daisycutter

foul breath, uncle ... fouled out in first qtr

i breathed on a guy whilst playing bball and got fouled

computer says: "next question"

gosch's is also pretty open the hangar doesn't look very enclosed either same with arden street at least most of the old suburban grounds had brick walls around them until they pulled them down for community use reasons

so if he'd continued with marking attempt and smashed his head with his knees and showed no duty of care, he would have escaped suspension rightio

but nrl is 90% contact. same with thugby ... no contact, no nrl, no thugby nrl has banned the shoulder charge but still get multiple concussion checks per game a bit off topic but what about striking the ball with your head in soccer. thousands of hits over some players careers

someone would want him. just never get much in these circumstances.

boxing and wrestling will be in big trouble then anyone for non contact nrl?

quite probable ... and gleeson is the wild card (in that he doesn't always follow the afl line)

in that last split second he was where he was purely because of a legitimate attempt to mark to mark the ball. to then claim he was a non contester is really getting over technical. there is also a duty of care on both players. greene himself was in a very vulnerable position being already legitimately air borne. anyway, let's agree to disagree

so, ok, no official grade below careless (for a charge to be made) however that is what maynard achieved. it being regarded as a "football action" i guess the real grade below careless then, is a no-charge so to reword my original, greene's defence could argue it wasn't careless and therefore no-charge at all. by deeming it accidental or a football act. wonder if gleeson will allow a bio-mechanics expert to give evidence on greene's mid air split second choices?

maynard was completely different. maynard hit well after gus had disposed of the ball. it was not during a football action as well as other considerations

by "accidental" i meant the grade below careless ... whatever it is called now yes, i know this case was graded careless ... just posing the question of whether it really was

sorry for that ... but when i looked it definitely said in stock just re-checked and it says In Stock For Same Day Despatch but then down below it says Out of stock strange, that

i think mr fence's main objection is there are no slitherers at caulfield racetrack

i presume they can't have it later at punt road ground because the lighting is not up to afl lighting standards for games and video streaming.

this site has them in stock 26cm mfc gnome

you keep saying greene wasn't contesting the ball. he certainly was, up and until it was deflected and a collision was immininent. this was in a SPLIT SECOND before contact. it is disingenuous for you to insist he was a non-contestant

like i said later. a catch-20 of choices. i'm not convinced in this case that a simple putting out his arms whilst airborne with forward motion and with knees up solves the dilemma. could well be more dangerous for both players. ymmv. but the ball was deflected by boyd at the last split second whilst greene was in a marking action. at this point it couldn't be marked and a collision was inevitable. even if he continued in his marking attempt there would have been a serious collision. look, i'm no fan of greene and his record of rough play, and i'm certainly no fan of tough thuggish play, but in this situation i'm happy to view it as an (unfortunate) football act and therefore not "careless".

if he didn't turn and brace but continued the marking attempt the end result could well have been a knee into boyd's face and both players more seriously injured. if they insist he shouldn't have turned at last split second they would have to explain what he should have done and what that likely outcome would have been. it was a catch-20 of choices

not quite accurate. the ball that bounced off his shoulder was in fact deflected by boyd so wasn't on its original trajectory. greene was entitled to contest the mark and leave the ground. at the last split second it became obvious a collision was inevitable so the question is was greene allowed to protect himself? he couldn't avoid the collision. additionally was this accidental or careless in grading?

if toby hadn't turned his body, what do you think would have happened? there would certainly still have been a collision it might have been worse for boyd 2 players might have been injured as it was, boyd had minimal hurt, so does this mean toby made the right decision? this is a very, very difficult one and finally, was it accidental or careless you be the judge

lotta leaking up at the gabba last night persisting down all night

i think greene's defence would be to argue accidental vs careless can see this going mro -> tribunal -> appeals board

how bad is the bummers guernsey? look like jaffas with railway tracks