5 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Wasn't this the bloke who was being touted as one of our more favored Draft Picks by some on this forum in the 2015 National draft. 

Obviously we all knew nothing about him then, but.......

 . . . he would have helped us even up the free-kick ledger?

I was at the game and yes, he did drop into the tackles, but give the kid a break, it's his first game.

I actually thought for a first gamer he did a great job, he wasn't afraid to go in and get whacked. 

He was touted as a high draft pick and went 2 picks before our 40 something pick. Could very well have been a Dee.

He's got a bit of mongrel about him, and if he continues to show that he'll be an ok player.

Rhys looks like he wants to hurt you and get hurt, time will tell. If Jack Watts had that intensity, he's be a superstar. Jack doesn't want to hurt his opponent, he wants to have high tea on the half forward flank with his.

3 minutes ago, Converted Dee said:

I was at the game and yes, he did drop into the tackles, but give the kid a break, it's his first game.

I actually thought for a first gamer he did a great job, he wasn't afraid to go in and get whacked. 

He was touted as a high draft pick and went 2 picks before our 40 something pick. Could very well have been a Dee.

He's got a bit of mongrel about him, and if he continues to show that he'll be an ok player.

Rhys looks like he wants to hurt you and get hurt, time will tell. If Jack Watts had that intensity, he's be a superstar. Jack doesn't want to hurt his opponent, he wants to have high tea on the half forward flank with his.

Converted from the Bears no doubt . . .

Kidding. I agree. First gamer getting used to the heat and pace of the AFL - probably natural to crumple into a little ball when being set upon so quickly on all sides. Showed a willingness to get involved and kept going under the threat of Jones, Bernie and co. signalling their intention to line him up.

5 minutes ago, Converted Dee said:

I was at the game and yes, he did drop into the tackles, but give the kid a break, it's his first game.

I actually thought for a first gamer he did a great job, he wasn't afraid to go in and get whacked. 

He was touted as a high draft pick and went 2 picks before our 40 something pick. Could very well have been a Dee.

He's got a bit of mongrel about him, and if he continues to show that he'll be an ok player.

Rhys looks like he wants to hurt you and get hurt, time will tell. If Jack Watts had that intensity, he's be a superstar. Jack doesn't want to hurt his opponent, he wants to have high tea on the half forward flank with his.

If he's got a bit of mongrel about him the bears should have put him in the ruck against Watts!

Beastmode... pfffft Lynch would kill him and eat skittles upon his corpse.

Whichever way one looks at it there is no escape for young Rhys. He has openly stated numerous times that he 'models his game on Joel Selwoods'.....

 

 

17 minutes ago, Melbman2 said:

 

That's a disgrace, hope he's ashamed of himself. ANB is a champ.

The guy is a bloody cheat and he WILL inevitably suffer a significant head, face or neck injury....and some poor bugger will be made to feel guilty about it

#bitchmode

The ANB spray is one of the all time best!

Gave him an absolute bath

I liken the ducking to staging, a deliberate action to draw a free kick, i personally think it should be a free kick against the player who did it and every time a bloke ducks down the player should drive them into the ground hard and make them earn it

On 5/24/2016 at 9:42 PM, Rhys Mathieson is a gun said:

You guys are all over reacting to a kid that dropped himself down twice not six times, being a brisbane supporter I agree that he did drop his knees but not all six times some were from sloppy tackles and one wasn't even from a high tackle it was an infringement after a mark. Maybe you should look into the Selwoods who have been getting away with it for years.

Duck, duck, duck, duck . . . and now we have a goose.

On 24/05/2016 at 10:12 PM, Rhys Mathieson is a gun said:

You guys are all over reacting to a kid that dropped himself down twice not six times, being a brisbane supporter I agree that he did drop his knees but not all six times some were from sloppy tackles and one wasn't even from a high tackle it was an infringement after a mark. Maybe you should look into the Selwoods who have been getting away with it for years.

Are you going around to all the team forums defending him?

Just so you know,  supporters from all teams think he is a joke. Cheers.

Our players need to improve their tackling as much as anything.

Just now, Clint Bizkit said:

Our players need to improve their tackling as much as anything.

Of course. Not one of them actually went through with it and broke his jaw.i hope Roosy gave em a spray for it.

4 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Our players need to improve their tackling as much as anything.

I disagree with this in general. I assume you want them to then tackle the hips which means players are able to get their arms free and release the ball.

This is against what they are coached.

Although I do actually agree we seem to give away a lot of frees when tackling. It's just the majority of frees to to Rhys would require players to tackle his thighs to not give them away.

 

3 minutes ago, Melb16 said:

I disagree with this in general. I assume you want them to then tackle the hips which means players are able to get their arms free and release the ball.

This is against what they are coached.

Although I do actually agree we seem to give away a lot of frees when tackling. It's just the majority of frees to to Rhys would require players to tackle his thighs to not give them away.

 

No doubt Mathieson needs to change for his own safety at the very least, but our players should have been smarter in how and when they tackled him.

i think it misleading to call his technique "ducking" as it is quite a different combination of movements.

"ducking" usually means dropping your head into a player by bending forward at the waist

mathieson's technique involves a number of movements (not necessarily all at the same incident), but none of these movements are an attempt to avoid the tackle (which might legitimise the movements). in fact he deliberately entices the tackle. i think this lack of trying to avoid (or break) the tackle is the starting point to differentiating his technique.

and yes he is not the only one, but he is very blatant and if it is allowed to continue (successfully) we'll see such free-staging becoming more common. that is the way of professional sport  

Edited May 26, 20169 yr by daisycutter

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

i think it misleading to call his technique "ducking" as it is quite a different combination of movements.

"ducking" usually means dropping your head into a player by bending forward at the waist

mathieson's technique involves a number of movements (not necessarily all at the same incident), but none of these movements are an attempt to avoid the tackle (which might legitimise the movements). in fact he deliberately entices the tackle. i think this lack of trying to avoid (or break) the tackle is the starting point to differentiating his technique.

and yes he is not the only one, but he is very blatant and if it is allowed to continue (successfully) we'll see such free-staging becoming more common. that is the way of professional sport  

And he's also not "cheating". He's playing the game as allowed by the rules. If he was "cheating" he would be penalised. I would prefer the rules to be changed so the tactic he has successfully employed (along with other players) is not rewarded with a free kick. It should just be play on and if the player tackled disposes of the ball incorrectly, or not at all, a free kick should be paid against him. 

Edited May 26, 20169 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia
Replaced 'played' with 'paid' so it makes sense

Just now, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

And he's also not "cheating". He's playing the game as allowed by the rules. If he was "cheating" he would be penalised. I would prefer the rules to be changed so the tactic he has successfully employed (along with other players) is not rewarded with a free kick. It should just be play on and if the player tackled disposes of the ball incorrectly, or not at all, a free kick should be played against him. 

as you know a lot of the rules are very rubbery.

the first step is for the game's administrators i to recognise this pattern emerging and make a judgement that it is not in the spirit of the game and worse,  could lead to serious injuries (esp. head trauma).

the next step is then either change the rules explicitly or tell the umpires to change the interpretation, accompanied by a strong educational program with the players (and coaches). it shouldn't be done via the "rule of the week" blitz.

16 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

And he's also not "cheating". He's playing the game as allowed by the rules. If he was "cheating" he would be penalised. I would prefer the rules to be changed so the tactic he has successfully employed (along with other players) is not rewarded with a free kick. It should just be play on and if the player tackled disposes of the ball incorrectly, or not at all, a free kick should be played against him. 

The AFL is happy to make new 'interpretations' on the fly.  Since they said some years back that this sort of tactic would lead to a free kick against in order to protect players' heads, it would hardly count of a biggest new rule of the week to instruct the umps to stamp it out.

16 minutes ago, sue said:

The AFL is happy to make new 'interpretations' on the fly.  Since they said some years back that this sort of tactic would lead to a free kick against in order to protect players' heads, it would hardly count of a biggest new rule of the week to instruct the umps to stamp it out.

Spot on, and it is not hard for them to adjudicate.. You notice every time he is tackled, the arm without the ball is forced up to make the tackle slip to his neck.. The minute the umpire sees this he should count a few seconds and ping him for holding the ball.. If you free arm has time to try and force a free, then it should be deemed that it could have been used to knock the ball free..

12 minutes ago, SPC98 said:

Spot on, and it is not hard for them to adjudicate.. You notice every time he is tackled, the arm without the ball is forced up to make the tackle slip to his neck.. The minute the umpire sees this he should count a few seconds and ping him for holding the ball.. If you free arm has time to try and force a free, then it should be deemed that it could have been used to knock the ball free..

And the tacklers arm slipping up over the shoulder/neck should be deemed as incidental and insignificant contact as happens like over 100 times in every game usually in packs.

Edited May 26, 20169 yr by america de cali

43 minutes ago, SPC98 said:

Spot on, and it is not hard for them to adjudicate.. You notice every time he is tackled, the arm without the ball is forced up to make the tackle slip to his neck.. The minute the umpire sees this he should count a few seconds and ping him for holding the ball.. If you free arm has time to try and force a free, then it should be deemed that it could have been used to knock the ball free..

it's a lot more than him just raising one arm though. i note 4 different concurrent movements (not necessarily all 4 every time)

if you see the oliver tackle from a few different angles and in slo-mo you will see all 4 quite plainly

Edited May 26, 20169 yr by daisycutter