18 minutes ago, old dee said:

Read joeboy again 

Joeboy often talks a bunch of balls.

I assume you're talking about Garlett. He played down back and on the wing in a tagging role, and was much more involved than joeboy gives him credit for.

Little harsh of Garlett.  He was playing more in the midfield today and had some good involvements.  We had more quality kicks playing through the middle today and it showed with our efficiency in attack. 

Melbourne FC - no passengers today

MFC - Building something special

20 hours ago, Undeeterred said:

Joeboy often talks a bunch of balls.

I assume you're talking about Garlett. He played down back and on the wing in a tagging role, and was much more involved than joeboy gives him credit for.

I'm with Joeboy. If Garlett was tagging, then one tackle seems like an ineffective performance. 

21 hours ago, old dee said:

IMO there was only one passenger today. But that is majoring in minors.

Agree with the vast majority of that joeboy.

Majoring in minors sounds a bit creepy Old Dee

22 hours ago, Sylvia Saint said:

Anyone see vandenBerg push Hodge out of the way with contempt and win a crucial footy early in the last quarter? He doesn't get the footy enough most weeks but what he does do is often impressive.

 

Yep I thought VDB played a great, physical game. Didn't flinch and threw his weight around.

1 hour ago, Deemented Are Go! said:

Yep I thought VDB played a great, physical game. Didn't flinch and threw his weight around.

Agree. it's not always possessions. VDHBERGER adds a physical edge to the team. Not in best 22 IMO but valuable against physical teams like the hawks.

1 hour ago, chook fowler said:

Majoring in minors sounds a bit creepy Old Dee

Yes on reflection chook a poor choice of words.

Oliver - 'Always best option' or 'he's a freak'.

I can't decide which one.

On 8/6/2016 at 4:54 PM, Biffen said:

Ben McEvoy-Maxys Lil beatch

Mr. Jarrad O'Brien of YouTube fame would tend to disagree with your analysis Biff. He has another candidate for the role that you assert Maxy played yesterday.

 

6 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm with Joeboy. If Garlett was tagging, then one tackle seems like an ineffective performance. 

Cool. Let's agree to disagree.

On 8/6/2016 at 5:54 PM, Biffen said:

Sam Mitchell -Go [censored] yourself.

Luke Hodge-Go [censored] yourself

Josh Gobson-Eat a bag

Ben McEvoy-Maxys Lil beatch

Luke Bruest-Parasitic front runner

Alistair Clarkson-Grumpy Oompah Loompah

 

YES YES YES YES YES AND YES

HOPEFULLY RIOLI WILL HET 3 WEEKS HIT ON CLARRY, MITCHELL WILL GET 4 FOR CLOUTING JACK WATTS! 

On 8/8/2016 at 8:01 AM, picket fence said:

YES YES YES YES YES AND YES

HOPEFULLY RIOLI WILL HET 3 WEEKS HIT ON CLARRY, MITCHELL WILL GET 4 FOR CLOUTING JACK WATTS! 

Different set of rules for Mitchell and Rioli, Mitchell definitely deserves a week if Hawkins got done for what he did to Davis, but i bet neither get weeks. 

It is not different set of rules for anybody.

Lets chill and look at it without any bias - it is really difficult to tell if Rioli hit the chest or the head - no matter how many times I look at it. If it is the head he is gone - if it is the chest it is pretty simple - not gone.

I saw the Mitchell incident slowed down and it is the open hand  - not a fist - it will be insufficient force or reprimand. Mitchell is dirty   - but the incident is what the incident is...

2 hours ago, nutbean said:

It is not different set of rules for anybody.

Lets chill and look at it without any bias - it is really difficult to tell if Rioli hit the chest or the head - no matter how many times I look at it. If it is the head he is gone - if it is the chest it is pretty simple - not gone.

I saw the Mitchell incident slowed down and it is the open hand  - not a fist - it will be insufficient force or reprimand. Mitchell is dirty   - but the incident is what the incident is...

As soon as I saw the replay at the ground I knew Rioli was going to get off. Big hit to a player who wasnt ready for it but looked to be in the chest. Lets face it, if Viney did it and got rubbed out we would be ropeable.

Mitchell incedent I also suspect he will get off, maybe a fine due to the action but not much force. The way Hawkins got done for his "hit" any logic would sugest Mitchell would be done as well. But Logic and MRP have never really been connected.

5 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

As soon as I saw the replay at the ground I knew Rioli was going to get off. Big hit to a player who wasnt ready for it but looked to be in the chest. Lets face it, if Viney did it and got rubbed out we would be ropeable.

Mitchell incedent I also suspect he will get off, maybe a fine due to the action but not much force. The way Hawkins got done for his "hit" any logic would sugest Mitchell would be done as well. But Logic and MRP have never really been connected.

They'll both get off.

The first time I saw the Mitchell incident it looked like a closed fist jab to the jaw, but from another angle you can clearly see it's open palm and not that hard. Jack was giving it to him first, anyway.

2 hours ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

As soon as I saw the replay at the ground I knew Rioli was going to get off. Big hit to a player who wasnt ready for it but looked to be in the chest. Lets face it, if Viney did it and got rubbed out we would be ropeable.

Mitchell incedent I also suspect he will get off, maybe a fine due to the action but not much force. The way Hawkins got done for his "hit" any logic would sugest Mitchell would be done as well. But Logic and MRP have never really been connected.

Rioli ran past the ball, elected to bump, jumped off the ground and you can see from Clarrie's head that he was hit under the chin. Very dangerous.

Should go but the MRP are the worst possible kind of farce and he will get off.

The lifting tackle on weed should also be looked at. Rioli ran in with his head and hit Weeds head who was bending down to pick up the ball. Incredibly dangerous movement. He then grabbed a leg and lifted weed and rammed him into the ground.

Should definitely go but the weak MRP won't do a thing.

Sicily's hit on Vince should see him go for two weeks minimum.

Mitchell's cowardly punch should get 3 weeks. He also slid in wit the knees in fromt of the Olympic stand if anyone noticed. can't remember what quarer it was. Should also be looked at.

Nothing to see here move on.

#freekickhawthorn

 

Edited August 8, 20169 yr by jnrmac

5 hours ago, nutbean said:

It is not different set of rules for anybody.

Lets chill and look at it without any bias - it is really difficult to tell if Rioli hit the chest or the head - no matter how many times I look at it. If it is the head he is gone - if it is the chest it is pretty simple - not gone.

I saw the Mitchell incident slowed down and it is the open hand  - not a fist - it will be insufficient force or reprimand. Mitchell is dirty   - but the incident is what the incident is...

Yep, and we gave our response on the ground.

Oliver, got up shook his head...and then went on to bury the Hawks with a great display of inside football and tackling.

As for Mitchell, he got what he deserved. Buried almost every time he got the ball. Love that Watts gave him one earlier in the game to "make him earn it"...

Move on...

49 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Rioli ran past the ball, elected to bump, jumped off the ground and you can see from Clarrie's head that he was hit under the chin. Very dangerous.

Should go but the MRP are the worst possible kind of farce and he will get off.

The lifting tackle on weed should also be looked at. Rioli ran in with his head and hit Weeds head who was bending down to pick up the ball. Incredibly dangerous movement. He then grabbed a leg and lifted weed and rammed him into the ground.

Should definitely go but the weak MRP won't do a thing.

Sicily's hit on Vince should see him go for two weeks minimum.

Mitchell's cowardly punch should get 3 weeks. He also slid in wit the knees in fromt of the Olympic stand if anyone noticed. can't remember what quarer it was. Should also be looked at.

Nothing to see here move on.

#freekickhawthorn

 

Cyril is very lucky.  The MRP will deem it to be no head contact, but it was a matter of millimetres.

Rioli's bump was fair, and if it was one of our boys who did it, I'd be [censored] if he got suspended. I thought his lifting tackle on Weeds was worse.

Mitchell hit Watts with an open hand, no suspension. I actually hope they don't look at it too closely because it looked like Watts sort of grabbed Mitchell's face first, play on, nothing to see here. ?

I've only watched the replay twice though...so far. ?

Why is it all of a sudden ok to slap someone in the face but not punch them?

Surely we're trying to discourage all head high contact?

I know open hands have minimal force, but I don't think that should make a difference in the case of contact to the head.  

1 hour ago, Males said:

Rioli's bump was fair, and if it was one of our boys who did it, I'd be [censored] if he got suspended. I thought his lifting tackle on Weeds was worse.

Mitchell hit Watts with an open hand, no suspension. I actually hope they don't look at it too closely because it looked like Watts sort of grabbed Mitchell's face first, play on, nothing to see here. ?

I've only watched the replay twice though...so far. ?

it wasn't fair. Shirtfronts are now illegal. full stop. It was a free kick to clarrie at least. Under the convoluted tribunal laws he may just get a fine, but only because clarrie is one tough nut. Still, the afl will not remove this type of dangerous tackle if they continually let players off at the tribunal just because the receiver was lucky and didn't get sufficiently injured

 

Open hand, no problems, no harm done - bulltish!

7 hours ago, daisycutter said:

it wasn't fair. Shirtfronts are now illegal. full stop. It was a free kick to clarrie at least. Under the convoluted tribunal laws he may just get a fine, but only because clarrie is one tough nut. Still, the afl will not remove this type of dangerous tackle if they continually let players off at the tribunal just because the receiver was lucky and didn't get sufficiently injured

Technically you might be right on it being classed as a shirtfront, daisycutter?

I was trying to look at the incidents mentioned from an MRP point of view, the way they have adjudicated in the past, I believed they would state that it was a fair bump with no contact to head, therefore no suspension, and if it was the other way around I would have expected Clarrie to get off too.  That being said, I believe the MRP stated that Rioli did make contact to the head, therefore I believe he should have copped a week instead of a fine.

Edited August 8, 20169 yr by Males