![](https://images.bigfootymedia.com/icons/mobile-bullets/essendon.png)
100% if that was Merret he would cop weekHeeney protected species like Daicos, Cripps, Butters. Nothing to see here. If it was Joe Average from any another side. Offered 1 match for an early plea.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: GWS Giants v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 65% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
100% if that was Merret he would cop weekHeeney protected species like Daicos, Cripps, Butters. Nothing to see here. If it was Joe Average from any another side. Offered 1 match for an early plea.
I think your Caps Lock is stuckTHEY'LL DEEM IT THAT TO PUT THE BROWNLOW AROUND HIS NECK!
MRP WILL DO SYDNEY A SOLID AS WELL!
This is hilarious. Those were all 100% the right calls. Do you want the umps to throw the rule book out the window when a team's on a roll?
Of course it was...project brownlow still on trackThe heeney incident was an accident wasn’t it?
OMG shut the **** up. Are you 11 or autistic or something? Chill the hell out.THEY'LL DEEM IT THAT TO PUT THE BROWNLOW AROUND HIS NECK!
MRP WILL DO SYDNEY A SOLID AS WELL!
The arm didn't swing itself.The heeney incident was an accident wasn’t it?
Has to be a week.Even Mooney agrees that's a week
I haven't minded the umpiring so far, I get that Warner is allowed to just drop the ball and Grundy can hold Marshall's arms in the ruck contest but to swing the momentum Swans way with several dubious calls and it calls the fairness of the game into question.Under the rules it was. The umps have let go PLENTY of holding both ways all day. Let’s not pretend Grundy and Rowbottom aren’t being bragged like nothing before.
It was deliberate
You would agree that it was insufficient intent? And Heeney didn’t hit Webster in the face to get clear to take the mark that lead to the goal? Who am I baiting? Just calling it as it is
It was an obvious free kick in the goal square, plus it looked touched anywayHenry punching Webster was ok?
Yet Shiemakers goal disallowed for his knows what.
He was definitely stumbling afterNothing in that from Heeney. Open hand trying to get separation and the defender was stumbling.
Correct.It was an obvious free kick in the goal square, plus it looked touched anyway
The only bad decision was allowing Heeney to smack Webster in the head
Can't hit the head.Nothing in that from Heeney. Open hand trying to get separation and the defender was stumbling.
The fact that he went to say sorry straight away and not continue with the play for a second or two shows he knows he is in strife and trying to get himself off ala Hawkins swinging elbow.The arm didn't swing itself.
No they weren’t the right calls. That was not insufficient intent. He tapped the ball forwards not towards the line, it took a leg break after bouncing forward. And Heeney should have been called for high contact and not been given the mark. How can you possibly defend that?This is hilarious. Those were all 100% the right calls. Do you want the umps to throw the rule book out the window when a team's on a roll?