I'm watching the replay now and loving it! But just had the Rioli vs Oliver incident, the commentators were loving it. Now ok I agree in essence that it was good having the bump back but I guarantee you if those roles are reversed its a free kick to Hawthorn. I don't like to get into the whole #freekickhawthorn thing but it's hard to deny it. 

Particularly when 3min Rioli did a clear high tackle on Jetta and no free kick against but 5min later Rioli ducks and gets a free kick! 

3 hours ago, Akum said:

OK, what Gibson did is exactly the same as what happens with tunnelling in basketball. It just is. Anybody who knows about basketball knows that you need just enough "incidental" contact to push your opponent off balance while they're in the air trying to catch the ball. You think tunnelling in AFL is restricted to taking out the legs. Well, you can call it what you like - what Gibson did would be deemed illegal in all sports because it risks causing serious spinal or head injuries if a person lands the wrong way. The umpire explained to Gibson that "it's illegal, and it could cause a serious injury". If you don't agree with that - well, it IS illegal, and it DOES risk causing serious injury. Again, it just is.

Of course footy's a contact sport, and there's plenty of ways to hit someone hard, and hurt them legally, without risking serious injury. Increasing knowledge of sports medicine means that all sports are trying to stamp out any type of contact that could cause serious injury by making it illegal. It's not trying to "ruin a contact sport", it's about doing what can be done to control the play to lessen the risk of serious injury, which is actually part of the umpire's job.

The umpires had a shocker in that game (and something they definitely didn't do is protect both our first-year players from the risk of serious injury from a high shoulder (Oliver) and from being lifted off the ground in a form of spear tackle (Weidemann)). But this is one of the few they got exactly right. And that would have been true even if it were Watts or Petracca (both ex-basketballers by the way) who had done what Gibson did. 

I simply have a problem with those in sport who condone any contact (however "incidental") that risks severe injury. Which is what you seem to be doing. I haven't seen you actually "put an argument" for condoning this type of contact yet, except to keep repeating that you believe that Gibson's action - which in most other ball sports is called "tunnelling" and is banned because of the risk of causing severe injury - should not be penalised in AFL.

So I sincerely want to know: what sports medicine knowledge do you have, against the weight of evidence in all the sports that have banned this sort of contact, that leads you to believe that tunnelling doesn't risk causing severe injury? Or if you do happen to agree with the weight of evidence that it could cause severe injury, why should it be OK in AFL despite it being banned in other sports?

Do you have any actual points to make here? Or just abuse and blind prejudice?

Couldn't have said it better myself.

20 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

You aren't alone. I know someone who works at the G on game days. Said the Hawk supporters are the most arragont by a long way and their grog squad often instigates most of the trouble on the day.

I haven't seen/heard worse other than the Saints when we played em in the finals during Diamond Joe's era. Some of the lowest stuff I've ever heard at the G that night and I was no saint in my early years there ? I remember poor old Gary Hardeman sat near our group one day with his kids. Lasted about 3 minutes ?

The only time I've ever come close to getting into a fight at the footy was against the Saints in the 98 finals when some lone nutjob was racially abusing the Wiz.

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The only time I've ever come close to getting into a fight at the footy was against the Saints in the 98 finals when some lone nutjob was racially abusing the Wiz.

I wonder whether we were sitting in the same area, I was only 11 but I feel like I remember that. Of course it was satisfying watching the Wiz continue to destroy them!

Thankfully I don't feel like those flogs would last a second at the ground this day and age.

This made me laugh.

5 hours ago, Akum said:

OK, what Gibson did is exactly the same as what happens with tunnelling in basketball. It just is. Anybody who knows about basketball knows that you need just enough "incidental" contact to push your opponent off balance while they're in the air trying to catch the ball. You think tunnelling in AFL is restricted to taking out the legs. Well, you can call it what you like - what Gibson did would be deemed illegal in all sports because it risks causing serious spinal or head injuries if a person lands the wrong way. The umpire explained to Gibson that "it's illegal, and it could cause a serious injury". If you don't agree with that - well, it IS illegal, and it DOES risk causing serious injury. Again, it just is.

Of course footy's a contact sport, and there's plenty of ways to hit someone hard, and hurt them legally, without risking serious injury. Increasing knowledge of sports medicine means that all sports are trying to stamp out any type of contact that could cause serious injury by making it illegal. It's not trying to "ruin a contact sport", it's about doing what can be done to control the play to lessen the risk of serious injury, which is actually part of the umpire's job.

The umpires had a shocker in that game (and something they definitely didn't do is protect both our first-year players from the risk of serious injury from a high shoulder (Oliver) and from being lifted off the ground in a form of spear tackle (Weidemann)). But this is one of the few they got exactly right. And that would have been true even if it were Watts or Petracca (both ex-basketballers by the way) who had done what Gibson did. 

I simply have a problem with those in sport who condone any contact (however "incidental") that risks severe injury. Which is what you seem to be doing. I haven't seen you actually "put an argument" for condoning this type of contact yet, except to keep repeating that you believe that Gibson's action - which in most other ball sports is called "tunnelling" and is banned because of the risk of causing severe injury - should not be penalised in AFL.

So I sincerely want to know: what sports medicine knowledge do you have, against the weight of evidence in all the sports that have banned this sort of contact, that leads you to believe that tunnelling doesn't risk causing severe injury? Or if you do happen to agree with the weight of evidence that it could cause severe injury, why should it be OK in AFL despite it being banned in other sports?

Do you have any actual points to make here? Or just abuse and blind prejudice?

Got to love the children who try be a smart ass from the world go and then get upset when it comes back there way.

 

Let me ask you a question, we do have some ex- basketballs as you pointed out. Which of them (or any other players) remonstrated with Gibson for his highly dangerous act

On 8/6/2016 at 8:39 PM, Nasher said:

Just saw replays on the 'incidents':

Don't think Rioli will go.  I don't know how they assess "high" - but I thought the contact with Oliver looked more like chest and the head throwback might have come from chin contact? I don't think there was a concussion risk with that shirtfront, I'd be happy with it if delivered by an MFC player.

The Mitchell one was [censored] poor and he should definitely get weeks.  Will probably be declared "low impact" which will probably reduce it unfortunately, but I can't see him avoiding a suspension.  He clearly, blatantly punched Watts in the face.  

I saw the Mitchell incident slowed down - it was open hand. He will get off or a reprimand. 

What I did love is the all round performance.

To my mind Gartlett was our worst performer and he had some nice pressure moments. Absolutely everyone played their part.

Now I'm not one to get ahead of myself but surely there are two things most obvious to the football world.

1. We have the best midfield in the league........and

2. For the first time ever a team (Melbourne) will trifecta the rising star award.

Yay!!

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-08-08/sam-mitchell-in-the-mrp-gun-for-strike-on-jack-watts?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

Mitchell appears certain to be charged with striking Melbourne forward Jack Watts after punching the Demon in the face in the third quarter of Saturday's loss at the MCG...After slamming Watts to ground in a tackle without the ball, Mitchell struck the Demon high with his right fist in a blow that will likely be graded intentional, low impact and high contact...That would result in a two-match suspension that could be downgraded to one match with an early guilty plea, ruling Mitchell out of a match the Hawks must win to guarantee they stay on top of the ladder.

The Hawks will also be sweating on Cyril Rioli's availability after the star forward laid a crunching bump on young Demon Clayton Oliver in the first quarter

Young forward James Sicily will also be assessed for striking Bernie Vince after a crude spoiling attempt that forced the Demons midfielder from the ground with a bloodied nose. 

He,He!  Sometimes, 'unsociable' football doesn't pay.  What a victory for football to get some of those snipers suspended leading up to the finals. 

It would be like an extra win to be single handedly responsible for Hawks dropping out of top 4; firstly by beating them and then key players suspended.

1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-08-08/sam-mitchell-in-the-mrp-gun-for-strike-on-jack-watts?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

Mitchell appears certain to be charged with striking Melbourne forward Jack Watts after punching the Demon in the face in the third quarter of Saturday's loss at the MCG...After slamming Watts to ground in a tackle without the ball, Mitchell struck the Demon high with his right fist in a blow that will likely be graded intentional, low impact and high contact...That would result in a two-match suspension that could be downgraded to one match with an early guilty plea, ruling Mitchell out of a match the Hawks must win to guarantee they stay on top of the ladder.

The Hawks will also be sweating on Cyril Rioli's availability after the star forward laid a crunching bump on young Demon Clayton Oliver in the first quarter

Young forward James Sicily will also be assessed for striking Bernie Vince after a crude spoiling attempt that forced the Demons midfielder from the ground with a bloodied nose. 

He,He!  Sometimes, 'unsociable' football doesn't pay.  What a victory for football to get some of those snipers suspended leading up to the finals. 

It would be like an extra win to be single handedly responsible for Hawks dropping out of top 4; firstly by beating them and then key players suspended.

Watts is lucky he didn't scratch Mitchell's eyes.

This win for me was the closure on what has been 10 dark years for our club.  Round 2 2007, we kick started the Hawks on what will be on of their most successful period in AFL history.  Over the next 10 years they have dominated and whilst we, well we all know what has happened.  The dark chapter is now closed and we look forward to our club have 10 years of sunshine.

20 minutes ago, drdrake said:

This win for me was the closure on what has been 10 dark years for our club.  Round 2 2007, we kick started the Hawks on what will be on of their most successful period in AFL history.  Over the next 10 years they have dominated and whilst we, well we all know what has happened.  The dark chapter is now closed and we look forward to our club have 10 years of sunshine.

I hope you're right and my fingers are crossed that it'll be a total reversal and they'll spend years in the jungle when they fall off this impeding cliff.

Does any one know the av age and games of the team on Saturday?

7 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Does any one know the av age and games of the team on Saturday?

Think it was 22.6 from memory

12 hours ago, Akum said:

Best part of this was that Tyson didn't get sucked into the contest but stood off, confident that if Jack needed him he would get it to him somehow.

They're learning.

21 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Does any one know the av age and games of the team on Saturday?

The numbers were slightly different pre game but this is now adjusted for the late outs. 

	MFC	HFC		Diff
Average Age	23.0	26.2		-3.2
Average Games	57.4	129.0		-71.6
Back Line
Ave Age	21.8	27.7		-5.8
Ave Games	46.2	161.5		-115.3
Fol (includes wing)
Ave Age	24.5	28.3		-3.8
Ave Games	101.8	184.0		-82.2
Fwd
Ave Age	23.5	24.8		-1.3
Ave Games	65.7	104.8		-39.2
Int
Ave Age	21.8	22.8		-1.0
Ave Games	38.5	34.3		4.3
Melbourne
Games	Backline	Fol	Fwd	Int	total
0-50	4	1	3	3	11
51-100	2	3	1	1	7
101-150	0	0	2	0	2
151-200	0	1	0	0	1
200+	0	1	0	0	1
					22
HFC
Games	Backline	Fol	Fwd	Int	total
0-50	1	1	2	3	7
51-100	1	1	0	1	3
101-150	1	1	3	0	5
151-200	0	0	1	0	1
200+	3	3	0	0	6
					22
	MFC Back	HFC Fwd		Diff
Age	21.8	24.8		-3.0
Games	46.2	104.8		-58.7
	MFC Fwd	HFC Back
Age	23.5	27.7		-4.2
Games	65.7	161.5		-95.8

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-08-08/sam-mitchell-in-the-mrp-gun-for-strike-on-jack-watts?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

Mitchell appears certain to be charged with striking Melbourne forward Jack Watts after punching the Demon in the face in the third quarter of Saturday's loss at the MCG...After slamming Watts to ground in a tackle without the ball, Mitchell struck the Demon high with his right fist in a blow that will likely be graded intentional, low impact and high contact...That would result in a two-match suspension that could be downgraded to one match with an early guilty plea, ruling Mitchell out of a match the Hawks must win to guarantee they stay on top of the ladder.

The Hawks will also be sweating on Cyril Rioli's availability after the star forward laid a crunching bump on young Demon Clayton Oliver in the first quarter

Young forward James Sicily will also be assessed for striking Bernie Vince after a crude spoiling attempt that forced the Demons midfielder from the ground with a bloodied nose. 

He,He!  Sometimes, 'unsociable' football doesn't pay.  What a victory for football to get some of those snipers suspended leading up to the finals. 

It would be like an extra win to be single handedly responsible for Hawks dropping out of top 4; firstly by beating them and then key players suspended.

I read this and thought the got it wrong. Mitchell's hit was an open hand, and rioli had every chance to tackle, which he should have done if Clarry hadn't fumbled. To say it is clarry's fault was crap

I am not one to umpire bash however ( you knew there was a however coming).

The inconsistencies were mind boggling.

Two little gems that got my blood boiling  - Jetta getting head high contact  - the umpire deemed he ducked so he called play on and within a minute Rioli ducked his head into a tackle and got given a free  - to shoot at goal. Similar incidents except the Rioli's ducking was more blatent.

When Bernie got his nose broken the umpire actually waved his arms in a play on motion. I get if he didn't see it  - but to have a clear view, see the incident and then wave play on..seriously...

 

Also  - on Gawn  - he was outmarked on a few occasions where he was just taken out of the contest ( not actually outmarked - he was not given a jump at the contest)  - the umpires have go to wake up to this....

 

 

11 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Clint I would be pretty happy with that shirt front if it was the other way around. Nothing wrong with it and no harm done. 

Same with the Mitchell slap. An annoying love tap...no big deal. Bit like the other Sammy (Newman) slap from decades ago that they always show on the Footy show for a laugh. Wattsy didn't worry too much either and just got on with things?? ??

Having another look at the Mitchell incident, I don't think it deserves a week, pretty minor. Rioli will also have no case to answer. Sicily however, probably deserves a week for his crude spoiling of Bernies good looks.

Hawthorn are very good to taking everything to the limit. 

They constantly impede opposition players in a marking contest. On kick outs they go so close to the marking square. When opposition players on standing on the mark a Hawthorn player is always next to the opposition player who will then block to not allow the opposition player from challenging the kicker.

I know all perfectly legal but just really on edge and generally just like their aggression - always on verge of thuggery but OK in terms of the laws of the game.

We need to learn a few lessons if we are to become a force of the future.

 

 

6 minutes ago, Mickey said:

I read this and thought the got it wrong. Mitchell's hit was an open hand, and rioli had every chance to tackle, which he should have done if Clarry hadn't fumbled. To say it is clarry's fault was crap

Did Clarry 'fumble' as the commentators say?  I thought he hand balled it off, was set for a receive back and not sure he even touched it on its way back when Rioli jumped off the ground and shirt-fronted him.  Clarry was going for the ball but he certainly didn't have it nor was he in control of it.  For the life of me I couldn't see how Rioli got a free kick.

4 minutes ago, nutbean said:

Two little gems that got my blood boiling  - Jetta getting head high contact  - the umpire deemed he ducked so he called play on and within a minute Rioli ducked his head into a tackle and got given a free  - to shoot at goal. Similar incidents except the Rioli's ducking was more blatent.
 

Not sure what qtr that was but Jet was groggy at the half time siren; hunched down, holding his head and need to be helped up.  I thought he could have collided with Duryea when trying to spoil just before the siren.  Maybe it was that contact that knocked him about. 

At least the game is being looked at closely by the MRP. 

I loved how Rioli was booed every time he went near the ball.  Also, loved how our guys played hard and tough without being reported.  Hawks found out in more ways than one last Sat.

Thanks for those stats ?

Ripping Win.
Was with my Dawks cousin, he had nothing but praise for us and just said at the start of the final QTR, Melbourne may not have the legs and the hawks have finished well this year.

Hated Ravioli's bump at the time and believed it should have been a free but now i have seen it a few times it was a fair one and a tough one at that.  Would have loved to see him bully one of our senior players, like Jones, instead of going after the kids, sniping little coward.

Reload and go after Port, Blues and the Cats guys, storm home and take that confidence into preseason.

 

35 minutes ago, longsuffering said:

Hawthorn are very good to taking everything to the limit. 

They constantly impede opposition players in a marking contest. On kick outs they go so close to the marking square. When opposition players on standing on the mark a Hawthorn player is always next to the opposition player who will then block to not allow the opposition player from challenging the kicker.

I know all perfectly legal but just really on edge and generally just like their aggression - always on verge of thuggery but OK in terms of the laws of the game.

We need to learn a few lessons if we are to become a force of the future.

 

 

This bugs me. They are not allowed to be within 5m of the player on the mark UNTIL the ump has blown his whistle and called play on. The umps get it wrong constantly