Jumping Jack Clennett

Couldn't agree less.

Jamar....tries hard...delist.

Replying to Nasher's post 23.It's important to look into it more thoughtfully and critically. Of course one can't expect equal frees every match. BUT, when you consistently see a tendency for the side with no supporters present getting a raw deal, it's worth pointing it out. Melbourne is greatly affected by this , since our supporters are always outnumbered.

My point is completely different to the Selwood ducking manoeuvre. I'm talking about the way players with the ball see an on-coming tackler, and bend forward, presenting their head and shoulders, giving the tackler a choice of getting out of the way, or tackling and giving a free (or whacking him, possibly breaking his neck) It's got nothing to do with the Selwood/Shuey " duck" to get a high tackle free, which also shouldn't be rewarded, but isn't dangerous. This thread has been diverted to the Selwood tactic. I'd like peoples' opinions on the forward dive to draw the high tackle. I think it's a terribly important point. I hear Lynch is OK..... Thank heavens. Let's stop it NOW, before there's another Neil Sachse.

Umpires have fallen back to the habit of rewarding players who bend over and present their head and shoulders to the oncoming tackler, by awarding frees for "high tackles". The player who ducks should be penalised for "dangerous play"(danger to himself) I brought this up a few years ago on this forum, warning of the possibility of a serious spinal injury. While not penalising the ducker, they usually haven't rewarded him ,in recent years, but I've noticed a recent tendency to pay the free for the high tackle in the last few weeks. I just heard about Lynch of Adelaide ducking and receiving a heavy knock today. I hope he isn't seriously injured, because I think it's the fault of the AFL Umpiring directors.

What about Geelong v Freo last night!!!!! 31 frees to 14 at Kardinia Park!! Geelong will continue to get results above their skill level as long as they have 8 games a year with NO opposition supporters present to yell "BALLLLL!!!!" immediately before the opposition take possession. They have an enormous advantage over all other clubs, with the capacity of Skilled Stadium being much less than their total number of members. I know it's the same at Subiaco, but somehow there's always plenty of support there for Coll, Ess and Carlton. We suffer badly, of course, and play there more often. Of course Coll, Carl and Ess are exempt from being sent to Geelong.(it wouldn't be fair to their supporters!)

Just noticed this very prescient post from "DeePower" in 2011. Any other predictions, DP ?

La Dee-Vina... I respect your thoughtful opinion greatly, but I'm surprised you observe that we've been attacking more in the last 6 weeks. I've watched all those games, and I don't think we've attacked nearly enough, exactly the same as in the first thirteen rounds. We still fail to play on. Players always look backwards before considering going forward. By the time they consider looking forward, all options are covered. There is still too much time taken before kick-ins are taken. They rarely kick in ,or lead ,up the centre. Oppositions know they only have to zone wide to cover our kick ins. We're still too scared to attack up the" centre corridor",even from the centre line.(remember the way Nathan Brown used to switch play to up the centre...the shortest way home!) I really haven't noticed any change, though I've been hoping for it., and looking for it. I thought that now we've concentrated so hard on learning defence, it would be beneficial to try to learn an attacking game. Even if it costs us premiership points, what does it matter at this point in time? Surely it would be helpful for next season.

"Eishold's was far more devastating though - had he nailed it we would have been into the GF (first in 22 years), though unlikely to win it."

How badly must Jamar play before Demon supporters criticise him?

Did any Demonlanders notice the absolute dream run Collingwood got from the umps tonight v. Adelaide? They only had to get the ball into their forward 50 to get a free in front of goal, over and over again. The crowd pressured the umps for holding the ball and high tackles. There was no noise when the same thing happened to Adelaide. After Adelaide got a couple of frees in a row, the crowd booing was so loud that they didn't DARE give Podsiadly a round the neck directly in front, when he not only marked it, but nearly had his head pulled off! Coll could usually tackle wherever they liked, and chuck the pill at will. Listening to the crowd, you'd think they were being absolutely robbed! The better side won tonight, despite the adjudications.

But he's a whole lot better than "Mark!!" Jamar!

The reasoning behind the wording and interpretation of the "holding the ball" rule is to encourage movement of the ball, and free flowing play. It is having the opposite effect. The game is rapidly getting more and more ugly. In my opinion, the free kick should go against the tackler who is second to the ball, then grabs the player who went in first. He then makes every attempt to STOP him from disposing of the ball, by hugging the ball to the tackled player's chest. So in fact it is the TACKLER who is "holding the ball". The tackler should be required to try to either wrench the ball from the opponent, or knock it free. If he causes a stoppage by hugging the ball to his opponent, it should be a free against the tackler, and it should be paid straight away, before other players dive in to generate the "rolling maul".

I noticed on numerous occasions on Sunday that the Port players would grab the Melb player's arm ,before immobilising them with the other arm. If the tackled player has had no prior chance to dispose, and cannot get the ball to boot, he must dispose of the ball illegally, with one hand. Is that a free? There appeared to be no consistency in the umps' interpretation. (The only consistency was that we were penalised for this, but they weren't ,on the couple of occasions we managed to pin them in this way. Riley did it once....is it an Adelaide tactic?) If a player's arm is behind his back in a "hammer lock", there is no point in trying to handball, which would just result in a throw. So it appears to the ump that he is not making a genuine attempt to dispose. Therefore, I think it's an excellent tactic to grab one arm, and pull it back when tackling. Too often players grab the hips, and the tackled player then lifts his arms and gets a handball off. We should copy Port 's tackling methods. Incidentally, I would like to argue against the hackneyed myth of "rewarding the perfect tackle". However perfect the tackle, if a player has no opportunity to dispose, and is unable to kick or handball because of the tackle , it SHOULD NOT be a free . Commentators and umpires do not seem to understand this. The over-riding principle should be to protect the player who has the courage to go in first for the ball.

I just watched the replay and I must correct myself about the Stewart incident. There was no "soft free". After Stewart deliberately KO'd Jones with a bump to the head, Gray got the ball and was well tackled. He disposed of the ball with one hand after trying to evade the tackler ,after holding the ball for an eternity......an absolutely definite free not paid. Stewart then gathered the ball and snapped what was , ultimately ,the deciding goal. No report, no free, and the winning goal. And some sycophants claim the umps don't affect the result of the match!!!!!

"How much did your aunts and uncles win in their bets?"

Did anyone else think Schultz's last mark was touched by Dunny ? I thought the ball actually deviated off his hand before falling into Schultz's arms .Dunny thought so,too, and the ump must have had some doubt, or he would have penalised Dunn for tackling him after taking the mark. It wasn't obvious from a different angle in slow motion, but in real time, I was sure it was touched.(before I saw Dunny claiming touched). Similarly, with the Wyngard free from Watts, the ump tried to "soften" the decision against Watts by putting Wyngard on a far greater angle than he should have been on. There must have been doubt in his mind. If Watts wasn't watching the ball, how did he knock it away so cleanly.?? Error. And early in the game when Stewart bumped Jones in the head, then Port got a soft free for a goal. Don't try to tell me that the result wasn't affected by the umpiring. Meanwhile, I thought it was our best performance of the season.

They've been blessed with father-sons.They have a huge advantage with ?8 games at Kardinia Park each year. It has a unique shape, and there is no room for opposition supporters. Opposition sides LOVE playing on our home ground( not just because of the weak opponents!) Inevitably, our supporters are outnumbered by opposition supporters(even v. Sydney and Bris) . These are disadvantages we have cf. Geelong, apart from the disparity in list quality.

Jamar..........palmed to Geelong

So ironical that Jamar's first name is "Mark"!!!

I can see where he gets his nickname "Pigdog".....he's a real terrier!

I reckon a lot of our problems emanate from the reluctance of our players to play on after a mark or a free. This stems from a lack of confidence either in their ability to quickly find an upfield option, or that there will be someone running past, or a lack of confidence that the upfield target will win the ball. Meanwhile the forwards don't lead early or confidently, since they know that the ball probably won't arrive quickly. The player with the ball who has failed to play on then looks hesitant and uncertain. He ends up having to kick backwards, sometimes to very near goal, where a small error can result in a soul-destroying turn-over goal. It's very evident in point kick ins, too, where players don't hurry to get the ball back into play before the opposition zones are set up. With the good teams, the kick in is instantaneous. I know that the over-riding mantra is to keep possession. To play on quickly without checking for a safe forward option can result in the dreaded turnover. However, I think that our players would rapidly gain more confidence in each other if we adopted the tactic of "play on at all times". Hawthorn, Sydney, Port etc ALL play on at every opportunity. Why not copy them?

I can't stand Essendon.....I almost barrack for Collingwood against them.....BUT......I'd hate to see them kicked out of the AFL.I just want them to come bottom 4 for a few years, to see how many if their supporters show the loyalty we have.(ditto with the soiled-nappy coloured team)

Yes...that free went to Darcy, who kicked the winning goal.It turned out that the ump who gave the decision had been in a car accident the year before, was unconscious for weeks in ICU, and had to be taught to walk and talk again when he came to! He was adjudged fit to umpire the next year!( not abad effort)! Unfortunately, I think you're right that it was his last game. I think we got some revenge on the Bullies in about 2004, in the last round, when Jeff White got a dubious free on the 50m line and duly kicked the winner(round 22, and significant in our final eight position) I'll never forget a game v. the Scrays at Princes Park in the 90's, when the frees were something like 18 to 1 against us during the second quarter. I was near the fence and tried to inform the ump of the unbelievable imbalance.........but he wasn't interested! (Though I'm sure he heard me!) the situation didn't improve!