs

    In keeping with our tough draw theme, Week 3 sees Melbourne take on flag favourites, North Melbourne, at Casey Fields this Sunday at 1:05pm.  The weather forecast looks dry, a coolish 14 degrees and will be characteristically gusty.  Remember when Casey Fields was considered our fortress?  The Demons have lost two of their past three matches at the Field of Dreams, so opposition teams commute down the Princes Highway with more optimism these days.  The Dees held the highe

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 1

    ALLY’S FIELDS by Meggs

    It was a sunny morning at Casey Fields, as Demon supporters young and old formed a guard of honour for fan favourite and 50-gamer Alyssa Bannan.  Banno’s banner stated the speedster was the ‘fastest 50 games’ by an AFLW player ever.   For Dees supporters, today was not our day and unfortunately not for Banno either. A couple of opportunities emerged for our number 6 but alas there was no sizzle.   Brisbane atoned for last week’s record loss to North Melbourne, comprehensively out

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 1

    GOOD MORNING by Meggs

    If you are driving or training it to Cranbourne on Saturday, don’t forget to set your alarm clock. The Melbourne Demons play the reigning premiers Brisbane Lions at Casey Fields this Saturday, with the bounce of the ball at 11:05am.  Yes, that’s AM.   The AFLW fixture shows deference to the AFL men’s finals games.  So, for the men it’s good afternoon and good evening and for the women it’s good morning.     The Lions were wounded last week by 44 points, their highest ever los

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 3
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

×
×
  • Create New...