Brad Scott unleashes

[GreatBradScott]

Because coaches don't have any ulterior motives or bias?

No, but media commentators can't get punished for saying things like that.

 

[LBJ6]

Whatever, when Trengove got 3 weeks for that 'sling tackle' i lost all faith in the sport. Brad Scott is late to the party.

 

[laminex]

We are not broke, we just don't have as large a supporter base and do not get the kind of value out of playing games at Docklands or MCG where the break-even point is very high, for football at least.

We don't adopt the media policy because we are poor, it doesn't add $0.01 to our bottom line. The policy was decided that it was best for our supporters and best for the game. We get an unparalleled level of access given the size of the club and the size of our supporter base.

Our supporters love it, the media loves it, the AFL loves, only the bitter flogs on BF who have a stick up their arse that follow a different club dislike it. That isn't my problem. It is not the club's problem. It is not the AFL's problem.

I don't know how I can put it more clearly than we do not give a shit that people do not like what we are doing. It is not even water off a duck's back, it is water that runs through the crack of my arse. That is how much I care about others that are offended about what we do and why.

Think you might need to take a stop feeling sorry for self pill, you do it because you media attention because you are a smaller club. you do it because you have to not because you want to. As for anyone not liking it, i think you over value NTH's care factor.

By the way i am not putting NTH down and please do not take it that way, we all have to work within the barriers we have and make the best of every angle we can.

More power to NTH for doing it.

 

[laminex]

Whatever, when Trengove got 3 weeks for that 'sling tackle' i lost all faith in the sport. Brad Scott is late to the party.

footy is dead long live..... well what ever this sport is going to turn into, it sure as shit anit footy anymore.

 

[Hank93]

This sort of thread is the reason a lot of people hate Big Footy. So many trolls.

It was a disgraceful decision by the MRP and Tribunal. Incidental contact should never get you a suspension.

 

[Dickie Greenleaf]

Overwhelmed by logic, must resort to making neutrals laugh.

It's a stupid argument based on semantics, this did he touch it or didn't he, stuff.

The fact is it was a ball in dispute and was there to be contested, as the Carltonite at no stage ever took clean posession.

Personally I lol at flogs who these slow motion replay arguments. Footy is played at a break neck speed and once a guy has committed to a contest there is little he can do to alter his course of action.

 

[Underdog]

No, but media commentators can't get punished for saying things like that.

Sure, the punishment makes it more scandalous. It's better news.

It doesn't mean constant soundbytes for the media is an appropriate approach to take.

Brad Scott is going to turn into Robert Walls or Caroline Wilson - always bitching and moaning about garbage.

As mentioned above, I'd rather release that mindset and the pessimism and concentrate on the positives and what I can control.

I don't disagree with him on this manner, but he's clearly just having a vent which is becoming a trend.

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

Played the game?? When jumping for the ball what should he do in mid air when he knows they are going to collide? Stay wide open and get KOed or brace for the contact?

This is the key for me. If you decide to leave the ground to contest the ball & then brace for contact which results in head high contact, then the duty of care lies with that player.

If Ziebell decided to keep contesting the ball & not brace for contact, then it would have been similar to the Lewis/Harbrow incident.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Just like at West Coast, Shuey elbows Thomas in the balls but its Thomas's fault for diving

Did you see Worsfold come out and whinge about it? Or anyone at WC for that matter? North are the biggest whingers.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Unusually frank interview from a coach who usually just bitches and moans about how everything was everyone else's fault. I actually liked it. A rare decent effort Bradley.

 

[Dickie Greenleaf]

Im glad theres someone else here who can see and comprehend this. Watch out for the incoming norf offended fan comments

Man up and answer the question put to you before.

Was the Harbrow hit on Lewis ok?

Yes or no?

 

[THE MOEMAN]

This is the key for me. If you decide to leave the ground to contest the ball & then brace for contact which results in head high contact, then the duty of care lies with that player.

If Ziebell decided to keep contesting the ball & not brace for contact, then it would have been similar to the Lewis/Harbrow incident.

The thing is if ziebell didn't brace for contact then he risks a rib injury, you need to be able to look after yourself to some extent whilst going for the footy

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

Im glad theres someone else here who can see and comprehend this. Watch out for the incoming norf offended fan comments

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with Ziebell's actions, it's just unfortunate that in bracing for contact, head high contact was made.

 

[kaiserchief13]

this is fun

That looks like Ziebell is going for the bump when he thinks Joseph will get the ball. Dumb technique though. No need to jump and risk hitting Joseph in the head.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

He has always come across as a bit of a whinger.

 

[Replica31]

Here's the current rule for high bumps sourced from the 2012 tribunal handbook. It's really quite straightforward and most of the arguments around Ziebell protecting himself, touching the ball first etc. are irrelevant. The only real question under the rules is whether he had a realistic alternative way to contest the ball.

Without limiting the above, the Player Rules provide that a player
will be guilty of rough conduct where in the bumping of an opponent
(whether reasonably or unreasonably) he causes forceful contact to be
made with any part of his body to an opponent’s head or neck unless
a) the player was contesting the ball and did not have a realistic
alternative way to contest the ball; or
b) the forceful contact to the head or neck was caused by
circumstances outside the control of the player which could not
reasonably be foreseen.
In the interests of player safety, the purpose of the rule dealing with
high bumps is to reduce, as far as practicable, the risk of head injuries
to players and this purpose needs to be kept firmly in mind by all
players and will guide the application of the rule.

 

[KaaL]

Didn't someone say that Ziebell got to the ball first? Clearly he didn't. Attempting to mark a handball? Get real.

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

The thing is if ziebell didn't brace for contact then he risks a rib injury, you need to be able to look after yourself to some extent whilst going for the footy

If Ziebell braced for contact & no head high contact was made, no problems. The kicker is head high contact, which NOW takes precedence over a players own duty of care.

 

[THE MOEMAN]

There was no alternative way to contest the footy, the only other option was to not contest the footy and wait for Joseph to get the ball. This is not how we want afl to be played so ziebs did the right thing by going for the ball in the air

 

[fairdinkum]

What a crap thread. Seriously, just rename the Main Board to Bay 13 Lite and be done with it already.

As for Scott's comments, I can think of better ways for him and the club to spend $10,000.

How would Scott have liked it if Anderson had come out after our loss to Hawthorn and said Scott's coaching was 'farcical'?

There are ways to go about things like this and I'm not convinced Scott chose the best option.

That said, so long as he has us doing things like blowing away St. Kilda and Carlton on-field, I'm not going to be too fussed by press conference shenanigans.

The real test is at 3.15 on Sunday.

 

[THE MOEMAN]

If Ziebell braced for contact & no head high contact was made, no problems. The kicker is head high contact, which NOW takes precedence over a players own duty of care.

Incidental contact when getting the footy should not be punished

 

[Dwight Schrute]

There was no alternative way to contest the footy, the only other option was to not contest the footy and wait for Joseph to get the ball. This is not how we want afl to be played so ziebs did the right thing by going for the ball in the air

If you look at the above picture Ziebell doesn't even have his hands out for the ball.

 

[kaiserchief13]

There was no alternative way to contest the footy, the only other option was to not contest the footy and wait for Joseph to get the ball. This is not how we want afl to be played so ziebs did the right thing by going for the ball in the air

As the photo above shows Ziebell is going for the bump initially. Why did he have to jump in the air going for the bump???? That's just asking for trouble and he hasn't learnt his lesson from previous incident(s).

 

[THE MOEMAN]

If you look at the above picture Ziebell doesn't even have his hands out for the ball.

His left arm is out for the ball, and he protects himself with the right arm

 

[Ry009]

not shifting blame to others he needs to deal with what he has control of on the field.