Preview Round 3, 2024: Essendon v St.Kilda - Marvel Stadium, Saturday 30th March, 4:20PM AEDT *HASTIE DEBUT*

Who Wins?

  • Bombers

    Votes: 13 16.7%
  • Saints

    Votes: 65 83.3%

  • Total voters
    78

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can we get a few of the below types of Bummers fans in this thread to spice the week up a lil bit? They're dead quiet, maybe shitting it after what we did to them last time :cool:








8b2et1.jpg
Need Yoda's input again

On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
So three forced changes is a horrible outcome but we could get creative if we wanted to see some new faces here.

King - Caminiti
Henry - Butler / Collard / Garcia
Wood - Schoenmaker / Campbell / Heath

Hastie / McLennan / Hotton and that's just about all the fit and available players at the moment 😬 Feels like no matter what we do there will be at least one underdone or raw player out there
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Potential to cause injury ...... what a crock of horseshite

Both Frampton actions of cannoning into Higgins and Draper's action of smashing into Lloyd both had the potential to cause serious injury yet one wasn't cited and one was graded as low impact but in both incidents the velocity of the hit was higher and more aggressive than Kings but he cops a medium grading

MRO can get fkd
We won’t win it but I hope we contest it under the grounds of the assessment being unreasonable.

By definition ANY high contact has the potential to cause injury, if you’ve watched a bough combat sport you’ve seen glancing blows that look like they’ve barely scraped a chin KO people. So then any high contact at all shoukd be assessed the same way and 70 blokes a week would be suspended.

I’d pay to watch it presented just to highlight how stupid the MRO and tribunal is
 
So three forced changes is a horrible outcome but we could get creative if we wanted to see some new faces here.

King - Caminiti
Henry - Butler / Collard / Garcia
Wood - Schoenmaker / Campbell / Heath

Hastie / McLennan / Hotton and that's just about all the fit and available players at the moment 😬 Feels like no matter what we do there will be at least one underdone or raw player out there
Caminiti and Butler come in, Jones starts on the ground and either of Collard or Garcia is sub.
 
Caminiti and Butler come in, Jones starts on the ground and either of Collard or Garcia is sub.
Seems most likely. I don't mind the idea of replacing Wood's height with more height though. Even a chance for Heath or big Campbell to come in and play half a game to free up Marshall to roam and be a marking option.
 


First issue with first statement: If both players are moving, who bumped who?
Second issue: King has full autonomy, Macrae has partial given Hill exists. What force is greater, 2 players moving one direction v 1 player moving the other direction who is actively arresting momentum?

Second statement: is it reasonable to expect head contact to left shoulder blade when you have actively ran slightly past the initial contact point if your arm is as close to the body to the body as possible whilst lowering yourself? Would this not remove access to the shoulder blade as arm and side of body is in front of said blade?

Third statement is fine. Fourth statement is fine, as is 5th.

6th statement: define "reasonably clear", this is speculation, further, define tackle, given Hill was originally in a smother and arms are not in fact wrapped around Macrae, this would not constitute a legal definition of a tackle and would be more a fall/push action. Second part of this statement for what King could have done literally was what King stated he tried: to lower himself and make himself small. This statement is just speculative trash and disregarded previous statements.

7th is fine, as yep contact was rather inevitable and when three players involved they can move around, duh. 8th is just stating the grading.

9th: What potential? There is no whiplash as it was not front on but side on, there is no sandwich as Hill is smaller than and was slightly airborn, King is actively trying to avoid contact and lower himself by statement. Any contact potential has to attribute these two instances on same trajectory. The actual momentum used by all involved leads to less of a glancing blow and if King was lower or slower or otherwise he misses contact as faster, is low enough to catch shoulder, shirtfronts himself on Macrae and Hill falling in front of him, or his actual forearm in that run necks Macrae in a strike as he runs past. There is no further potential greater force to engage injury unless:

Hill actually was standing behind Macrae.
Macres head is struck.
Given Hill is now directly behind Macrae, there is a head clash following the strike as his head now has no room behind it (due to Hill falling and dragging Macrae down) and thus concussion and skull further impacted.

Define your potential. Just stating potential is straight bullshit as a catch all statement.

The following statements is just validating bullshit, "we think this potential is different to that potential because potential!".

They really have NFI and just sniff each others arseh*le in deliberations.
 
He could have abandoned the contest, and then everyone would be calling him soft and weak for shitting himself.


At the last second, he turned for contact. He braced for the impact, didn't seek to cause it. It's a football action, and accident.. It's bizarre you'd be defending it as if he lined a guy up and got him deliberately.

Or would you prefer players to pull out of contests if they think there's a chance they might not be first to the ball?
Agreed. But that's where we are.
In the old days you could kill someone as long as you acted like you didn't mean it.
Now it doesn't matter if you meant it or not.
 
I did not think it was possible. But we played Essendon in the midst of a massive injury run last year. We will be weaker then that side this weekend.

From that game:

Out - Wood Crouch Gresham Howard Clark Webster Paton

In: Membrey Sharman Wilson Bonner Steele Jones + a debutant
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I did not think it was possible. But we played Essendon in the midst of a massive injury run last year. We will be weaker then that side this weekend.

From that game:

Out - Wood Crouch Gresham Howard Clark Webster Paton

In: Membrey Sharman Wilson Bonner Steele Jones + a debutant
An extra plus though with Windy and NAS coming off arguably their best games ever and Steele looking back to his best.
 
Yep still think we’re net positive overall. Especially against these unfortunate sods 😎
Surely Gresh can’t play 2 very good games in a row?
Someone on the radio said that was his best game in five years!
 
An extra plus though with Windy and NAS coming off arguably their best games ever and Steele looking back to his best.
That night Wood and Crouch were incredible and Gresh kicked 1 but also had 23.

I’m still tipping us. Just can’t believe how shorthanded we are again
 
First issue with first statement: If both players are moving, who bumped who?
Second issue: King has full autonomy, Macrae has partial given Hill exists. What force is greater, 2 players moving one direction v 1 player moving the other direction who is actively arresting momentum?

Second statement: is it reasonable to expect head contact to left shoulder blade when you have actively ran slightly past the initial contact point if your arm is as close to the body to the body as possible whilst lowering yourself? Would this not remove access to the shoulder blade as arm and side of body is in front of said blade?

Third statement is fine. Fourth statement is fine, as is 5th.

6th statement: define "reasonably clear", this is speculation, further, define tackle, given Hill was originally in a smother and arms are not in fact wrapped around Macrae, this would not constitute a legal definition of a tackle and would be more a fall/push action. Second part of this statement for what King could have done literally was what King stated he tried: to lower himself and make himself small. This statement is just speculative trash and disregarded previous statements.

7th is fine, as yep contact was rather inevitable and when three players involved they can move around, duh. 8th is just stating the grading.

9th: What potential? There is no whiplash as it was not front on but side on, there is no sandwich as Hill is smaller than and was slightly airborn, King is actively trying to avoid contact and lower himself by statement. Any contact potential has to attribute these two instances on same trajectory. The actual momentum used by all involved leads to less of a glancing blow and if King was lower or slower or otherwise he misses contact as faster, is low enough to catch shoulder, shirtfronts himself on Macrae and Hill falling in front of him, or his actual forearm in that run necks Macrae in a strike as he runs past. There is no further potential greater force to engage injury unless:

Hill actually was standing behind Macrae.
Macres head is struck.
Given Hill is now directly behind Macrae, there is a head clash following the strike as his head now has no room behind it (due to Hill falling and dragging Macrae down) and thus concussion and skull further impacted.

Define your potential. Just stating potential is straight bullshit as a catch all statement.

The following statements is just validating bullshit, "we think this potential is different to that potential because potential!".

They really have NFI and just sniff each others a-hole in deliberations.
If it was Grand Final week and St Kilda had qualified, Max would have probably been cleared to play.

Wait...His name is Max King and not Barry Hall.

We are not the Sydney Swans.
 
Yeah. He’ll “out edge” him.

What a thing…the Essendon edge 🙄
Makes me crack up seeing someone as vanilla as Brad Scott come out with this rubbish tbh. They're such a nothing club these days and appointing Scott fits them perfectly.
 
Makes me crack up seeing someone as vanilla as Brad Scott come out with this rubbish tbh. They're such a nothing club these days and appointing Scott fits them perfectly.
By all means have your “edge” or whatever…but keep it in house and just adopt it with your play, why go and broadcast it to the rest of the competition so they are ready for it?
 
By all means have your “edge” or whatever…but keep it in house and just adopt it with your play, why go and broadcast it to the rest of the competition so they are ready for it?
Because they're a bunch of losers. They don't actually stand for anything, fake thuggery ain't it. It's not tough at all, but when you look at who is leading that club it makes more sense. An average coach looking for answers. They're going nowhere 😍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top