THE MOST AWESOME POST MATCH THREAD EVER!!!

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,654]

Just now, Clint Bizkit said:

You're allowed to tunnel a player (one of the most dangerous things you can do) so long as the ball has gone past you?

Tunnelling is when a player on the ground takes out the legs of someone in the air, Gibson was in the air and made incidental contact to AVB, to me that is not tunnelling 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

2 minutes ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

Tunnelling is when a player on the ground takes out the legs of someone in the air, Gibson was in the air and made incidental contact to AVB, to me that is not tunnelling 

So the rule has changed from the ball being past the player to the player tunnelling must be on the ground for it to be a free kick? That's irrelevant.

[grazman 7,499]

8 minutes ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

There was a small bit of contact with both players in the air AFTER the ball had past. No free kick at all, was in shock when it was paid and not just because it was for us

disagree - the umpire got it right. Tunnelling is a very dangerous action and could result in a very serious injury it should be a free kick.  

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,654]

1 minute ago, Clint Bizkit said:

So the rule has changed from the ball being past the player to the player tunnelling must be on the ground for it to be a free kick? That's irrelevant.

Two players jump for the ball, the ball goes over their head, small contact is made after the ball is past with both players in the air, so a player falls slightly awkwardly and we call this tunnelling. What a crock...

[Sir Why You Little 37,242]

4 minutes ago, grazman said:

disagree - the umpire got it right. Tunnelling is a very dangerous action and could result in a very serious injury it should be a free kick.  

You take someone out when they are off balance or in mid air and anything could happen. 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

This might sound odd, but there is a bit of play that Oliver does in with about seven minutes to go in the game where he had the ball in the back pocket, and instead of committing to one side he simply stopped, rotated and then kicked the ball to Bugg.

It doesn't seem like much, but by stopping and rotating he wasn't forcing himself to kick one way or the other. Worse still, he didn't have to kick on his left unnecessarily. In this instance it wasn't from a mark but this is exactly what I always bang on about our players not getting back quick enough and drifting off their line which results in a kick under pressure.

Yesterday, Vince (a couple of times) and Frost both had instances where they didn't get back behind the mark quick enough and tried to dispose of the ball on an awkward angle.

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,654]

5 minutes ago, grazman said:

disagree - the umpire got it right. Tunnelling is a very dangerous action and could result in a very serious injury it should be a free kick.  

I agree tunnelling is dangerous. This was not an example of tunnelling

[grazman 7,499]

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

You take someone out when they are off balance or in mid air and anything could happen. 

Indeed- I know its a different sport, but in basketball it is a very serious offence.  

[grazman 7,499]

3 minutes ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

I agree tunnelling is dangerous. This was not an example of tunnelling

I thought it was, regardless of whether the player is on the ground or in the air, if you take someone's legs out and cause them to land on their back then it's tunnelling. The ump thought so too, (you could clearly hear him explain to Gibson that it was a dangerous action) and it was one of the few free kicks they gave us in front of goals so I was happy with the result

Edited August 7, 2016 by grazman

[Willmoy1947 4,171]

3 minutes ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

Two players jump for the ball, the ball goes over their head, small contact is made after the ball is past with both players in the air, so a player falls slightly awkwardly and we call this tunnelling. What a crock...

Not sure about the reference to tunnelling but I am sure what the umpire said about "dangerous play therefore free kick" paraphrasing

[Deestar9 1,712]

19 hours ago, olisik said:

Didn't see hogan in the rooms after the game to congratulate his boys 

Was def there ...saw him twice ....why negative posts after such a great win ?

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,654]

Just now, grazman said:

I thought it was, regardless of whether the player is on the ground or in the air, if you take someone's legs out and cause them to land on their back then it's tunnelling. The ump thought so too, and it was one of the few free kicks they gave us in front of goals so I was happy with the result

I too was happy with the result, as we got screwed most of the day.

 

just went back and watched the incident 3 times and still don't see it as tunnelling, contact with AVB was incidental and at the hips, his legs were not taken out

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,654]

1 minute ago, Deestar9 said:

Was def there ...saw him twice ....why negative posts after such a great win ?

That is Olisik...

[grazman 7,499]

We see it differently I suppose.  The worst case I saw was against Aaron Davey when he basically landed on his head - and yes no free kick on that day.  At least it puts players on notice whether it was Tiggy Touchwood or not.

[The Sailing Demon 379]

When exactly will my throbbing erection go down?

I was on the streets of Waikiki last night following it on the public wi-fi screaming like a lunatic.

[Ricky P 757]

4 hours ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

One thing I enjoyed about today is the spunk that they boys displayed. They didn't take a backward step and were handing out their fair share of sledges.
When Duryea dropped that ball near the goal square to gift Tracc that goal, boy oh boy did Tracc let him know all about that? Plus I saw Maxy give Gibbo a cheeky pat on the bum after he gave away that free to Weideman.
Hell, even Jack got back into Mitchell after he gave him that whack in the pack. 

Agree with this. We were into them all day. You could build an empire on Oliver's nasty sneer.

[Ricky P 757]

1 hour ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

The person from the first half that should be rubbed out is Sicily, that was an old fashioned round arm on Bernie, a dog of an act that should get 3 weeks and the umpire who missed it should be dropped too

Agreed - that was straight out of the 80s. Rioli's bump was perfectly fair. The Sicily incident is the one we should be talking about.

[Bonkers 994]

What a fantastic win. Most impressed with the four quarter effort. We have played a few games against top 8 sides where we came close to knocking them off but just couldn't get over the line. It's a great reward for effort to finally get one of these wins. I think it may have finally clicked in their minds that they are good enough if they can put 4 quarters together. Watching the game from the ground the doubt was whether we could keep going, that was more than answered when we kicked 5 goals in a row to run over the top of them & bury them.

A positive from the game for me was Sam Weideman. He didn't have too many touches throughout the game but whatever he did was composed & clean. I think he had 5 or more score involvements, his impact on the game was really important especially early on.

[pitmaster 3,588]

4 hours ago, Forest Demon said:

Watched from Brisbane, and if Eddie mentioned Wiedeman's Collingwood connection one more time, I would have put my fist through the television.

I was at the game and have not watched the replay so I don't know how bad he was, but...the fact that Murray "The Enforcer" Wiedeman's grandson is playing for Melbourne is a story the media have massively underplayed.

If Mike Sheahan were still in the daily press game it would have had big coverage, but even Rohan Conolly is not old enough to get it.

Murray Wiedeman was the architect of the 1958 upset when the Pies broke the Demons' run of three straight premierships. He was loathed, I mean deeply hated, by Melbourne supporters. The media have missed this story and I for one am glad Eddie is giving it some airplay. If Sam turns into a champion it will be wonderful and hilarious.

[Ricky P 757]

1 hour ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

In all fairness, we should mention the AVB goal from a free, a gift from the umpires, who are an out and out joke.

Agreed. That was basically perfect defending from Gibson.

[Ricky P 757]

1 hour ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

Two players jump for the ball, the ball goes over their head, small contact is made after the ball is past with both players in the air, so a player falls slightly awkwardly and we call this tunnelling. What a crock...

He didn't his legs from under him. AVB made the most of it. Good on him. But I'd be livid if it got paid going the other way.

[Undeeterred 3,127]

2 hours ago, Demi Dee said:

This has happened a lot lately. Was it Vince who was dropped in the square last week, only for the umpire to step over him and ignore the incident  

I was pretty tempted to take one for the team yesterday, jump the fence and drop David Neitz who was in a Hawks tracksuit helping them warm up. Why are our Melbourne greats helping the Hawks, especially against us on game day. Clarkson, Yze, Neitz. I'm sure there are others, perhaps the umpires were old Melbourne players trying to exact revenge against the old regime. I'm sure I saw a pair of Hawks undies under one of their pairs of shorts. 

Cam Bruce too.

[Undeeterred 3,127]

1 hour ago, grazman said:

Indeed- I know its a different sport, but in basketball it is a very serious offence.  

I've seen more out and out punch ups on a basketball court caused by tunnelling than anything else.

Doesn't matter that it is a different sport though, once you take out someone's legs and make them lose control of where their body lands, it opens up a huge amount of potential trouble.

[buck_nekkid 6,054]

26 minutes ago, Ricky P said:

Agreed. That was basically perfect defending from Gibson.

If the ball has already passed overhead, and Gibson makes inadvertent but legal contact, then no free kick.  If he makes illegal contact (tunneling, high or whatever, then it's a free.  Don't know what the umpire saw, or was thinking.  However, if we call it 50/50, then the count would be about 11:1 for 50/50 free kicks awarded.

[Deestar9 1,712]

21 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

PEDOOOOOOOLANNNKOOO!!!

You [censored] beauty!!

Maybe you should check Dawes stats from last week before crowing about Pedo ...,pretty much the same except Dawes 5 tackles ...Pedo 0...,the only reason Dawes wasn't played was because Roos said his body wouldn't handle a six day break ..,,neither player is our future but think you're being rather unfair