Jump to content

POSTGAME: Rd 08 vs Brisbane

Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

45 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

 

100% that Nev was trying to kick the ball sideways to Langdon. There is no other possible explanation.

The maggots cost us a goal.

He definitely was trying to pass it to Langdon, but in that instance the umpire has no choice because the interpretation of the rule is tighter. They would look at it that Nev had not done enough to keep it in, they would also have probably imagined that even if that was his intention, in the moment he was keener to get the ball out. 

Nev had the ability to pick the ball up and handball or paddle it to Langdon. 

  • Quote
    •  
    2 minutes ago, Pates said:

    He definitely was trying to pass it to Langdon, but in that instance the umpire has no choice because the interpretation of the rule is tighter. They would look at it that Nev had not done enough to keep it in, they would also have probably imagined that even if that was his intention, in the moment he was keener to get the ball out. 

    Nev had the ability to pick the ball up and handball or paddle it to Langdon. 

    I don't think picking it up was an option with how hot they are with htb now.

    Risked a free dead in front of goal. I think he made the right choice, just kicked it too hard.

    Nev knows he's not getting any faster too. Was it Cameron on his hammer?

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    11 minutes ago, Pates said:

    He definitely was trying to pass it to Langdon, but in that instance the umpire has no choice because the interpretation of the rule is tighter. They would look at it that Nev had not done enough to keep it in, they would also have probably imagined that even if that was his intention, in the moment he was keener to get the ball out. 

    Nev had the ability to pick the ball up and handball or paddle it to Langdon. 

    I don't see how that 'rule' applies when it is argued he was trying to kick it to Langdon's advantage.

  • Quote
    •  
    23 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

    Being there at the ground, it was clear that they were putting a lot of work into him off the ball.  Not overly dirty stuff, but constantly bumping into him and shepherding him from running into position a mile off the play.  I watched Charlie Cameron do this to him numerous times, blocking Max from getting into a good marking position outside 50 for kick-ins. Max seemed to try to make it obvious to the umps what was going on, without giving away free kicks to them in their forward 50.  Didn't notice too much of our blokes flying the flag to an extent for big Max.

    a) I think that we need to be better as a team and recognize when this is going on and a put on better physical pressure the other way to let their blokes know we won't tolerate it and

    It will be interesting to see what happens this week against Port who had the same and maybe more aggressive tactic round 1?? last year and if we do anything about it unlike against Port.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    47 minutes ago, Pates said:

    He definitely was trying to pass it to Langdon, but in that instance the umpire has no choice because the interpretation of the rule is tighter. They would look at it that Nev had not done enough to keep it in, they would also have probably imagined that even if that was his intention, in the moment he was keener to get the ball out. 

    Nev had the ability to pick the ball up and handball or paddle it to Langdon. 

    Yes but the umpires communicate with each other as to whether it was a skill error or deliberate. This was clearly skill error

  • Quote

    22 hours ago, P-man said:

    McStay getting two weeks for the bump on Jetta is a joke tbh. I’d be filthy if it was a Melbourne player

    What exactly is McStay meant to do im that situation when Jetta puts his head down and charges into him? Jump out of the way? Even Goodwin in the presser acknowledged that players need to be better at turning their body before contact.

    It really seems like the match review process and basic common sense are an ill fit.

    To say Jets charged at him is BS. Yes he lowered his head back down slightly but it was all for half a step to a step. McStay needed to tackle but he choose to bump hit him in the head. end of story. If he tackled its holding the ball. simple.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    1 hour ago, Pates said:

    He definitely was trying to pass it to Langdon, but in that instance the umpire has no choice because the interpretation of the rule is tighter. They would look at it that Nev had not done enough to keep it in, they would also have probably imagined that even if that was his intention, in the moment he was keener to get the ball out. 

     

    1 hour ago, sue said:

    I don't see how that 'rule' applies when it is argued he was trying to kick it to Langdon's advantage.

     

    The crazy part is, they are rigorous in their application of that one rule, yet allow rampant throwing, holding, dropping, short kicks, etc.

    Which is the biggest blight on the game? But OOB is what they clamp down on.

    Not to mention they have to read a player's mind to make the right call in a contentious moment like that.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

    Yes but the umpires communicate with each other as to whether it was a skill error or deliberate. This was clearly skill error

     

    7 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

    The crazy part is, they are rigorous in their application of that one rule, yet allow rampant throwing, holding, dropping, short kicks, etc.

    Which is the biggest blight on the game? But OOB is what they clamp down on.

    Not to mention they have to read a player's mind to make the right call in a contentious moment like that.

     

    1 hour ago, sue said:

    I don't see how that 'rule' applies when it is argued he was trying to kick it to Langdon's advantage.

    I wouldn't disagree with any of these assessments, being a defender has got increasingly harder with rule adjustments over the years. Since I first started watching AFL in the mid-late 90s I've seen (this is from memory) these rule changes:

    - tighter ruling on push in the back 
    - tighter ruling on holding the man/blocking
    - harder on chopping arms/spoiling the player not the ball
    - tighter deliberate out of bounds both with "walking the ball over" and the rushed kick out of defence
    - deliberate rushed behind (which players even now are confused about the rule)
    - and now a tighter (and inconsistent) ruling on HTB

    Seriously who would want to be a defender when they seem to be constantly making your job harder?

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

    I just thought I'd add a little about the Jetta/McStay incident because I'm watching 360 and Robbo is joining the chorus blaming Jetta for it. 

    What I will say is that Jetta plays a part in the IMPACT of the bump, it looks (and is) heavy because Jetta when he collects the ball does lead forcefully with his head. I 100% think this is something the medico should be chatting to Nev about because he can't keep doing this otherwise he could really get hurt. So that is one side of it.

    BUT every commentator is IGNORING the fact that McStay chose to bump as Jetta collected the ball. He tucked his arm in to collect him high rather than open his arms up to tackle. He was also running in on him so of course this is all happening quick but his made the decision to bump rather than tackle. The way the media seems to be collectively ignoring this very simple fact is infuriating.

    EDIT Also just wanted to say that McStay actually immediately put his hands towards Jetta to say sorry so it clearly wasn't an intentional "I'm going to take your head off" bump.

    Edited by Pates

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1
    50 minutes ago, Pates said:

    I just thought I'd add a little about the Jetta/McStay incident because I'm watching 360 and Robbo is joining the chorus blaming Jetta for it. 

    What I will say is that Jetta plays a part in the IMPACT of the bump, it looks (and is) heavy because Jetta when he collects the ball does lead forcefully with his head. I 100% think this is something the medico should be chatting to Nev about because he can't keep doing this otherwise he could really get hurt. So that is one side of it.

    BUT every commentator is IGNORING the fact that McStay chose to bump as Jetta collected the ball. He tucked his arm in to collect him high rather than open his arms up to tackle. He was also running in on him so of course this is all happening quick but his made the decision to bump rather than tackle. The way the media seems to be collectively ignoring this very simple fact is infuriating.

    EDIT Also just wanted to say that McStay actually immediately put his hands towards Jetta to say sorry so it clearly wasn't an intentional "I'm going to take your head off" bump.

    I woudn't rule out Jetta being slightly concussed given his earlier knee to the head..he looks pretty slow and dazed most of the night..

    Nonetheless its very rough blaming Jetta who was going directly for the ball. If it was Selwood they would all be lauding his bravery. (cue spew)

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    On 7/26/2020 at 8:53 PM, No Plan B said:

    Melts aside I’m starting to see why we sold the farm for May and Lever. May is probably in the AA squad of 40 at present. Love his arrogance. 

    Completely agree.

    His kicking is excellent and he's a proper leader down back. I'm a total convert.

  • Quote
    21 hours ago, Pates said:

    I just thought I'd add a little about the Jetta/McStay incident because I'm watching 360 and Robbo is joining the chorus blaming Jetta for it. 

    What I will say is that Jetta plays a part in the IMPACT of the bump, it looks (and is) heavy because Jetta when he collects the ball does lead forcefully with his head. I 100% think this is something the medico should be chatting to Nev about because he can't keep doing this otherwise he could really get hurt. So that is one side of it.

    BUT every commentator is IGNORING the fact that McStay chose to bump as Jetta collected the ball. He tucked his arm in to collect him high rather than open his arms up to tackle. He was also running in on him so of course this is all happening quick but his made the decision to bump rather than tackle. The way the media seems to be collectively ignoring this very simple fact is infuriating.

    EDIT Also just wanted to say that McStay actually immediately put his hands towards Jetta to say sorry so it clearly wasn't an intentional "I'm going to take your head off" bump.

    If Jetta had stood up he would've been poleaxed. McStay is a foot bigger than him.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • GAMEDAY: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

      It's Game Day and the Demons are back on the road again and this may be the last roll of the dice to get their 2025 season back on track as they take on the Gold Coast Suns at People First Stadium.

        • Like
      • 546 replies
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Gold Coast

      The Gold Coast Suns find themselves outside of the top eight for the first time since Round 1 with pressure is mounting on the entire organisation. Their coach Damien Hardwick expressed his frustration at his team’s condition last week by making a middle-finger gesture on television that earned him a fine for his troubles. He showed his desperation by claiming that Fox should pick up the tab.  There’s little doubt the Suns have shown improvement in 2025, and their position on the ladder is influenced to some extent by having played fewer games than their rivals for a playoff role at the end of the season, courtesy of the disruption caused by Cyclone Alfred in March.  However, they are following the same trajectory that hindered the club in past years whenever they appeared to be nearing their potential. As a consequence, that Hardwick gesture should be considered as more than a mere behavioral lapse. It’s a distress signal that does not bode well for the Queenslanders. While the Suns are eager to remain in contention with the top eight, Melbourne faces its own crisis, which is similarly deep-seated but in a much different way. After recovering from a disappointing start to the season and nearing a return to respectability among its peer clubs, the Demons have experienced a decline in status, driven by the fact that while their form has been reasonable (see their performance against the ladder leader in the Kings Birthday match), their conversion in front of goal is poor enough to rank last in the competition. Furthermore, their opponents find them exceptionally easy to score against. As a result, they have effectively eliminated themselves from the finals race and are again positioned to finish in the bottom half of the ladder.

        • Haha
      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 15

      As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

        • Clap
      • 287 replies
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Port Adelaide

      Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

        • Like
      • 3 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Essendon

      Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Gold Coast

      The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

        • Haha
      • 372 replies
      Demonland
    View All