TheWiz

I think that’s the most contested and hard game of footy I’ve ever seen - so good. And from my two most hated clubs. Off to punish myself for this dirty thought with a nice glass of wine.

Whatever this new inboard kick is from the 50m defensive arc needs to stop. Both Gawn and May cost us 4 goals from it.

It doesn’t open the game up and it hurts too much on the rebound. Kick it long or only explore this as an option when you’re two kicks from defensive goal.

New, and really poor strategy.

Ladhams likely out with suspension in the VFL. Had to go back to Round 17 against the Bulldogs to see when he last played in the ones. Not a big out for them and hasn’t particularly played well this year, but means they have limited ruck depth to Hickey. He also plays pretty rough so less collateral damage.

1 minute ago, Mel Bourne said:

Who are we talking about here? 

Cam Guthrie is out with an injured shoulder. Was playing very well with a couple of goals.

Kolodjashnij is out after awkwardly landing on his upper back/neck from a mark.

Rohan looks a bit proppy and maybe has injured his leg.

48 minutes ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

I think Brown was more referring to being embarrased by the comment made (does Petty want it to be public) rather then embarrased by being upset part

That’s a really good point. Appreciate your perspective.

For all the criticism about our ‘apparent’ deteriorating culture and selfishness, last night all I saw was a single united club playing and supporting each other. 

Jonathan Brown’s comment is extremely disappointing. As a senior commentator, influential figure in the sport, a father and a 40 year old man, he should have been much more considered in his commentary - particularly given it was known from the outset to be something inflammatory about a family member and Petty is a young 22 year old. I think he behaved completely appropriately in the circumstances.

In addition to their focus of mental health, inclusiveness, women and on field behaviour, Brown and Fox Sports should immediately apologise to Petty, and the AFL investigate the incident.

Was rewatching highlights from our GF and it’s been a while since we played with such confidence, strength and speed. 

If there is ever a H&A game to treat like a final this is it.

As usual against Brisbane, Hipwood, Daniher and every other mug to bash up Gawn and the forward line. Dees must stand up and make a statement.

Hunt, Spargo, Harmes, ANB, Rivers, Sparrow

Need a big game from our bottom 6 this weekend. Hunt had a fantastic last quarter last week. Hope he can take a bit of confidence coming into this game.

Cripps played very well against us. It was an interesting strategy to not bring Harmes in to tag him.

Saints did relatively well this weekend tagging Neale. They still have very good depth with McCluggagge, but would like see Harmes in for a negating role.

Over the past 30 years only four clubs have managed to go back to back. Adelaide once (1998), Brisbane twice (2002, 2003), Hawthorn twice (2014, 2015), and Richmond once (2020).

Geelong has never done it. Their three premierships in 2007, 2009 and 2011 were followed by Hawthorn, Collingwood and Sydney, respectively.

Maybe this will help people with their expectations of this year, but winning one is tough, but going back to back is a rare feat. You’re dealing with complacency, culture changes, list changes, figured out game plan, a harder draw,  worse draft picks and most importantly - and I can’t stress this enough - a professional league of other elite clubs where every other team is trying to achieve the same goal.

Keep positive. Enjoy the footy we’re playing. Enjoy that we’re still extremely competitive and will be playing finals. Stop comparing it to last year and most of all have some healthy respect to the competition we’re facing.

Go Dees.

Didn’t help them anyways

Every heart beats TRUE

Yeeeeeessssss Maxy!!

Dear Ben, hands like a Big Mac - not the one arm hi five. 

King is actually trolling us now…

I joked before about Dutchy being our forward kicking coach, but he may as well be Kings because those two missed shots are deplorable

2 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

It was a pure football action gone wrong. There was 0 intention and if his name was not Chandler but, I dunno, Dusty, he walks away free. 

And this is why we should have appealed. Because bigger names have gotten away with a lot worse, but we don't have the balls as a club to protect our players and fight for them.

I just hope that if Trac or Clarry are in this situation, we take it all the way. Somehow I suspect we won't. 

I agree there was a handicap because he isn’t kissed on the you know what like a Cotchin or Martin.

Regarding the action, it was a very unfortunate movement and tackle, and ultimately knocked the player out. There is a reason why we haven’t seen a similar situation like this…

I agree we should have appealed it, albeit from my view to a lesser suspension.

3 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

I said this at the time. It was not about needing Chandler to play, it was about the MFC protecting their player from injustice.

We don't have the balls of CFC and that is why we will never be a big club like them. 

Chandler was in the wrong. Understand it was a chase down tackle with momentum, but it was careless, with high impact and high conduct. It was the right decision not to appeal.

10 hours ago, A F said:

Pittonet kills Max as a rule. 

How so? (Asking for my SuperCoach final!)

I still don’t understand how a player can enter into a non-marking contest, not touch the ball, knock another player out… and not face any penalty. 

45 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Pretty sure a suspended player is only ineligible for the season in which the offence occurs.

 

 

Thank you

Question: if Cripps’ suspension gets extended and Carlton gets knocked out of the H&A season, as the extension will roll into next year would he be ineligible for next year’s Brownlow?

Love this idea. If we lose Jackson we don’t have a back up for Max. Seeing him be bashed up over the past couple of years, Grundy isn’t just insurance but could take the load off giving longevity to Max.

This plays well to servicing our midfield dominance and could assist our forward line with one of them parked down there.

We talk about pressure… imagine being an opposing defender trying to kick the ball out from a behind… left or right there is one of these two!

2 minutes ago, chookrat said:

It really comes down to whether he was contesting the ball or electing to bump. Years ago in the game that T-Mac kicked the sealer v West Coast there was an incident where Viney collected Hurn high with his hip during a marking contest but didn't have a case to answer because he was contesting the ball. I have only seen the one angle of the Cripps incident and it isn't clear whether he is competing for the ball or bumping, I'm sure the MRO will have better vision to work off. I can see one of three outcomes;

1. Not graded, based on Viney example above - 0 weeks

2. Rough conduct / high contact / high impact - 2 weeks

3. Rough Conduct / high contact / severe impact - goes to the Tribunal and minimum 3 week sanction which would probably land in the 3 week region.

I don't see it being 1 week because that would require a medium impact grading which isn't really consistent with player being subbed off with concussion. Most likely 2 to 3 weeks depending on severity, with a possibility of p weeks if it could be demonstrated that Cripps actions were reasonable given the circumstances, e.g. that he had eyes only for the ball.

Will be interesting to hear more as it comes out, but one difference may be that this wasn’t a marking contest from a kick? There is only one way to contest a mark, but many ways he could have contested this situation as it was play on - and therefore this was rough conduct?