binman
Life Member
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by binman
-
No, it's not that. It's just that he plays a critical role as a defender. Riv's run and carry from the back half is key to our transition game. And there is no obvious replacement, certainly not one with his skill set and/or could play the role to his level. By contrast we have langdon, Windsor, Hunter, Billings, nibbla, Laurie, howes and spargs who could all conceivably play on the wing. -
But he DID bump. That's the point. That was never in question Choose to bump. Pay the price - that's the rule whether it occurs during a careless or incidental contact or not. Or a 'football act'. They didn't debate he bumped Gus. They argued he was merely protecting himself whilst engaged in a football act. A reasonable choice to make in the circumstances A shepperd is unarguably a football act. But CHOOSE to bump and you knock.a player out you are gone. Just as Maynard should have copped weeks when he CHOSE to bump rather than, say, just putting both hands out to Gus's chest to minimise the potential for harm for BOTH of them. If in that latter scenario he accidentally hit Gus in the head and knocked him out, yes that would not be reportable. BUT HE DIDN'T - HE CHOSE TO BUMP. Maynard owed Gus a duty of care once he chose to bump - and did not meet that duty of care when he hit him flush to the head.
-
-
-
Surely Laurie gets the gig. But spargo plays the same role as Laurie (high half forward) and chin plays closer to goal, so it feels as if we would be a small forward short if Chandler doesn't start. Perhaps the short, narrow SCG makes that less an issue than it would be at the g with all that space inside 50.
-
This is a big slider:
-
-
Amazing what a practice match win does for the vibe! Those numbers might change of we lose tomorrow night. (by the way I'm not particularly superstitious, and it's plain crazy to think me writing the above might have an impact on the result tomorrow night - but out of an abundance of caution, footy gods please note i was JOKING!)
-
Indeed. But the real issue is whether it was a smother or pressure is immaterial. He should have got weeks because he chose to turn and bump - and flushed Gus with his shoulder. Text book. He had the option to put his hands out to protect himself and Gus. Which as Brad Scott said, is EXACTLY what he he would have done if that incident happened at training and Pendlebury was the player he was running at to spoil. Or as a poster noted here, a brilliant analogy i thought, if your 3 year old was on your bed and you fell towards them what would you do? What would your instinctive reaction be to protect your child? To protect your child, would you turn your body in mid air, brace and flush them with your shoulder? Or would you remain chest on and put your hands out in front to do everything you could to protect them? Hell, do the same thing with no child, just you but falling face first to the ground. What's your natural instinct? What's the natural instinctive reaction to protect yourself? Every time its putting both hands out to cushion your fall. NOT turn your body and smash your shoulder into the ground. It's why the AFL's prosecution was so pathetic. They completely allowed the pies movement expert to spout rubbish and not push back. Or even ask the questions above - which i would have thought are the logical questions. Or perhaps ask: 'Mr Maynard, you CHOSE to to turn your body and bump to protect yourself. That choice clearly protected you, but not your opponent. In hindsight, what other ways might you have CHOSEN to protect yourself AND show a duty of care to your opponent and minimise the risk of head trauma? Was turning your body and choosing to bump your opponent in the head REALLY the only option you had to protect yourself and your opponent?' You might ask those questions IF YOU ARE ACTUALLY TRYING TO GET A GUILTY VERDICT. Or you might call YOUR OWN biomechanical expert as a witness to rebut theirs. One that might for instance explain how many decisions can be made in a spilt second and how for example divers and gymnasts turn their body ALL THE TIME in a split second to minimise the impact of a mistimed dive or jump. Pathetic. The fix was so in It infuriates me.
-
Tough first round for the blues having to play the lions at the gabba at night without weitering and Walsh.
-
No wonder he has a gig in the footy media.
-
From above article by Jonathan Horne (whose analysis i often disagree with but really like) Sixth – Melbourne Melbourne has had six months of what-ifs. What if Caleb Marchbank had filed his fingernails. What if they’d lowered their eyes against Collingwood. What if Angus Brayshaw hadn’t been knocked out cold. What if Clayton Oliver wasn’t in disarray. What if they’d kicked straight. They let the Oliver story get out of control. Rather than take a hose to the fire, the strategy seemed to be to stand in front of it spraying the word “culture” dozens of times. In football, the word has been pulverised, made redundant. It’s the new “learnings”. Goodwin calls them a blue-collar team. They defend from the high ground. They patrol and gobble. They contest like angry ants. But their connection with their forwards needs tidying up. There’s too many blasters in that midfield. Get that right and keep Gawn in one piece, and this remarkably consistent side can challenge again.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/mar/05/afl-2024-predicted-ladder-part-two-collingwood-can-win-if-theyre-giant-killers?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
-
Some interesting comments in that lot. I actually agree we are under pressure in terms of maximizing success with this list, and going out in two years in a straight sets. That is fair. But i would have thought that the Lions are under even more pressure on that front given that group, with the huge leg up of home games at the GABBA, has yet to win a flag and have only made one grand final. Not to mention their appalling record at the MCG. But pressure because of 'off-field dramas' palaver is such a nonsense, and the perfect example of the media creating a narrative and then shoe horning clubs into that narrative. Like clubs are monkeys and the media is the organ grinder. We have been very clear we have a strong culture. The way the club has dealt with the issues Clarry has faced is just one piece of evidence to back that claim up. Another is the number of key re-signings in the last 2-3 years, including Koz last year. Does anyone seriously think McAdam would have nominated the dees after wanting out from that cultural competency disaster zone at the crows without checking with Koz and/or other Aboriginal community members about the culture at the dees? Why should the media hysteria theatre create pressure for us to perform? Do we owe the media and the footy public something because of some confected 'off-field dramas'? What a load cobblers. The club doesn't need extrinsic motivators (though us against the world vibe might be of some help), no doubt their intrinsic desire to win another flag is motivation - and pressure - enough. Of the AFL journos, i really rate Twomey and Beveridge. So its no surprise that Twomey has the Lions under the most pressure. And i agree with Beveridge (and, shudder, Barrett's), that Suns (and the AFL too for that matter) given how much money they poured into the Suns) are under enormous pressure, particularly given Dimwit has all but promised finals.
On visiting a young fan in hospital: 'This is the side of Oliver we don’t see, but Oliver never turns down the chance to give back outside club hours. Like most AFL players, Oliver doesn’t feel the need to publicise these moments.' I reckon certain Collingwood player might learn something from Clarry.
Ben Dixon: Premiers: Collingwood. “System and talent, clearly the competition leaders in these areas, young enough to be still hungry and their ability to win tight games in clutch moments is no fluke.” Young enough to still be hungry? We'll i guess that could apply to any team, but relevant data points are the Pies have the oldest list in the AFL and 9 of their best 22 players are over 30: Cameron Mihocek Crisp Hoskin-Elliott Elliott Cox Sidebottom Howe Pendlebury
Clarkson has been 'forced to backtrack after he admitted to an expletive-ridden, quarter-time spray towards Webster at Moorabbin'. Clarkson has form for this sort of totally inappropriate outburst. Yes the article references some examples of Clarkson's many such outbursts and loss of control, but the Roos must be happy for such nice balanced article that treats Clarkson with kit gloves and doesn't question the culture of the club. I mean there is an obvious hook here for giving the Roos, the first AFL club to have a female president and CEO, a sermon about culture - Clarkson using a highly sexualised (and arguably also misogynistic AND homophobic) slur, in ear shot of 'several players, club staff and AFLW footy boss Tess McManus'. It's all good though, Clarkson has 'reached out to Ross Lyon and both the St Kilda players to apologise'. I guess the Roos are not on the AFL sanctioned hit list. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/lyon-concedes-there-is-no-defence-for-webster-s-hit-on-simpkin-20240304-p5f9iv.html
It might sound hypocritical by me given my stance on banning the bump, but I'm against giving Webster a massive penalty. From my perspective it is unfair on Webster and against the principles of natural justice. Why? Because retrospective penalties, particularly for incidents that are not novel (eg like judds chick wing tackle), indeed are in fact super common, are antihical to the principle of natural justice. As analogy, you cop a speeding fine. There are set penalties, but a magistrate decides they want to make a statement because of a recent spike in road deaths. And triples the fine and takes your licence. There is a regime of penalties for bumps to the head. Webster's hit was a bog standard example. The penalty set in the regime is what he should get, perhaps at the upper range. Why should Webster be 'made an example of'? How fair is that to webster? If the AFL feel that is the way to stamp out bumps to the head, why didn't SPP get 8 weeks? If using webster as the example implies it will stamp it out, then has simpkin got a legal argument that the AFL didn't take the opportunity to make an example of SPP (because that may have meant him not getting knocked out)? The time for setting penalties is in the calm of the off season. If the argument is increased penalties will be an effective deterrent then bloody introduce them BEFORE the season starts. If the AFL wanted to make a statement about head trauma they could have announced, to much fanfare, BEFORE the first intra club simulation that penalties for bumps to the head had been dramatically increased. Knock a player out, minimum 5 weeks. Knock a player out when choosing to bump if tackling is an option, minimum 7 weeks. Run past the ball and bump a player and hit the head, minimum 8 weeks. Leave the ground and knock a player out, minimum 10 weeks. Additional weeks for particularly spiteful acts. Weeks double for repeat offenders. Put every player on notice and make it clear that this season these penalties WILL apply. It's so typical of the AFL's approach to this, and other issues, to do nothing, or not enough, and then react to specific events. And then dodge responsibility and putting it at the feet of the players. It's a point Gus made powerfully in his retirement letter - to protect the head, the AFL has to be PROACTIVE not REACTIVE. I've made this point a number of times over the last few seasons, I find it increasingly hard to believe that the AFL addiction to media saturation doesn't drive its decision making. All the whoo ha filling up the airwaves about the bump is great content for the media, who pay big bucks to the AFL for access.
Fear not, we'll hear plenty from the Doom and Gloomers (sounds like a goth version of Bay City Rollers) this season. Any loss and they'll pop back for a 'just being realistic, telling it like it is, a good team would never lose that game, same old problems yadda, yadda yadda' truth telling session. And of course they'll be back in force after our inevitable post bye losses and/or sub par performances that are in part a result of fatigue from loading, causing the now annual Demomnland knickers in a knot meltdown.
Reupping this thread. Anyone who want to put their flag in the ground about where we will finish the 2024 home and away season AHEAD of round one has three days to do so. Current data: 116 members have voted and the prediction ladder looks like: 5th to 8th - 44 votes: 39.29% Top 4 - 43 votes: 38.39% Missing finals - 25 votes: 22.32%
