47 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

Anybody else hear Mark Fine's diatribe on this last night?  Painful

this fine gentleman http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/broadcaster-fine-pleads-guilty-over-company-20131029-2wczw.html with a bad case of amnesia?

7 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

this fine gentleman http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/broadcaster-fine-pleads-guilty-over-company-20131029-2wczw.html with a bad case of amnesia?

Ahhh.  I wasn't aware of that.  What do they say about people in glass houses?

24 minutes ago, Akum said:

I'd say there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.

They definitely went for us extra hard after half time, probably trying to play on the "bruise-free" crap.

Whatever it was that Cripps did that got under Lewis's skin got under Viney's skin too.

Weitering was doing a lot of work off the ball to keep T-Mac away from the ball, allowing Casboult to mark virtually unopposed because T-Mac was blocked and couldn't come in & spoil. Watts got elbowed in the back of the head going for a mark - play on. But nothing was picked up by the umpires. There seemed to be a lot of holding off the ball on their blind side.

And we definitely lost our "shape" for a while in that third term, allowing them to hit the front. They were pushing us around physically, and often illegally, and getting away with it.

Lewis said that things were going on before that incident but he didn't elaborate and perhaps fortunately wasn't asked to. So I reckon Lewis just took matters into his own hands and felt that we're not taking it any more and we're fighting back. After that, and the subsequent melee, we regained our "shape" & structure, and started to play "fearless footy" again.

Seems the club is very unhappy with what went on in that 3rd quarter, but they can't say anything

I'd say both sides we've played so far have tried to go the "off the ball" stuff after half time, and as always seems to happen, the provocation gets missed and it's the retaliation that gets caught. I'd also say that most sides are going to play us this way when we get on top of them and we need to work out how to respond in a way that doesn't require our senior players to get rubbed out.

You bend the rules as far as they will bent. All the stuff you mentioned is free kick material that umpires should pick up. I have no problem with us playing on the edge.

Push-shove-push-shove-punch - there is only once of these incidents that will get you weeks  and that is punch. Provocation is one thing - punching is another. 

Bernie when he was tagging bent the rules - lately he has gone too far over the line and has got rubbed out. I don't mind a few frees being given away for bending the rules but you don't punch in the head as that will get suspended - it is that simple.

4 hours ago, Vogon Poetry said:

I live on a planet that says this Club aspires to play finals for the first time in 11 years.  To do that we need our best players on the field for the most number of games possible because at the end of the season one game and percentage could be vital.

I don't live on a planet that says "he hit me first so I'll break his jaw and ignore that I've put the primary goal of this Club at risk".

I don't think Lewis is a thug.  I think he's just dumb.

If we lose any of the next three games by less than (say) 10 points I'll feel angry that two vital players were undisciplined.  You can beat your chest and say "goody, we gave as good as we got".

To play finals we need to rack up 4 points at a time.  I dont condone behind the play sniping, but this wasnt an example of that.  Whatever happened, after these incidents we kicked 7 out of nine goals and collected the 4 points.  Banked.  If we drop one of these 3 games you mention, it wont be because of Jordan Lewis, thats a cop out.  But we banked 4 points from the Carlton game after we were in deep trouble.

37 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Looking forward to seeing whether Rowe lines up this week considering the dramatic doctors report which was at pains to highlight his serious concussion issues.

If he does play, either of two things are at play here. (1) Carlton are  breaching a duty of care by allowing one of their players to play the week after experienced dramatic delayed concussion symptons such as dizziness, compromised vision and nausea or (2) Carlton's doctor flat out lied which is breach of a doctor's code of ethics I would've thought.

Surely Rowe sits this week out.....right?

   

Aaaand if he does sit out why did he continue to play instead of doing a concussion test

40 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Looking forward to seeing whether Rowe lines up this week considering the dramatic doctors report which was at pains to highlight his serious concussion issues.

If he does play, either of two things are at play here. (1) Carlton are  breaching a duty of care by allowing one of their players to play the week after experienced dramatic delayed concussion symptons such as dizziness, compromised vision and nausea or (2) Carlton's doctor flat out lied which is breach of a doctor's code of ethics I would've thought.

Surely Rowe sits this week out.....right?

   

He will play, and the surest thing of all is that the AFL will do sweet FA about it.

I'd like to see what the MRP does if Cripps plays and someone does more dmg to the hairline fracture in his jaw... can't exactly use the medical report again can they?

5 minutes ago, Ouch! said:

I'd like to see what the MRP does if Cripps plays and someone does more dmg to the hairline fracture in his jaw... can't exactly use the medical report again can they?

They will do nothing, unless the damage is caused illegally.

I get annoyed when media types like Robbo blatantly distort facts, like saying that when Jessie hit Rowe, Rowe wasn't looking at him.

Not only was he looking at Jessie he was pushing him in the chest when Jessie lashed out.

Also it has been described all week as a strike or punch, until today when it has been admitted on the AFL site to be an open hand.

Just prefer the media to try and be accurate, which clearly is very difficult for them. 

Wonder if any of our players got concussion when we played Carlton last year?

2 hours ago, Itsabouttohappen said:

To play finals we need to rack up 4 points at a time.  I dont condone behind the play sniping, but this wasnt an example of that.  Whatever happened, after these incidents we kicked 7 out of nine goals and collected the 4 points.  Banked.  If we drop one of these 3 games you mention, it wont be because of Jordan Lewis, thats a cop out.  But we banked 4 points from the Carlton game after we were in deep trouble.

So we beat the Blues because Lewis hit Cripps but his absence from the next 3 games cannot be a factor in any losses? Not sure I follow that logic. Hard to see how a 22 missing Hogan and Lewis makes us stronger and gives us a better chance of winning the 4 points. As the old saying goes the most important ability is availability. Hogan is a kid so not as disappointed in him as I am in club leaders Vince and Lewis.

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

They will do nothing, unless the damage is caused illegally.

Sorry that's what I was wondering... imagine if Cripps gets taken out with a bump like the one Varcoe hit Dalhaus with in rnd 1. In of itself the hit might not have caused an injury but with the existing fracture it turns into a more serious injury. How can the medical report play any serious role in the MRP decision making process...

the MRP should be judging the act,not the consequence of the act if they are to ever be seen to be consistent. 

Fish

Denmark

Something or other 

44 minutes ago, Ouch! said:

the MRP should be judging the act,not the consequence of the act if they are to ever be seen to be consistent. 

Consistency ... I saw something about that on Masterchef. If you use a blender your soup will have a much better consistency

19 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

Consistency ... I saw something about that on Masterchef. If you use a blender your soup will have a much better consistency

Gold (pumpkin yellow  )

4 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Fish

Denmark

Something or other 

The Little Mermaid statue in Copenhagen?

On 03/04/2017 at 2:00 PM, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

Shocked at the severity.

 

Not surprised by Carlscum's actions, a cesspool of a club with zero morals, cheating scumbag who spit thee dummy when things don't go there way. Carlton people generally have two wits, halfwits and f&$*wits

 

I agree, just working my way through this thread well after the fact. 

Carlton are a bunch of [censored] [censored].

Ed: felt good just typing those swears, despite the filter!

 

20 hours ago, Vogon Poetry said:

You and I usually agree but not on this occasion.

I am the opposite vp. I somtimes  disagree with pd but not on this occasion.

I watched that 360 ep last night (thanks youtube and chromecast) and was totally fine with how lewis responded. I am on record here as saying he was stupid in hitting cripps but he copped his wack. Sure respond to a couple of questions from slobbo - after all he chooses to go on the show. But slobbo was salivating about the chance to grill lewis such was his personal disappointment. Why should lewis have play the contrite card and be forced into a moral inquisition. In fact i admired him and felt for him having to put up with slobbos moralising. It was instructive that wheatley - a proper journo didnt ask him a single question about it.

I also like the fact that lewis hinted there was some mitigating factors without expanding. Reiwoldt, who im sure lewis would have spoken to, also raised the issue of the blues niggling at us. Remember lewis was closely tagged all day - a tactic rarely used these days and a reflection of boltons defensive, get under the opponents skin strategy. Which it has to be said was effective in the second and third quarters. That, unlike last year, we overcame it and won means i rate our game higher than some might.

53 minutes ago, binman said:

I somtimes  disagree with pd but not on this occasion.

You're improving.

12 hours ago, demoniac said:

So we beat the Blues because Lewis hit Cripps but his absence from the next 3 games cannot be a factor in any losses? Not sure I follow that logic. Hard to see how a 22 missing Hogan and Lewis makes us stronger and gives us a better chance of winning the 4 points. As the old saying goes the most important ability is availability. Hogan is a kid so not as disappointed in him as I am in club leaders Vince and Lewis.

I saw the logic.  We banked 4 points against a shyte team we've struggled to beat in the past. We were in trouble when that little fracas occured (which is a very old school method of stopping the opposition's momentum). When the going gets tough sometimes you just need to fly the flag. It was illegal, but how many touches did Cripps get and goals did Carlton get after that?  Coincidence perhaps, but contrary to most it was the sort of leadership I was hoping for from Lewis. You don't get to push us around anymore. 

Does his missing three weeks hurts their team - yes it does, but not to the extent that it will be the difference between winning and losing. We have beaten Geelong, Freo and  Richmond previously without Lewis. I'm glad he's back for Essendon.

 

When Lewis came to the Dees, I said to a hawks supporter that we don't lose those types of matches to Carlton and Essendon any more and so far we haven't.  There was a good chance we could have though without him.

Lewis had a perfect explanation for his actions.

He felt like hitting Cripps so he did.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

You're improving.

I disagree.

17 hours ago, Itsabouttohappen said:

To play finals we need to rack up 4 points at a time.  I dont condone behind the play sniping, but this wasnt an example of that.  Whatever happened, after these incidents we kicked 7 out of nine goals and collected the 4 points.  Banked.  If we drop one of these 3 games you mention, it wont be because of Jordan Lewis, thats a cop out.  But we banked 4 points from the Carlton game after we were in deep trouble.

 

1 hour ago, grazman said:

I saw the logic.  We banked 4 points against a shyte team we've struggled to beat in the past. We were in trouble when that little fracas occured (which is a very old school method of stopping the opposition's momentum). When the going gets tough sometimes you just need to fly the flag. It was illegal, but how many touches did Cripps get and goals did Carlton get after that?  Coincidence perhaps, but contrary to most it was the sort of leadership I was hoping for from Lewis. You don't get to push us around anymore. 

Does his missing three weeks hurts their team - yes it does, but not to the extent that it will be the difference between winning and losing. We have beaten Geelong, Freo and  Richmond previously without Lewis. I'm glad he's back for Essendon.

 

When Lewis came to the Dees, I said to a hawks supporter that we don't lose those types of matches to Carlton and Essendon any more and so far we haven't.  There was a good chance we could have though without him.

It's a long road to the flag, paved with opposition players.  Hot kitchen.

True and we've had our fair share of shrinking violets in the past. We now have a team of competitors and we are developing our own brand of unsociable football. Lewis is instrumental as we are still a young side. Many of them can stand up for themselves, but its guys like Bernie and Jordie that make the opposition hear footsteps. They've been given this remit by Goodie it appears.  As PD said though some slight adjustments are required.

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

 

It's a long road to the flag, paved with opposition players.  Hot kitchen.

Yep - you can't make an omelette without hairline fracturing some jaws or something