We're about as aggressive as our coach's post-match press conferences...

 

 

Edited May 19, 20196 yr by The Stigga

Steven May would not have put up with that.

32 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Steven May would not have put up with that.

Right on.

Would have clocked him, given them another goak snd copped a six week suspension.

14 minutes ago, binman said:

Right on.

Would have clocked him, given them another goak snd copped a six week suspension.

No need to belt anyone but a show of force was needed Bin.  Worst case was a report (one or two weeks max) and a 5 meter penalty.

Allowing bullies to bully is not a winning culture and sends a poor message to team mates.  And if team mates don't stand up for each other then what will they stand for when the going gets tough?

11 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

No need to belt anyone but a show of force was needed Bin.  Worst case was a report (one or two weeks max) and a 5 meter penalty.

Allowing bullies to bully is not a winning culture and sends a poor message to team mates.  And if team mates don't stand up for each other then what will they stand for when the going gets tough?

We are not exactly in a position to lose player for 1 ot 2 weeks max. Im sure if you ask Gawn, he would say the exact same thing.

 

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

We are not exactly in a position to lose player for 1 ot 2 weeks max. Im sure if you ask Gawn, he would say the exact same thing.

 

If you are happy for us to continue to be bullied dazzle that's fine.  I would rather fly the flag and cop the one or two weeks IF it comes or maybe a reprimand/fine.

A weak response is more likely to breed a weak / selfish club/team culture and end up effecting results regardless of who is in or out.  Once players begin to literally see a soft response under similar circumstances to the Maxy incident (or worse) they are more likely to accept that they are not expected to stand up for each other when the going gets tough.

Of course the opposite response is more likely to elicit a robust response and expectation going forward, again regardless of who is in the team.

Happy to agree to disagree with you on this one.

Edited May 20, 20196 yr by Rusty Nails

46 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

If you are happy for us to continue to be bullied dazzle that's fine.  I would rather fly the flag and cop the one or two weeks IF it comes or maybe a reprimand/fine.

A weak response is more likely to breed a weak / selfish club/team culture and end up effecting results regardless of who is in or out.  Once players begin to literally see a soft response under similar circumstances to the Maxy incident (or worse) they are more likely to accept that they are not expected to stand up for each other when the going gets tough.

Of course the opposite response is more likely to elicit a robust response and expectation going forward, again regardless of who is in the team.

Happy to agree to disagree with you on this one.

I’m with you Rusty but not to a point of someone getting rubbed out, but definitely to a point where they cop a fine. I would’ve loved a similar response to what Viney gave Rance a couple years ago when Rance clocked Watts in the back of the head, or the melee that happened at 1/4 time the year before. 

But that could be a reflect of Roos and Goodwin. 

45 minutes ago, Megatron said:

I’m with you Rusty but not to a point of someone getting rubbed out, but definitely to a point where they cop a fine. I would’ve loved a similar response to what Viney gave Rance a couple years ago when Rance clocked Watts in the back of the head, or the melee that happened at 1/4 time the year before. 

But that could be a reflect of Roos and Goodwin. 

Im certainly not saying you fly the flag with a view to getting yourself suspended either Mega.  However, this is sometimes the unintended consequence.

And yes i reckon Goody needs to up the ante a little on the anti social.  Some ordinary signs have started to slowly  creeping in on this side since Roos departed.

A competitive edge needs to be imported  and imparted as part of the required traits when recruiting.

4 hours ago, binman said:

Right on.

Would have clocked him, given them another goak snd copped a six week suspension.

You don't know that,  'bm'.

 

3 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

No need to belt anyone but a show of force was needed Bin.  Worst case was a report (one or two weeks max) and a 5 meter penalty.

Allowing bullies to bully is not a winning culture and sends a poor message to team mates.  And if team mates don't stand up for each other then what will they stand for when the going gets tough?

Simply, reamaining passive,  in an aggressive contact sport,  is unacceptable.

2 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

If you are happy for us to continue to be bullied dazzle that's fine.  I would rather fly the flag and cop the one or two weeks IF it comes or maybe a reprimand/fine.

A weak response is more likely to breed a weak / selfish club/team culture and end up effecting results regardless of who is in or out.  Once players begin to literally see a soft response under similar circumstances to the Maxy incident (or worse) they are more likely to accept that they are not expected to stand up for each other when the going gets tough.

Of course the opposite response is more likely to elicit a robust response and expectation going forward, again regardless of who is in the team.

Happy to agree to disagree with you on this one.

The same should have happened when smith was dumped hitting his head in a sort of stop play action.  Pinned arms and smashed into the ground.

i don't blame Jetta,  but I do our players for not remonstrating vigorously...  which no doubt would have caused the umpires to reflect again,  on his initial decision.

1 hour ago, Megatron said:

I’m with you Rusty but not to a point of someone getting rubbed out, but definitely to a point where they cop a fine. I would’ve loved a similar response to what Viney gave Rance a couple years ago when Rance clocked Watts in the back of the head, or the melee that happened at 1/4 time the year before. 

But that could be a reflect of Roos and Goodwin. 

They will only get rubbed out if they act violently.

44 minutes ago, DV8 said:

The same should have happened when smith was dumped hitting his head in a sort of stop play action.  Pinned arms and smashed into the ground.

i don't blame Jetta,  but I do our players for not remonstrating vigorously...  which no doubt would have caused the umpires to reflect again,  on his initial decision.

This was one out of the box IMO DV.  I didn't see any malice or intent to 'hurt bull Smith from Jetta.  However he did have a choice after pinning his arms not to bring him to ground.  Intent or otherwise it was clearly a dangerous tackle.

Under a non-compromised umpiring umbrella, it should have resulted in a free kick and shot at goal for us putting us 2 goals up;  OR at the very worst a ball up, a halt in play while Bull was replaced, and the ball being retained in our forward 50 with even numbers around the resulting ball up.

Mumford cleared to play. To protect Max we MUST play Pruess and instruct him to get his retaliation in first!

 

 

28 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

This was one out of the box IMO DV.  I didn't see any malice or intent to 'hurt bull Smith from Jetta.  However he did have a choice after pinning his arms not to bring him to ground.  Intent or otherwise it was clearly a dangerous tackle.

Under a non-compromised umpiring umbrella, it should have resulted in a free kick and shot at goal for us putting us 2 goals up;  OR at the very worst a ball up, a halt in play while Bull was replaced, and the ball being retained in our forward 50 with even numbers around the resulting ball up.

When our players saw Smith stunned on the ground,  obviously from a head hit to the ground which they all saw...  there should to have been a push & shove moment from our boys...   right or wrong,  you just don't let these things go-by un-protested,  vigorously.

 

The vigor makes the umpires have to respond...  and when a player layes motionless on the ground,  there isn't a lot of directions they can go.

But it makes them re-apprise their initial thinking.

I reckon they may well have changed the initial decision,  of a free to Jetta.

.

23 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Mumford cleared to play. To protect Max we MUST play Pruess and instruct him to get his retaliation in first!

 

 

No,  we don't target Mummy... we play as we should be... vigorously at every GWS player,  with a bruising attack at ball and man..

40 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Mumford cleared to play. To protect Max we MUST play Pruess and instruct him to get his retaliation in first!

 

 

You have my vote Trigon.  It's time to target scummy Mummy.  His main objective this week will be to take Gawn out and Mummy is the best at disguising these veiled attempts as "Oh sorry about that ...I'm just so big and clumsy!" and getting away with it.

And we've all seen how much protection big Maxy has received this year from the umps....a big fact naDa, zero, ZILCH!!

Pruess is a must addition to get stuck into Mummy early and soften him up.  Max up forward until Pruess has had a good go for a quarter or two then Maxy for the remainder.

What goes around comes around and Maxy's been on the receiving end of plenty of sniping so far this year.  Mummy is the best at it (sniping) around congestion.  Time to protect Maxy and dish it out the other way, playing within the rules but pushing the envelope.  This will also be something out of left field that i doubt GWS will be expecting.

Time to get anti social and let loose the hounds from hell ! ...

Are you sure we’re allowed to use Tasers?

Edited May 20, 20196 yr by TRIGON

The push back from Oscar McDonald was as many here have expressed it - meek and is typical of how he is playing.  Struth, he didn't need to knock him out, but push him with a bit more vigor or put a shoulder into him.

I've defended Oscar McDonald in his performances pre this season, but this kind of physical softness has got to stop.  He is 23 years old and 100kg now, so should be more than capable of making his physical presence felt.

You might say how does a bit of push and shove prove to everyone what a big man he is, but as others have said, it's a symptom of a broader issue, because this shying away from being as fully physical in a remonstrative way infects the whole way he plays during game time.  He is unprepared to hold his ground physically and gets brushed out of the contest all the time.  Sam Frost is 5kg lighter than Omac,  but plays with twice the physical presence and some actual aggression in his game.  Tommy doesn't cop the rubbish that Oscar does.  When AVB came back late last year, the physical presence he bought really lifted our game and was a big part of the reason the whole team had a swagger in their step in the lead up and during our finals campaign.

Someone needs to get the boxing gloves on at training and lay right into Oscar (and probably a few others) until he gets angry, actually starts fighting back, repeat the exercise before every game until he starts playing with some moungral in his game, because his present meekness just won't hack it anymore and particularly not in finals.

Edited May 20, 20196 yr by Rodney (Balls) Grinter

45 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

The push back from Oscar McDonald was as many here have expressed it - meek and is typical of how he is playing.  Struth, he didn't need to knock him out, but push him with a bit more vigor or put a shoulder into him.

I've defended Oscar McDonald in his performances pre this season, but this kind of physical softness has got to stop.  He is 23 years old and 100kg now, so should be more than capable of making his physical presence felt.

You might say how does a bit of push and shove prove to everyone what a big man he is, but as others have said, it's a symptom of a broader issue, because this shying away from being as fully physical in a remonstrative way infects the whole way he plays during game time.  He is unprepared to hold his ground physically and gets brushed out of the contest all the time.  Sam Frost is 5kg lighter than Omac,  but plays with twice the physical presence and some actual aggression in his game.  Tommy doesn't cop the rubbish that Oscar does.  When AVB came back late last year, the physical presence he bought really lifted our game and was a big part of the reason the whole team had a swagger in their step in the lead up and during our finals campaign.

Someone needs to get the boxing gloves on at training and lay right into Oscar (and probably a few others) until he gets angry, actually starts fighting back, repeat the exercise before every game until he starts playing with some moungral in his game, because his present meekness just won't hack it anymore and particularly not in finals.

Fair dinkum I'm getting fed up with this sort or rubbish.

The way so many so called demon fans on this site insult omac is simply pathetic.

This (ridiculous) thread is about teamates not sticking up for max. One of the players that reacts is omac, but still he's not immune from critisism. Our he man that everyone was drooling over pre season gets suspended in a practice game for being a stupid faux tough guy and misses round 1 and who knows costs us the game. 

Did you watch the game? Meek? Omac attacked contest after contest and despite the fears of darling and Kennedy rag rolling him more than held his own. Laid some big tackles and got smashed plenty of times too. 

And unlike Frost didn't make any brain dead errors, turnovers  or clangers that cost us goals or chances  to clear our defence.

Don't believe me? Go look at omac's video of his involvement on  statspro on tbe AFL website. His best game for the season. Joeboy even called it serviceable, which for him is akin to saying very good game.

How about posters  get around the young fella, who as is pointed out above is only 23. Still young for a KPD. Many seem to love Sam Collins for gc. Instructive he us older (just) than omac and was towelled up by tmac against us and I think cost them the game.

Love him, hate him, ambivalent or simply don't think he is up to the job at least be happy we have him in the side atm while his two highly paid teammates sit out with injury, one for being an undisciplined peanut who despite being a so called leader didn't think to ask his new club what their expectations were for him in terms of getting ready for preseason. Now that's meek.

 

Edited May 20, 20196 yr by binman

56 minutes ago, binman said:

Fair dinkum I'm getting fed up with this sort or rubbish.

The way so many so called demon fans on this site insult omac is simply pathetic.

This (ridiculous) thread is about teamates not sticking up for max. One of the players that reacts is omac, but still he's not immune from critisism. Our he man that everyone was drooling over pre season gets suspended in a practice game for being a stupid faux tough guy and misses round 1 and who knows costs us the game. 

Did you watch the game? Meek? Omac attacked contest after contest and despite the fears of darling and Kennedy rag rolling him more than held his own. Laid some big tackles and got smashed plenty of times too. 

And unlike Frost didn't make any brain dead errors, turnovers  or clangers that cost us goals or chances  to clear our defence.

Don't believe me? Go look at omac's video of his involvement on  statspro on tbe AFL website. His best game for the season. Joeboy even called it serviceable, which for him is akin to saying very good game.

How about posters  get around the young fella, who as is pointed out above is only 23. Still young for a KPD. Many seem to love Sam Collins for gc. Instructive he us older (just) than omac and was towelled up by tmac against us and I think cost them the game.

Love him, hate him, ambivalent or simply don't think he is up to the job at least be happy we have him in the side atm while his two highly paid teammates sit out with injury, one for being an undisciplined peanut who despite being a so called leader didn't think to ask his new club what their expectations were for him in terms of getting ready for preseason. Now that's meek.

Save your breath, binman.  Some posters have a near pathological dislike for a player.  Sadly, Oscar is one.

In nearly every thread they find a way to abuse their particular whipping boy.  Then all the cohorts jump in.  The same posters with the same comments.  Thread after thread, week after week, ad nauseam.  

They get some weird joy from cracking their whip at every opportunity.  Its sad and sick.  I just hope they aren't using the player's personal twitter, instagram etc to voice their vitriol.

Edited May 20, 20196 yr by Lucifer's Hero

In the Hawks game we got back into it when Hunt started the argy bargy with Sicily.  It set off a chain of aggro and it really fired up the team.  And the aggro was all legal.

Can't help but think had the someone done the same after the Smith incident it would have fired the team up.  We may have even won.  There was no sting in our game vs WCE so when the low life Vardy went for Max most players did nothing - in fact it was the 'juniors' who stood up for him. 

Wouldn't have minded Jones, Viney or Harmes putting some physicality into Vardy at the next center bounce or two or lay a few heavy tackles and fall over him by accident.

Edited May 20, 20196 yr by Lucifer's Hero

What I found to be a fascinating doco on the "Enforcers" playing Ice Hockey who are there purely to protect their teammates.
And yes I realise that this would never fly these days in the AFL but it explained a little why it's part of their game.
Doesn't change the fact I'd still like to see a little more intimidation from our side.
We've been beaten up for as long as I remember.

 

 

Edited May 20, 20196 yr by Fork 'em

12 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

In the Hawks game we got back into it when Hunt started the argy bargy with Sicily.  It set off a chain of aggro and it really fired up the team.  And the aggro was all legal.

Can't help but think had the someone done the same after the Smith incident it would have fired the team up.  We may have even won.  There was no sting in our game vs WCE so when the low life Vardy went for Max most players did nothing - in fact it was the 'juniors' who stood up for him. 

Wouldn't have minded Jones, Viney or Harmes putting some physicality into Vardy at the next center bounce or two or lay a few heavy tackles and fall over him by accident.

Disagree.  Smith going off had a massive structural effect - it freed up an intercept marker for them in our D50.  We were also down 2 rotations (soon to be 3).  The AFL have confirmed the free kick was a wrong decision.  We actually needed to focus on the roles, and cover back across in defence.  We didn’t do this, and looked to run out of legs.  We tactically failed to deliver it clear into 50 away from their (now free) intercept markers.  A bit of a ‘sugar high’ from some faux aggression was way less important that proper attention to the gameplan.

It is a game, and encouraging violence for the sake of ‘being a tough guy’ is a bit silly, especially when one punch acts and stuff like the fights in the crowd are a serious topic at the moment.  Play the game fairly but strongly is fine, encouraging violence to intimidate or interfere with another’s capability to play is pretty [censored] weak.

1 minute ago, buck_nekkid said:

Disagree.  Smith going off had a massive structural effect - it freed up an intercept marker for them in our D50.  We were also down 2 rotations (soon to be 3).  The AFL have confirmed the free kick was a wrong decision.  We actually needed to focus on the roles, and cover back across in defence.  We didn’t do this, and looked to run out of legs.  We tactically failed to deliver it clear into 50 away from their (now free) intercept markers.  A bit of a ‘sugar high’ from some faux aggression was way less important that proper attention to the gameplan.

It is a game, and encouraging violence for the sake of ‘being a tough guy’ is a bit silly, especially when one punch acts and stuff like the fights in the crowd are a serious topic at the moment.  Play the game fairly but strongly is fine, encouraging violence to intimidate or interfere with another’s capability to play is pretty [censored] weak.

There is a big difference between encouraging violence and suggesting argy bargy and legal aggro ala the Hawks game I referred to. 

As Goodwin said a while back - he wants us to play 'grumpy', some call it 'unsoiciable' 'football or a hard edge.  It is not encouraging violence to play aggressively within the rules.

Lots of things could have been different in the last that caused us to lose.  But we played the game without a hard edge and were timid in last quarter in every sense.  A bit more legal aggro or 'grumpiness' was called for.   We didn't show it for Smith or Gawn, nor in the immediate aftermath of those events against the perpetrators.  It certainly worked vs the Hawks.  

For an example.
I feel once David Nietz retired Aaron Davey suffered as he was subjected to aggressive taggers near every week with zero support from his teammates.
When he was running around under the wings of big Neita he could walk that bit taller and play with more freedom.
Brad Miller tried to fill the roll but was was quickly tamed by a few visits to the tribuneral.

Edited May 20, 20196 yr by Fork 'em