Dangerfield Stages

[Fidelista 39]

20 minutes ago, Davos said:

Smart players use the rules to their advantage. 

That means we have dumb umpires then doesn't it.

[McQueen 17,864]

With respect to the two people who started the threads, can mods consider merging the two about this <insert expletive>.

[Cards13 9,117]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Should Dangerfield be reported for staging.

Having now viewed the incident again several times, it is clear he staged for a free. That is against the rules and a punishable offence.

He throws his arms out before any contact with Brayshaw and when he is nowhere near the throw in or ruck contest. He runs into the back of Brayshaw who is stationary, just in front of him, wildly waving his arms as if he is being held back by two sumo wrestlers. He has clearly staged to get a free kick. 

The AFL MRP looks at consequences of an act. This resulted in a goal that changed the result of the game. 

What will Michael Christian or his boss the former Cats player and footy manager and now AFL footy manager Steve Hocking do, absolutely nothing. 

I’ve called him Dangerdiver for a few years now, since he dived after Viney bowled him over. It’s a terrible look for the game.

[Little Goffy 12,837]

Just so shameful. I could accept it as a ruthless exploitation of a rule and circumstances, but the sheer comedy act of the 'I'm a pelican' dance Dangerfield did, followed by the gloating smugness after. He could've at least had the decency to keep his head down. (not in the Selwood way).

Meanwhile, I'll be properly angry again if Hawkins doesn't cop anything for the not-in-play, high-contact, deliberate hit to Fritsch. But the way things go, it'll be discarded by the MRP in less time than it actually takes to watch the footage.

[Binmans PA 26,592]

Dangerfield is an ugly looking gronkazoid. I hope his career takes a nosedive. ??

That felt good. What a muppet he is. How was his dive over the boundary line at one stage too?

[Scoop Junior 3,093]

8 minutes ago, A F said:

That felt good. What a muppet he is. How was his dive over the boundary line at one stage too?

Yeah I saw that at the ground - was absolutely pathetic.

The bloke is a champion footballer and I've always liked watching him (except against us) as he's just so powerful and skilful. But recently I've lost a lot of respect for him as a sportsman. In recent games I've seen him repeatedly hold an opponent's arm after they apply a tackle on him to make it look like he is being held after getting rid of the ball. He milked the ruck free kick last night and then his dive over the boundary was another blatant act of staging.

I suppose he has learnt the art of milking frees off his captain, who I noticed time and again whinging to the umpires about not receiving a free. And all Ablett has to do is throw his arms in the air and he gets an immediate free for holding.

Then you have Chris Scott carrying on like a pork chop when one decision doesn't go his team's way, only to then act all sanctimonious the next day in his media interviews.

I never minded Geelong in the past but recently I've begun to really dislike this mob.

[Binmans PA 26,592]

5 minutes ago, Scoop Junior said:

Yeah I saw that at the ground - was absolutely pathetic.

The bloke is a champion footballer and I've always liked watching him (except against us) as he's just so powerful and skilful. But recently I've lost a lot of respect for him as a sportsman. In recent games I've seen him repeatedly hold an opponent's arm after they apply a tackle on him to make it look like he is being held after getting rid of the ball. He milked the ruck free kick last night and then his dive over the boundary was another blatant act of staging.

I suppose he has learnt the art of milking frees off his captain, who I noticed time and again whinging to the umpires about not receiving a free. And all Ablett has to do is throw his arms in the air and he gets an immediate free for holding.

Then you have Chris Scott carrying on like a pork chop when one decision doesn't go his team's way, only to then act all sanctimonious the next day in his media interviews.

I never minded Geelong in the past but recently I've begun to really dislike this mob.

Nah, I've always hated them. They've always beaten up on us in my 31 year lifetime and half my family are Geelong.

And on the bigscreen at the ground, they kept replaying Scott's carry on and all the Geelong supporters were cheering and laughing. They're all a bunch of muppets.

[3183 Dee 2,654]

56 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

[censored] Dangerfield.. nothing but an arrogant self righteous [censored].

There needs to be a complaint into Cameron Ling commentating on Geelong games. I haven't seen a more bias supporter of the game in the commentary box! To see him carrying on like he'd won the grand final with Duckwood and Ablett last night was borderline pathetic!

Totally agree - as I get to most Dees games, I don’t get to see the televised ones that often. That commentary team were GAGGING for a Cats win and Cameron Ling was the worst. Absolutely sick-making seeing his big cheesy head all over Tom Hawkins 10 seconds after the siren.

 

For what it’s worth, I agree with Goodwin that we are so close to being a great side. I look forward to hammering Geelong to see the miserable faces of their looked-after superstar midfield, their arrogant coach and that boofhead Hawkins. [censored]!

[deanox 8,876]

56 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

Have another look.

Jetta turned to look back at the ball just before he made contact. I think that is why he got the benefit of the doubt. Lucky, but the only luck we got, apart from the Gawn bump off the ball, where I'm sure  ?Blitzas accidentally ran into him, and Max sure made the most of it, though it took him by surprise.

Two lucky ones to us. At least 5 to them.

"umpires don't affect the results"......phooey!

The Geelong player charged direction and braced himself when running into Gawn from behind/side. It was intentional and Gawn didn't see it coming.  He may not have intended to knock him over but he did. 

[DeezNuts 624]

2 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

I'm more concerned with Hawkins getting weeks for his dog act on Fritsch. 

Minimum of a week or two I’d hope 

[SFebes 4,714]

20 hours ago, DeezNuts said:

Minimum of a week or two I’d hope 

He didn't actually connect did he? I only saw a brief replay but a fine at worst I'd say.

[dimmy 1,159]

I think the Harmes situation was a worse decision, because Harmes was running back and was a yard from the plyer. He immediately put his hands up to indicate he was not in play ,but got pinges. What was he supposed to do !!!

We have two examples of rules that are not good for the game in their present form. Dangerfield is so proactive on rule changes for next year, surely his judgement is very self centred and at the best hypocritical..

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,138]

On 7/22/2018 at 1:49 PM, DeezNuts said:

Minimum of a week or two I’d hope 

Not even a fine,  what a farce. Hawkins knew what he was doing, no doubt 

[loges 6,276]

On 7/22/2018 at 12:50 PM, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

Have another look.

Jetta turned to look back at the ball just before he made contact. I think that is why he got the benefit of the doubt. Lucky, but the only luck we got, apart from the Gawn bump off the ball, where I'm sure  ?Blitzas accidentally ran into him, and Max sure made the most of it, though it took him by surprise.

Two lucky ones to us. At least 5 to them.

"umpires don't affect the results"......phooey!

Our past 3 losses significant impact by the umpiring

[Billy 2,142]

I really don’t like Geelong, Dangerfield & Selwood are a protected species, the crowd are feral & the way Hawkins was carrying on in the last quarter really lacked class.

Theres no humility about that mob, maybe that’s why they’ve been so good the last 15 years

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,640]

56 minutes ago, Billy said:

I really don’t like Geelong, Dangerfield & Selwood are a protected species, the crowd are feral & the way Hawkins was carrying on in the last quarter really lacked class.

Theres no humility about that mob, maybe that’s why they’ve been so good the last 15 years

I don't really like them, too!

[chookrat 3,821]

1 hour ago, loges said:

Our past 3 losses significant impact by the umpiring

Umpiring wasn't why we lost, we didnt stand up to Geelongs pressure in the 4th and made alot of mistakes. This said im very bullish about or side and what we are building. 

[sue 8,501]

3 minutes ago, chookrat said:

Umpiring wasn't why we lost, we didnt stand up to Geelongs pressure in the 4th and made alot of mistakes. This said im very bullish about or side and what we are building. 

yes and no.   No reason to attribute the loss to a single reason.  IT was both umpiring and mistakes.  But yes to your second sentence.

[loges 6,276]

20 minutes ago, chookrat said:

Umpiring wasn't why we lost, we didnt stand up to Geelongs pressure in the 4th and made alot of mistakes. This said im very bullish about or side and what we are building. 

Didn't say it was why we lost.

[deebug 1,754]

On 7/22/2018 at 12:40 PM, dazzledavey36 said:

[censored] Dangerfield.. nothing but an arrogant self righteous [censored].

There needs to be a complaint into Cameron Ling commentating on Geelong games. I haven't seen a more bias supporter of the game in the commentary box! To see him carrying on like he'd won the grand final with Duckwood and Ablett last night was borderline pathetic!

You should have heard triple M they were just about willing geelong to win. it was that bad i turned it off.

 

 

[Willmoy1947 3,824]

Geelong are on the way down. An old side of has beens that would be totally envious of the players we have and they don't. A pity that i saw a player of Kelly's ability deliberately try and remove Oliver, a great player, from the game.

Even in their self indulgent,  LUCKY, to say the least, win they would be quietly purring about what a good side WE will be.............

Dangerfield does deserve mention. A player that sadly, and with severe misjudgment, decided to chase the dollars, in sacrifice of a career that could have enhanced Cat's Brownlow Medal count no end. Alas now known and clearly viewed as a stager.

There is also a misconception about a lot of people who comment on this site as being  "weekend keyboard warriors". A lot of them are not. They just never have the same luck in their lives as others do, and if they had, they might achieve as much.

[FireInTheBennelly 4,028]

On 7/22/2018 at 8:58 AM, Call Me What You Will said:

The Hawkins - Fritsch one is symptomatic of a major blight on the game. Once a maggot has paid a free it seems OK for some players to grind a head into the ground, double jumper punch the chest or other physical afterthoughts against the player penalised (or in Fritsch’s case the recipient)of the decision made. Classic Hawkins behaviour.

 

For mine, this is what's caused the increased number of 'crowd incidents' at games this year. If it's ok for the players to behave outside of the rules after play, then I can too. The push in the back when a player's on the ground is the one that gets me. I was pretty sure we had a rule on pushing in the back... The carry on after kicking a goal is getting ridiculous, apparently it's a free shot at the opposition. Tigers are the worst at this.

I can't recall which game, might've been Pies/Norf, but the ball went out of bounds for a throw. Subsequent to that one player clipped an opposition player high and a free kick was called. The commentators, and I'm sure G. Lyon was one of them, discussed why it shouldn't be a free.

For [censored] sake, you don't get a free shot just because the whistle's gone, it should be reportable, not frigging play on. Now Hawkins has 'no case to answer'. For a forearm to the head (with a clear punching action) of a player lying on his back, after the whistle.

Remind me again what Clarry was fined for earlier in the year...

[Pates 9,541]

It was a free, it wasn’t in the spirit of the game or fair play but it was a free by the laws they’ve created. He manipulated it with skill and precision, was he hamming it up? Yes. But he was being block from the contest as “ruckman” and he knew exactly what he was doing as you can see with his celebration where he tapped his head to say “we outsmarted them and the umpires on that one”. 

Geelong seem to be the masters of manipulating the rules in sneaky ways, they have always been the kings at leading with the head and lowering the body for high contact. 

It wasn’t a good look but the umpire was unfortunately correct.

Wouldn’t surprise me if you randomly see midfielders nominate for the ruck in sneaky ways similar to how Dangermouse did. 

Edited July 23, 2018 by Pates

[Clintosaurus 6,767]

Can guarantee that was rehearsed during the week, probably while Troy Pannell was there. Dangerfield lined up nowhere near the ruck contest, which indicates to me he had no intention of contesting with Maxy, but purely to get his man to stand next to him and allow him to put a tonne of mayonnaise on being 'blocked'. Ablett also put his hand up to contest which probably caused the confusion, and he was trying something similar on Petracca.

There is also no way Gus knew who nominated for Geelong - it is impossible to hear the umps out on the ground. On TV the microphones make it easy for the viewer. Look everytime the umpire calls play on - it takes 3 or 4 times for the player on the mark to realise. All our players would have seen was Max on his own and assumed no-one nominated for Geelong.

I hope Mitch Robinson knocks Danger the [censored] out this Saturday.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,534]

On 7/22/2018 at 12:07 PM, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

That was a definite 50m, if not a report, with Hawkins' record.

A player's previous record should have nothing to do with whether a player is reported by an umpire or cited by the MRO. But it should, however, be relevant to any punishment if found guilty.