jnrmac

Petty serves two roles. He takes the opposition key defender and playmaker like Collins from GC or McCartin/McDonald from Sydney, Weitering from Carlton, McGovern from WCE etc and tries to stop their intercept marks. Against Geelong he would probably play Stewart and against the Pies probably Mihocek. The other is clearly to mark and kick goals himself. He isn't being recognised on here for the first paragraph.

Fair question. I presume its predictability but its also predictable to the oppo. In th pre season we varied our kick ins a lot. Have we reverted to old habits? Watch the geelong game last year to see how they crushed us at the kick ins by having Blixacvs (!) jump over the top pf Max and smash it 15 m away where the Geelong smalls swept it away. Our players were at the feet of Max. Good coaching by Scott. We learned nothing from that game IMO

We have a lot of trouble with tall forward lines. Reid from Sydney has given us a lot of grief. Hipwood, Mason Cox, Casboult, Lobb on occasion. Daniher has created problems but fortunately can't kick. We don't have a tall backman - ie over 200cm - that can take those players. Instead we rely on pressuring delivery. And when that breaks down we look terrible against the talls.

This is stupid by the tribunal. Any person running full tilt has to look u p and see where they are running and where to spoil etc. Its a BS argument. If he KEEPS his eyes on the player that might constitute an argument But how many times do you see a player running with the flight to spoil a mark by placing his fist in the place were the player marking has his hands. Its totally legitimate to do that.

Nowhere have I seen comments about Ballard being accidentally kneed in the head a few mins beforehand (and potentially suffering some neck/head response) and when the JVR spoils Ballard holds the back of his head. He isn't holding his face where JVRs bicep brushed it. It seems relevant to me as Ballard said he heard a crack - hence the stretcher and an abundance of caution. But there was no neck damage, nor concussion and he will play this week. So he wasn't hurt in the JVR incident. To say there was potential is also patently ridiculous as there are 100 other footy actions that fall into the same category Also to call it striking is bizarre and clearly incorrect - If he had hit the ball first it could not be striking. And he missed it by mm. Plus the tribunal admitted it was a genuine spoil. The case has so many holes it is difficult to see how he can't get off

And its almost as if the player going for the mark has first mover advantage. Why not the other way around?

Garry Lyon was all over the Newman and Murphy examples

Hard to present any facts saying OMac was the answer 🤣

Pretty sure they'll experiment for some ideas going into finals. But you don't want to disclose all of your weapons this early.

McCartin got concussion from his head lightly touching the ground Better ban the ground

Dangers was actually two actions One a spoil, two lifting his elbow up and thrusting it in the face of Vlastuin - al in the name of 'bracing for contact'

Its insane how Chol's action is not then also worthy of a 2 week suspension - yet not even reported. And if its because of a stretcher that is ridiculous as Ballard was not injured, nor concussed and will play this week. It was purely precautionary according to the Suns because he said he heard a 'crack'. Max Gawn should lie on he ground and call for a stretcher every single time he gets whacked in the head. The AFL/tribunal needs to explain how this can possibly be so. And explain to players how things will be adjudicated. It is as it always has been - a complete [&^%^%$#&^$#&#] lottery, with big name players and big name clubs having all the good tickets.

Thats curious then. No one has priority to contest a ball. Both players have equal opportunity to mark, spoil or bump etc. If JVR gets there and contacts the ball first what responsibility does Ballard have in terms of putting is head where the ball is? Remember Dangerfield in the Grand Final against Vlastuin? The decision was based on Dangerfield getting to the ball first. The subsequent contact to Vlastuin's head was deemed incidental or in the contest.

Can someone explain what the outcome would have been if JVR had actually connected with the ball?

The stretcher was simply a precaution as he said he heard a crack Oh and we get that [censored] Adrian Anderson off our case. Every time he goes near our club he rogers us.

I reckon we could come up with 30 examples of Cotchin, Hawkins, Cripps and other 'name' players that have gotten off way worse incidents than this. What a shocking corrupt organisation the AFL is.

The JVR decision is insane particularly when compared to this in the same game

Hawkins and Salem are completely different. Hawkins can sit in the goal square and still get the best defender.

Three wins in 12 days is a great effort. Hadn't realised the tight schedule. The club would have been delighted if at the start of the season you said they would win all three.

Having just watched the replay I was shocked there were at least 4 holding the ball decisions that should have gone the way of Kozzie. He really gets the raw end of the deal with the umps. Disgraceful. Umpiring looked OK live but on review was terrible. Even if we were the beneficiary of some dubious ones late.

Salem needs a good block of work before he comes back in. 1. He seems to take a while to get back up to speed after injury and 2. His injuries and Thyroid are not issues where you can easily maintain fitness.

Our accuracy would be much higher if Max could kick....

He was throwing up on the boundary line. A very accomplished actor by the sound of it

he was in my eyes

Cunnington punched Bernie Vince in the guts an got away with it Sniper