Dean laidley & tunnelling!

Remove this Banner Ad

the reason aaron edwards got his leg injury in the first place (that kept him out from rd 6 until now) is because he was tunnelled
i think it is a genuine concern, and it is part of all the dirty tactics sydney puts on
but raising it in the public i think was not a wise move, but everyone knows swans are dirty so it doesnt really matter...
 
Lazarus said:
the reason aaron edwards got his leg injury in the first place (that kept him out from rd 6 until now) is because he was tunnelled
i think it is a genuine concern, and it is part of all the dirty tactics sydney puts on
but raising it in the public i think was not a wise move, but everyone knows swans are dirty so it doesnt really matter...
Click to expand...

Watch the tape you moron, as has been pointed out, Mattner did NOT tunnel whatsoever.

If you want to sit there and claim Sydney play dirty tactics - yet AGAIN bringing up that stupid 19th man incident which had no bearing on the result - have fun Saturday night with your nice and clean loss.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

NorthBhoy said:
Huh? I don't think sides are scared of Sydney anymore, but that doesn't mean anyone thinks they aren't worthy of respect or a switched performance. We front up with last weeks attitude and we won't score. There are suburban sides who would have beaten us on Saturday and the same effort would be a disaster.

We will turn up and have a dip. Whether we can turn our form around (just about every player had his worst game for the year 3 days ago) in such a short time is what I can't be sure of.
Click to expand...

When was anyone actually "scared" of Sydney? We started 2006 the longest-priced defending premiers for at least a decade, and probably a lot longer. Media commentators dismissed us (or simply swallowed Roosy's line that we were just a good battling team with no stars) and we've never had a reputation for really smashing teams.
I think we can all agree the Swans earned and kept the respect of rivals, but "scared"? Hardly.
 
Laidley has always come across as a man of fairly low intelligence and this really just confirms it for me. If the swans players are anywhere near as fired up about his comments as I am then they are going to be 100% switched on from the opening second this weekend.

As others have pointed out.... If it was really a valid concern then bring it up with the AFL and the umpiring department in private. Publicly airing crap like this only reflects poorly on North Melbourne and their players. One can only assume that his comments are an attempt to shield his shitboner squibs from criticism over their pitiful, gutless display on the weekend.

North...........you can hide behind the media, the AFL and the umpiring department all you want this week but come Saturday night when the first ball is bounced there will be nowhere to hide. Tunneling or no...... You are going to get ****ed up!
 
Stat_Machine said:
Watch the tape you moron, as has been pointed out, Mattner did NOT tunnel whatsoever.

If you want to sit there and claim Sydney play dirty tactics - yet AGAIN bringing up that stupid 19th man incident which had no bearing on the result - have fun Saturday night with your nice and clean loss.
Click to expand...

hook line and sinker
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

SweetLeftFoot said:
Given Edwards broke a leg last time, there is an element of truth in your post. We are scared we may lose more players to serious injuries from tunneling.
Click to expand...
The amount of players injured from tunnelling all year = 0.

There's footage of the Edwards injury here: http://sportal.com.au/afl-news-display/laidley-alerts-umps-to-tunnelling-55972 about halfway through. You cannot classify that as tunnelling. Mattner was in the air going for the spoil. I feel for Edwards, having suffered such a bad injury, but I think it's just a tad convenient to label that incident tunnelling and then apportion blame to the Swans for deliberately injuring players.
 
bedford said:
I don't want a stouch,but arn't you one of the posters that was going crazy on the main board about the 19th man , just remember Kirk clearly kicked a goal that wasn't paid.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, not to my knowledge. When it first happened I said I didn't expect anything to happen but was happy to see an archaic rule which forces the captain to police it to change. It was a change for the better.

I did laugh at the hypocrisy of a Swans player commenting that the AFL should review the Kirk decision and adjust the result but wasn't quite so welcoming AFL involvement when the 19 men thing was discovered.

I think it is blatantly obvious that clubs unintentionally have issues with the interchange bench, clubs had problems and had free kicks paid against them after the change. It is not "cheating" so much as it is a lack of care taken on the interchange bench. I said the benefit of the doubt has to be given to the Swans in terms of intentionally abusing it. To intentionally abuse it is to cheat, to unintentionally do it is to make an error.

As to the Kirk thing, I don't really know. I couldn't see from the game and have never seen a replay that highlighted it as an error. If you have one am happy to look at it. Just so you should be aware, AFL never change a decision based on umpire error. The St Kilda vs Fremantle decision being the only one that has ever been done and that was only due to the umpires not able to hear the siren. Even if it was a blatant goal, umpire's decision always stands.
 
What a load of horseshit that video is. Does he really believe that our All Australian defenders and co-captains would be coached to do something blatantly a) against the rules, and b) dangerous? And yes, Bolton is good at what Laidley calls tunnelling, because he doesn't give away much room to a forward on the lead, he is always close by for the spoil. When a forward jumps to mark (as was the case in all the examples shown on that video) he loses momentum, whereas the defender behind him keeps right on running in an attempt to keep up and spoil. He can't judge when the forward is going to jump and he can't jump at exactly the same time, so there is going to be a lag in their movement. For anybody to judge it as being a deliberate attempt to injure the forward is ridiculous.

****, this has really pissed me off.

Zvim, please note that this is not directed at you, your comments have been very well balanced and it is always nice to hear from opposition supporters who have something sensible to say on this board.
 
Haha

Roosey has struck back! He rang Rowan Sawers too!

Said it's just a free kick, umpires have no problems with swans players, and there is no such thing as "tunnelling" in the rules just a push!!!

JUST a free kick!!!

Should we send Deano a few packets of those disposable incontinence nappies?:D
 
I think what pissed me off when the Saints first made the tunnelling allegations against B2 after Round 1 was the implication that Bolton had cheated by deliberately using an illegal (and dangerous) tactic. I thought that was really unfair on Bolton as he's one of the fairest defenders going around.

In the Saints game there were one, maybe 2 marking contests between Bolton and Riewoldt on youtube that could have been called 'tunnelling', but I think in both cases Riewoldt jumped early and Bolton couldn't really avoid contact. Sure, pay a free kick if you're worried about the player in the air landing awkwardly, but I said at the time it was one of the biggest non-issues in footy going round and, given the relative silence on the issue since Round 1, I don't think this has changed.
 
Riewoldt often jumps early and has to lean back to try and snag the mark. If he gets bumped and lands on his back though it's the defender's fault. :rolleyes:
 
Hopefully the only tunnelling that will be going on after Saturday night's game will be after Laidley has blown a gasket and he and the Kangaroos will be tunnelling out of ANZ stadium to save themselves from further embarrassment !!!

Laidley has thrown the tunnelling mud this week as a piece of spin-doctoring to try and take the media focus off their insipid performance last week against Port Adelaide.

IMO Laidley is a full blown LOONEY with Jeckyll & Hyde syndrome
 
Lakeside Legacy said:
Laidley has thrown the tunnelling mud this week as a piece of spin-doctoring to try and take the media focus off their insipid performance last week against Port Adelaide.
Click to expand...

Agree, but it worked, hardly a mention of their performance.

So probably clever in one sense.
 
grimlock said:
The amount of players injured from tunnelling all year = 0.

There's footage of the Edwards injury here: http://sportal.com.au/afl-news-display/laidley-alerts-umps-to-tunnelling-55972 about halfway through. You cannot classify that as tunnelling. Mattner was in the air going for the spoil. I feel for Edwards, having suffered such a bad injury, but I think it's just a tad convenient to label that incident tunnelling and then apportion blame to the Swans for deliberately injuring players.
Click to expand...

The footage shown was clearly not tunnelling.Laidley needs to go to a basketball match to see what it really is.In the incidents shown none of the Kangaroos were taken out by their legs,thus not being tunnelled.The only player I have seen tunnelled this year has been Nick Riewoldt.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Dean laidley & tunnelling!

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top