Have just fallen off my chair watching Kane Cornes telling anyone stupid enough to listen that what Greene does with his kicking leg is fine. Wow!

Last year he kicked Dalhouse in the face, yesterday he kicked a Swan player in the chest, tried to kick Ahir and chipped another kick to Jones.

How can this behaviour be acceptable??

Edited September 9, 20186 yr by dieter

Here’s the AFL approved counter tactic:

 

Don't worry.  Now that he has to play C'wood, Eddie everywhere will have a word to Gil and this dangerous tactic will be banned.

This is a disgrace and he needs to be rubbed out. It's simply dangerous.

Not only that but a player is protected from front on contact via a free kick. If you want to remove that protection then fine make it a free-for-all but its there to stop a player from being poleaxed front on.

A knee is totally acceptable and is a very natural action to protect ones genitalia. An outstrecthed foot with studs has the potential to do serious damage. Luke Dalhaus last year was very lucky he wasn"t injured more.

Greene gets fined last year and it will be interesting to see what the new MRP does with the golden child club.

 

 

That he continues to put his studs into people is disgusting, the AFL has had the chance previously to stamp this out and didn’t, they have created this mess.

 

That said, it just goes to show that Toby is a dog of a person, actually kicking out with his studs first, lovelife...

I like it.

As long as it’s not high, why should fending off with foot be different from fending by arm..?

Adds a new dimension and skill to the game... bring it on! 

Because it's Finals, Mike Christian will ask players to turn their other cheeks to Toby's boots. Why, he only using dem in self defence...

1 minute ago, PaulRB said:

I like it.

As long as it’s not high, why should fending off with foot be different from fending by arm..?

Adds a new dimension and skill to the game... bring it on! 

You ever been kicked on the footy field, man? What a stupid comment.

8 minutes ago, dieter said:

You ever been kicked on the footy field, man? What a stupid comment.

Umpires, AFL, etc... saw it rightly as a fend off rather than a “kick”, and so was permissible. I like the dimension it will adds as others adopt it... 

im sorry you were kicked playing footy and now feel that entitles you to try to belittle others viewpoints. 

Go Dees. 

Edited September 9, 20186 yr by PaulRB

15 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

I like it.

As long as it’s not high, why should fending off with foot be different from fending by arm..?

Adds a new dimension and skill to the game... bring it on! 

How is a foot different than an arm?  Perhaps it's because players don't wear studs on their arms.

Edited September 9, 20186 yr by sue

15 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Umpires, AFL, etc... saw it rightly as a fend off rather than a “kick”, and so was permissible. I like the dimension it will adds as others adopt it... 

im sorry you were kicked playing footy and now feel that entitles you to try to belittle others viewpoints. 

Go Dees. 

If it's such a popular fend off why is this DH the only one doing it. Next thing is you will have so many more people kicking in danger when someone is bending down to pick up the ball. They will be saying i was fending him off, because i wanted to pick up the ball...hello@#$%

If the AFL doesn't instruct the umpires to penalise it, then some day a player who has a boot coming towards his face will grab the boot and upend TB slamming his head into the deck.  He'll probably be pinged for a trip, or is it a dangerous tackle, but I expect TB won't be doing it again.

interesting... worth having a look at his style of play... his first mark involves the use of the leg but only mildly by comparison to the one much later that brought the howl of protest from the Swans player.

The commentators applauded the first mark and then debated the later one.

Not an easy line to draw.

Don’t like it but not sure there is any rule against it as long as it is not high or deemed to be dangerous by the umpire. Otherwise it is a fend using a foot rather than an arm. 

Very easy line to draw. No feet up with studs exposed to an oncoming player. Immediate free kick and suspension. A gutless act.

If it was so acceptable then why is he the only one who does it repeatedly. No one else does it because they understand the game's morality.

 

How in hell is intentionally lashing out with a studded football boot in accordance with the guiding principles for the Laws of the Game in relation to player health and safety?

It has nothing to do with protecting Greene in his attempt to mark the ball and all about his intent to harm opposition players. It is essentially kicking in danger. A violent act by somebody with a history both on and off the field.

When I played footy, that would have seen the offender decked and later cost him 4 weeks courtesy of the tribunal AND being labelled a kicker.

If Greene is allowed to get away with what he is doing it makes a mockery of the rules of our game. 

I can't believe the Hawks or Cats didn't come up with it

Danger has got a few tricks. One is where he drags/ collects people down when he's going down and another is where he guides (actually directs at speed) the tackled opposition player down seemingly as opposed to pile driving

Someone just grab his leg and twist. Problem ends

Toby Greene needs that offending leg dealt with, like broken, so he like “doesn’t do it again”

it is a very poor look to the game. 

Similar to GW$ actually 

We can only hope Jeremy Camerons face accidently comes in its path

1 hour ago, PaulRB said:

I like it.

As long as it’s not high, why should fending off with foot be different from fending by arm..?

Adds a new dimension and skill to the game... bring it on! 

In the ruck contest they can't fend off with a straight arm. Arm has to be bent.

The legs should used only to get some elevation in the mark. 

Protection should not mean harm to the other player.

A knee up should be enough to protect yourself. 

I want hard football not dangerous stuff.

You can see by the other players reaction that they see it as an unfair tactic.

 

Fending off with the foot? So that's what we call kicking now. Noted.

How is it not kicking in danger ??

don't like it. but it's going to be hard to define it

bit like when they tried to define chucking in cricket and used degrees of elbow bend with a different degree for fast bowlers vs spinners

certainly bringing the leg/foot upto the horizontal seems dangerous and unfair