NON-MFC: Round 15, 2022

[Maldonboy38 6,436]

Great game Port v Suns. Both teams full on pressure, busting a gut, some great skills. Port have their mojo back and the Suns system and effort is very strong. Port probably win from here but the Suns playing very strong footy.  

[Demon17 5,262]

1 hour ago, D4Life said:

I would be delighted to play the Pies in any match during the finals!  
Home & away a different scenario!

AGreed and anytime, and Dees not having 3 concussions in 1 1/4 so the Pies would face a fit and firing full strength team.

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

14 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

AGreed and anytime, and Dees not having 3 concussions in 1 1/4 so the Pies would face a fit and firing full strength team.

I can’t wait for the return leg. If we bring the same intensity as the Lions game it’s a completely different proposition. 

[dee-tox 4,835]

36 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Gold Coast are becoming a decent Football Club. 

Been good all year. 

Play with plenty of heart. 

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

A few dodgy umpiring calls ruining this game. 

[Clintosaurus 7,953]

Great game. Well played both teams.

[Maldonboy38 6,436]

If Ben Ainsworth could kick, Suns won that by 10+ points. His three misses were pretty much unforgiveable in the last quarter. 

[John Demonic 5,988]

14 minutes ago, CYB said:

A few dodgy umpiring calls ruining this game. 

Yes, as usual. Whether its AO or GHMBA, you can count on the umpires to squib out of making the tough deliberate or HTB calls in the last minute. Our job next week is to get a big enough lead to take it out of their hands, unlike last time.

Edited June 26, 2022 by John Demonic

[Return to Glory 8,519]

Wandered to the MCG with teenage daughter to watch Pies v GWS. One of the worst games I've seen for a while. GWS are a spiritless mess.

[layzie 34,528]

That's crap on a stick 

[Sir Why You Little 37,462]

1 hour ago, dee-tox said:

Been good all year. 

Play with plenty of heart. 

This year they have been able to do it for longer

[Boots and all 1,000]

11 hours ago, DubDee said:

in fairness to Chris Scott this is good form to call out a bad hit and acknowledge it
 

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/geelong-cats/afl-news-2022-chris-scott-press-conference-after-geelong-cats-win-over-richmond-tigers-private-chat-with-tom-stewart-bump-on-dion-prestia/news-story/c14f64e09bbd0533f9b05d43aba6c905

Typical Cats, trying to get on the front foot to spin the whole thing. I couldn't care less about Stewart's "apparently" amazing ability to refocus and impact the game in the later stages or that he's such a great guy and didn't mean it. He could have meant it and nobody would be the wiser. Also, how about Prestia's opportunity to impact the game, he could easily have been the difference in that game. Anybody would think Stewart was the victim, the  way the media bang on about it. Sorry, Scott and the Cats [censored] me to tears.

[Demonstone 23,598]

If Stewart's action wasn't deliberate, you have to wonder what else his intention could have possibly been.

[monoccular 17,760]

25 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

If Stewart's action wasn't deliberate, you have to wonder what else his intention could have possibly been.

It was certainly a deliberate decision to bump - which we keep getting told condemns you to whatever the outcome may be.

Meanwhile, eye gouging is apparently only worth a $1k fine, both for the perpetrator and the victim.

[John Demonic 5,988]

1 hour ago, Demonstone said:

If Stewart's action wasn't deliberate, you have to wonder what else his intention could have possibly been.

I sincerely doubt that he would've gone for a big bump off-ball on a young fringe Richmond player like Ralphsmith or Gibcus. He saw an opportunity to do it on Prestia and he went for it. Maybe he didn't want to deliberately get him in the head, but I think it was a definite attempt to take out their best player for a certain amount of minutes, so they could get capitalise.

Edit: And it's fair play if you don't get him in the head (re suspension) - but when you do, you've elevated it to the high end of the scale in terms of 120 minutes of advantage. Chris Scott would've encouraged that kind of play, he's only getting on the front foot now because it's about minimizing  the weeks he'll miss via the GoOd ChAraCtEr defense.

I think the intention to take out a key Richmond player supersedes any good character stuff they throw up in the next week.

Either way, I don't give a [censored] about both teams. Richmond is experiencing a bit of karma for Cotchin taking out Coniglio or was it Josh Kelly? in a prelim.

Edited June 26, 2022 by John Demonic

[Boots and all 1,000]

2 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

I sincerely doubt that he would've gone for a big bump off-ball on a young fringe Richmond player like Ralphsmith or Gibcus. He saw an opportunity to do it on Prestia and he went for it. Maybe he didn't want to deliberately get him in the head, but I think it was a definite attempt to take out their best player for a certain amount of minutes, so they could get capitalise.

Exactly, he saw the opportunity and took it. He no doubt realised the consequences of his actions very quickly and felt sincerely sorry about it...not really the point is it. He may have been upset that he'd let his team down, knowing that he may get a lengthy suspension. 

[Demonstone 23,598]

Stewart has been referred directly to the Tribunal with the offence graded as "careless" (ha ha), "high" and "severe".

[Boots and all 1,000]

1 minute ago, Demonstone said:

Stewart has been referred directly to the Tribunal with the offence graded as "careless" (ha ha), "high" and "severe".

Well the high and severe components of the charge would never have changed...so the Cats achieved their objective.

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

3 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

I sincerely doubt that he would've gone for a big bump off-ball on a young fringe Richmond player like Ralphsmith or Gibcus. He saw an opportunity to do it on Prestia and he went for it. Maybe he didn't want to deliberately get him in the head, but I think it was a definite attempt to take out their best player for a certain amount of minutes, so they could get capitalise.

100%. It was a coward act and he should get penalised to the full extent. Hits like that can end careers. What if that was Gus or Paddy McCartin? Time for a statement punishment I think to really drive the point home that you cannot go past the ball and bump and expect a few weeks. Bumps past the  ball with a concussed player should be 4 weeks minimum and an additional 1 week for every extra week (after the 12 days) the concussed player misses out due to ongoing concussion symptoms (max 12 weeks)

[Lucifers Hero 40,746]

Gleeson makes a case that Stewart should have been referred directly to the Tribunal and no grading scale (careless, severe, high) applied thereby leaving it open to the Tribunal to consider the circumstances stewart-s-strife

But the MRO/Football Manager rating leaves it open to the Cats to argue that it wasn't 'severe' based on other cases.  Can't see the AFL now arguing it should have been rated 'deliberate.'  Showing my cynicism but could it be that the Footy Manager was looking after his twin bro by rating it at all. 

On a related note, while Stewart was apparently upset at 'letting the team down' and supposedly a real good fellow I haven't seen an apology to Prestia or a reference to Stewart checking he was/is ok. 

Edited June 26, 2022 by Lucifers Hero

[BDA 23,048]

Geelong didn't waste anytime before starting the charm offensive 

I always laugh when I hear the "he's not that sort of player" comment. He's just laid out a player with a horrendous elbow so by definition he's exactly that sort of player.

He'll get 4-6 weeks I reckon

[Engorged Onion 10,226]

What's the operational definition of 'careless'? or 'reckless'?

[Jaded No More 68,976]

16 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Gleeson makes a case that Stewart should have been referred directly to the Tribunal and no grading scale (careless, severe, high) applied thereby leaving it open to the Tribunal to consider the circumstances stewart-s-strife

But the MRO/Football Manager rating leaves it open to the Cats to argue that it wasn't 'severe' based on other cases.  Can't see the AFL now arguing it should have been rated 'deliberate.'  Showing my cynicism but could it be that the Footy Manager was looking after his twin bro by rating it at all. 

On a related note, while Stewart was apparently upset at 'letting the team down' and supposedly a real good fellow I haven't seen an apology to Prestia or a reference to Stewart checking he was/is ok. 

Scott went on and on about what a good guy Stewart is and not once did he say "we all hope Prestia is ok".

Shows you exactly what kind of club Geelong is. Putrid. 

You want to see remorse? Have a look at Chandler's reaction to his tackle. He was almost in tears and he reached out to the opponent to check he was ok. That is true remorse for a far less intentional act! 

[sue 9,277]

Surely a deliberate not-in-play and not-football-related act (Stewart) deserves a much much bigger penalty than Chandler's unfortunate tackle (accidental, in play, tackling part of the game)  We shall see.

[Dee Zephyr 19,322]

The grading means Stewart will be suspended for at least three weeks. Is that correct? It’s just very hard to understand how they operate sometimes .