Adam Goodes lacks courage in the contested situations when he goes in feet first

[Herne Hill Hammer]

He has collected a few people doing that and earnt a reputation for it and he has also copped plenty of media attention about it too. And yes there are plenty of examples of buddy going low and hard too but I think that was more a troll than a geniune question.

My question is why has Goodes not earnt a reputation, or media attention, for going into 50/50 contests in a dangerous manner?

As for your comment on Dermie being the one that brought it up and having a hatred for Geelong and Essendon, how is that relevent. He is the one that says he hates the Bombers and to a lesser extent the Cats. He has never said anything about the Swans and in fact many other people within the media say he is very un biased towards all clubs other than the Bombers and Cats. He has openly said he has respect for the way the Swans go about it as he has the Cats (a little more begrudgingly).

Is it possible to discuss this without the Bay styled sh*t fights. It is a relevent discussion point and does not need the side banter from all sides.

Not really, as I posted, the OP is a thinly veiled troll, nothing more, nothing less.

Goodes has earnt a reputation, I think, a few years ago he was looked a couple of times within weeks of each other. It seems if something is ingrained into your play it can't simply be turned off by changing the rules, it takes time, just like an improving team returning to past bad habits when they are fatigued or put under pressure, they revert to what comes naturally.

Dustin Fletcher was a shocker for tripping people for the first, probably 2/3s of his career. I can't remember him doing it for a number of years now.

Old habits die hard and in Goodes' case it's probably too late.

 

[swanton]

Goodes' indiscretions are slowly catching up with him, the same way Judds' indiscretions did. At first people wanted to let Judd escape penalty with the campbell brown eye poke (including myself) simply because we all put it down to a one-off brain fart that wouldnt happen again. But it did, and along with a 2nd eye-poke, there was also the Baker elbow, the pavlich elbow, and the attempted arm break (chicken wing tackle) incident. The AFL bosses didnt like it one, but you can when there is 4 incidences of Judd attacking defenseless players on the ground with video footage, you cant continually turn a blind eye.

And whilst its not surprising that Goodes has escaped punishment for his legs/feet first tackle slide on Gibson last weekend, the media attention brought about by dermie hopefully goes a long way to seeing Goodes rubbed out next time he performs the dangerous slide on someone else.

LoL

WHat are you going on about, he was suspended twice last year for goin gin legs first/sliding
So the media havent done jack to bring it out to the wider community or the AFL heirarchy because they already know about it and have dealt with it in the past

This time no illegal action (other than kicking in danger) was committed, should have been a free kick to Gibson, but nothing else

 

[Gongswan]

Ok, because I am so dopey Gongswan, tell me exactly, slowly and in words I'll understand just what Shotties meant by his comment to me.... Because I must be really dumb.

He's saying you think you know what Goodes was thinking, read the next pot about intuition, you really are some kind of jockey

 

[Blue and Gold Blood]

Even Hawks supporters haven't the idiocy to call this a slide, you haven't even bothered to watch it, mr troll face

Ive watched it, and if chopping someone elses legs out with your own legs, with forward momentum and not keeping your feet doesnt constitute a slide, then what is it?

 

[Lord Eddard]

Good post -

The rules however make no allowance for deliberate or otherwise in tripping decisions. If you throw your legs at the ball and it brings someone to ground that is a trip, end of story, and tripping is a reportable offence.

I think you're dead wrong. Goodes was inches away from making contact with the ball as was his intention. If he was trying to toe poke the ball through for a match winning goal would you cry "Suspend him"? No and it's the same rule anywhere on the ground.

If the ball is in the vicinity the player is allowed to kick it. It happens many times a game. Goodes was fractionally late and should have been penalised. That's it.

 

[worthy]

Not really, as I posted, the OP is a thinly veiled troll, nothing more, nothing less.

Goodes has earnt a reputation, I think, a few years ago he was looked a couple of times within weeks of each other. It seems if something is ingrained into your play it can't simply be turned off by changing the rules, it takes time, just like an improving team returning to past bad habits when they are fatigued or put under pressure, they revert to what comes naturally.

Dustin Fletcher was a shocker for tripping people for the first, probably 2/3s of his career. I can't remember him doing it for a number of years now.

Old habits die hard and in Goodes' case it's probably too late.

How can you sully the reputation of a 300 game champion (Fletcher) like that, name every occasion.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

He has collected a few people doing that and earnt a reputation for it and he has also copped plenty of media attention about it too. And yes there are plenty of examples of buddy going low and hard too but I think that was more a troll than a geniune question.

My question is why has Goodes not earnt a reputation, or media attention, for going into 50/50 contests in a dangerous manner?

As for your comment on Dermie being the one that brought it up and having a hatred for Geelong and Essendon, how is that relevent. He is the one that says he hates the Bombers and to a lesser extent the Cats. He has never said anything about the Swans and in fact many other people within the media say he is very un biased towards all clubs other than the Bombers and Cats. He has openly said he has respect for the way the Swans go about it as he has the Cats (a little more begrudgingly).

Is it possible to discuss this without the Bay styled sh*t fights. It is a relevent discussion point and does not need the side banter from all sides.

Was actually genuine. Feel free to point out where he's gone in like Hodgey or Sewell or Mitchell.

 

[Nostradumbass]

"Soccer Background" Lulz...

 

[Sanecow]

Ive watched it, and if chopping someone elses legs out with your own legs, with forward momentum and not keeping your feet doesnt constitute a slide, then what is it?

When you actually slide, maybe.

 

[MrFujiMoto]

Not really, as I posted, the OP is a thinly veiled troll, nothing more, nothing less.

Goodes has earnt a reputation, I think, a few years ago he was looked a couple of times within weeks of each other. It seems if something is ingrained into your play it can't simply be turned off by changing the rules, it takes time, just like an improving team returning to past bad habits when they are fatigued or put under pressure, they revert to what comes naturally.

Dustin Fletcher was a shocker for tripping people for the first, probably 2/3s of his career. I can't remember him doing it for a number of years now.

Old habits die hard and in Goodes' case it's probably too late.

Agree with what you are saying about being able to turn it on or off, it simply becomes instinct for players. As for the rule, that has never changed how dangerous it is.

 

[MrFujiMoto]

I think you're dead wrong. Goodes was inches away from making contact with the ball as was his intention. If he was trying to toe poke the ball through for a match winning goal would you cry "Suspend him"? No and it's the same rule anywhere on the ground.

If the ball is in the vicinity the player is allowed to kick it. It happens many times a game. Goodes was fractionally late and should have been penalised. That's it.

Simple point is - he did not make contact and tripped Gibson over. He was probably the same inches away from causing a serious injury if you want to go down the what almost happened path.

As I said the rules make no allowance for deliberate etc -

15.4.5 Prohibited Contact and Payment of Free Kick
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where
they are satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact
with an opposition Player.
A Player makes Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player if
the Player:
....
(h) trips or attempts to trip an opposition Player, whether
by the use of hand, arm, foot or leg;
You are right it is the same rule for all over the ground and so it should be but you are wrong about my assessment of suspending him. Based on the fact that a trip is a reportable offence, and Goodes clearly tripped Gibson, I simply said the MRP were within their rights to suspend him.

As for the hypothetical situation you mention it is silly. You answered your own question. Yes I think that the above still stand whether the player is trying to toe poke a goal, clear the ball from defence or trying to execute a triple double pyke with a double twist. Makes NO difference.

This is no different to kicking in danger, ball being in the vacinity makes it no more or less a trip.

 

[Lord Eddard]

Simple point is - he did not make contact and tripped Gibson over. He was probably the same inches away from causing a serious injury if you want to go down the what almost happened path.

As I said the rules make no allowance for deliberate etc -

15.4.5 Prohibited Contact and Payment of Free Kick
A field Umpire shall award a Free Kick against a Player where
they are satisfied that the Player has made Prohibited Contact
with an opposition Player.
A Player makes Prohibited Contact with an opposition Player if
the Player:
....
(h) trips or attempts to trip an opposition Player, whether
by the use of hand, arm, foot or leg;
You are right it is the same rule for all over the ground and so it should be but you are wrong about my assessment of suspending him. Based on the fact that a trip is a reportable offence, and Goodes clearly tripped Gibson, I simply said the MRP were within their rights to suspend him.

As for the hypothetical situation you mention it is silly. You answered your own question. Yes I think that the above still stand whether the player is trying to toe poke a goal, clear the ball from defence or trying to execute a triple double pyke with a double twist. Makes NO difference.

This is no different to kicking in danger, ball being in the vacinity makes it no more or less a trip.

I agreed that it was a free kick but it's really reaching to call it reportable. When was the last time you saw a player get suspended for kicking in danger? If you can name one I'd be very impressed.

 

[MrFujiMoto]

I agreed that it was a free kick but it's really reaching to call it reportable. When was the last time you saw a player get suspended for kicking in danger? If you can name one I'd be very impressed.

Sorry I was just using that as an example of where the ball being in the vacinity has no bearing on the free being paid or not. He should have been penalised for tripping, not KID. And there have been plenty of people reported for tripping.
I am not saying it should have been reported, just that by the rules he could have easily been reported.

 

[MrFujiMoto]

Not really, as I posted, the OP is a thinly veiled troll, nothing more, nothing less.

Would it be less a troll if this OP came from a Neutral supporter. I think it is a valid main board topic of discussion.

 

[CaptainChardonnay]

 

[Blue and Gold Blood]

ITT, Swans supporters doing their best to avoid acknowledging that Goodes action was extremely dangerous and had the potential to cause a signicant injury to Gibson. The whole reason why trips and sliding are outlawed in the game is for the purpose of protecting players from avoidable signicant injuries. On that basis Goodes should have been suspended for going in feet first and taking Gibsons legs out from under him. Gibson is lucky he didnt get an MCL injury in his right knee.

 

[flyinghi64]

Name every incident of it in his career.

You are delusional if you think this is an isolated incident. I feel I would have to go back and review every game he has played, cut and paste all his previous feet first slides and make slow motion clip of it for you to understand what it is 90+% of posters on this thread are refering to.
I really do not want to watch that much Sydney Swans so just take my word for it... HE....... HAS...... DONE...... THIS..... MANY...... TIMES....... BEFORE.

Hamms ducks and throws back his head. I see it. I acknowledge it. I don't like it.
See what I did there?

 

[Tedeski]

The MRP has cleared Goodes of ANY wrong doing meaning that any Hawk player can do the same thing to their oppopnents this week if they so please.

Goodes will be playing this week & has no more points against his name than he did after round 6.

I repeat. Goodes will play this week against Freo meaning he is not guilty of anything meaning he is still courageous.
Unfortunately for us, the Hawks beat us on Saturday night & beat us well and we won the GF in 2012.

Now there Hawk supporters. Go get some sleep & try to dream up another way to get satisfaction out of last years loss.
The Goodes matter has been done to death.

Did I mention that Goodes is playing this week meaning he had NO case to answer for his wonderful hard contest at the ball against a soft Gibson?

Well Goodes is playing this week..................shove that up your jumpers Hawks & Dermie!

 

[Tedeski]

You are delusional if you think this is an isolated incident. I feel I would have to go back and review every game he has played, cut and paste all his previous feet first slides and make slow motion clip of it for you to understand what it is 90+% of posters on this thread are refering to.
I really do not want to watch that much Sydney Swans so just take my word for it... HE....... HAS...... DONE...... THIS..... MANY...... TIMES....... BEFORE.

Hamms ducks and throws back his head. I see it. I acknowledge it. I don't like it.
See what I did there?

Goodes slides.....................he does it well.................sometimes.

He didn't slide against the Hawks.

He approached the contest for the ball with sheer aggression legally according to the MRP.

So for the thick heads. Goodes has slid in the past & been reported & suspended when he's got it wrong. On this occassion he got it right & Gibson played out the whole game...............Gibbo is just a little softer than your average AFL footballer & carried on a treat because of what could have happened. But anything dangerous can happen on a footy field to any player. Why is Gibbo so precious?

Soft is the word I think of when I watch Gibbo. Free man in defence. Courageous is what I think of when I watch Goodes. Legally bouncing off players like Buddy in the GF in that last 10 mins, on one leg.

Geez.....................I'm gonna go have a look at that last 10 minutes again paying special attention to Dermies barracking in the commentary box, screaming out for any potential free kick that his beloved Hawks may have been gifted by the biased umps of that day. Only reason they came close to us. 21 to 10 was the final count in favour of the Hawks. Buddy crying after the game is a special feature I look out for but the Goodes bumps........................spine tingling stuff.

Have a look chewy & worthyless.............your boys will make you proud the way they bounced straight up after Goodes ran straight at them. No sliding. No tripping. Just good old fashioned BANG!
But unlike Dermie, the ball was near by.

 

[Tedeski]

ITT, Swans supporters doing their best to avoid acknowledging that Goodes action was extremely dangerous and had the potential to cause a signicant injury to Gibson. The whole reason why trips and sliding are outlawed in the game is for the purpose of protecting players from avoidable signicant injuries. On that basis Goodes should have been suspended for going in feet first and taking Gibsons legs out from under him. Gibson is lucky he didnt get an MCL injury in his right knee.

I'll take the opinion of ex AFL players (MRP) over yours thanks.
Goodes..........no case to answer thankyou!

 

[.Shotties.]

You are delusional if you think this is an isolated incident. I feel I would have to go back and review every game he has played, cut and paste all his previous feet first slides and make slow motion clip of it for you to understand what it is 90+% of posters on this thread are refering to.
I really do not want to watch that much Sydney Swans so just take my word for it... HE....... HAS...... DONE...... THIS..... MANY...... TIMES....... BEFORE.

Hamms ducks and throws back his head. I see it. I acknowledge it. I don't like it.
See what I did there?

No, I acknowledge that he's done it before, what I don't accept is the constant remarks that he's been doing this for extended parts of his career or that it's occurred a huge number of times.

The request that I take your word on a swans player on the basis that you don't watch many Swans games was a hit weird, too.

 

[flyinghi64]

Mmmm just looked at the incident again and I must admit it wasn't as much a slide as it was a trip. The way he threw that left leg out was very awkward looking and definitely not natural running or kicking motion. The only thing he looked like trying to do was stop Gibson getting to the ball and using his left leg to take out Gibsons leg, in other words a deliberate trip.
The first thing Goodes did at the stop of play was look up to the replay as he would have thought he may be in trouble.

That's my last word on the incident. There's another round coming up to get into but with 30+ pages on this incident if Goodes does something similar again......look out.

 

[worthy]

The request that I take your word on a swans player on the basis that you don't watch many Swans games was a hit weird, too.

Actually, what he said was he doesn't want to go back through and review old footage, he may have seen every game Goodes has played, or even a lot of games, he just doesn't want to see them again.

Where's that link to the Campbell Brown thread btw.

 

[strategy]

Goodes took Gibsons legs out and isnt the new rule supposed to stop that ?
Also why did Lecras not even get cited for a throat punch to a Lions player last week ?

 

[worthy]

Goodes slides.....................he does it well.................sometimes.

He didn't slide against the Hawks.

He approached the contest for the ball with sheer aggression legally according to the MRP.

So for the thick heads. Goodes has slid in the past & been reported & suspended when he's got it wrong. On this occassion he got it right & Gibson played out the whole game...............Gibbo is just a little softer than your average AFL footballer & carried on a treat because of what could have happened. But anything dangerous can happen on a footy field to any player. Why is Gibbo so precious?

Soft is the word I think of when I watch Gibbo. Free man in defence. Courageous is what I think of when I watch Goodes. Legally bouncing off players like Buddy in the GF in that last 10 mins, on one leg.

Geez.....................I'm gonna go have a look at that last 10 minutes again paying special attention to Dermies barracking in the commentary box, screaming out for any potential free kick that his beloved Hawks may have been gifted by the biased umps of that day. Only reason they came close to us. 21 to 10 was the final count in favour of the Hawks. Buddy crying after the game is a special feature I look out for but the Goodes bumps........................spine tingling stuff.

Have a look chewy & worthyless.............your boys will make you proud the way they bounced straight up after Goodes ran straight at them. No sliding. No tripping. Just good old fashioned BANG!
But unlike Dermie, the ball was near by.

God damn you're immature, how old did you say you were again?