General AFL Discussion #8 - Carlton Supporters ONLY !!!

[Stig O'Hara]

[QUOTE)tJYN-eG1zk&ob=av3n[/QUOTE]

 

[blues4flag]

Josh Bootsma = Chris Mayne's long lost brother?

Both from WA (at least, Mayne plays there), both tall and thin, both with wacky hair.

 

[blues4flag]

[QUOTE)tJYN-eG1zk&ob=av3n

[/QUOTE]

Great post.

 

[happydude]

I think I heard essendon applied for a vfl license so next season they are parting ways with bendigo to have thier own team makin it a 12 team comp again.

As I said I heard this a little while ago so I'm not 100% sure.

 

[The_Wookie]

They've been talking about it for a while, so it doesnt surprise me

 

[happydude]

Yea I watch a few games a year on the tv (can't be bothered drivin from the valley for vfl) and keep up with results and from memory in the port v willy game it was brought up.

 

[Sector 7G]

They've been talking about it for a while, so it doesnt surprise me

Carlton has gone down the cheaper path of just swollowing a VFL club. It was reported that Essendon was going to have to pay significant start up/licensing costs, but being aligned with a country team would be far from ideal so would be worth it to them.

 

[40yearBLUE]

Essendon Bendigo is more akin to a divorce I believe. And this year is troubling Bendigo in terms of what direction their coaching/player development takes visa vis do they take any cues from Essendon or do they look after their own longer term on field interests.

 

[parrot]

Despite countless footage, stats, and acknowledgement by coaches, players, umpires of the Weagles Free Kick Staging/Cheating tactics, good ol' Johnny Worsfold says it's a "mystery to him". This is the same guy who coached Cousins for 10 years, and told the football world that "Cousins didn't have a drug problem" 2 weeks before the AFL forced the Weagle to suspend Cousins on drug issues. The Weagles coach doesn't have a good track record when it comes to honesty. That club has a truly terrible culture.

 

[Peete]

Chicken wing arms + painful expression on face as you throw back your head and you collapse at the knees into any opponent ..

the latest AFL innovation -wonder if the players are on a special bonus plan/ incentive per free?

 

[parrot]

One of the little cheats in action....

I think it's fantastic some attention has been put onto these Cheating tactics by the Weagles. It might be OK in the WAFL, but we don't want that rubbish in the AFL.

 

[Peete]

Some great footage coming out in various shows in slow motion showing WC - doing teh personal dive routine...

absolute disgrace - they have no chance of winning GF played on MCG

 

[Faz 2000]

There's a few moves. There's the duck, which is obvious, but there's also this drop the shoulders, lift the chin, throw the head back (before contact) move which all but guarantees someone will catch 'em around the neck.

Marc Murphy is by far our best exponent of the sucked-in high tackle. He needs to teach the rest of the guys.

 

[parrot]

Another Weagles Cheat in action....

Note the technique - drop to the knees and bend the neck to make contact with the tacklers arm to draw a free. Pathetic.

 

[Peete]

Note teh expression on face too- all that PAAAAIN!

so un-manly.

 

[Blue since 72]

I posted this in a thread on the main board.

"If the tackle is initiated legally then the tackled player shrugs his shoulders or drops his knees surely he is inducing the high tackle and, just as is the case if you lead with your head, it should be play on.

If the tackle is initiated high then it's a free kick.

The umpires should be able to determine if the initial contact is high or not although they are never going to get it right all the time, but it should be accepted by people who watch the game that this is the case anyway.

I'll take Woosha at his word that this is not a 'practiced thing' but perhaps the umpires have become a bit trigger happy considering the emphasis on 'the head is sacrosanct' and are being caught out by players who are intentionally looking to turn a legal contact into an illegal contact.

Really this is no different to lots of other ways players try to deceive the umpires to gain an advantage.

Tough gig that umpiring job."

Hard to tell from the photo's above as they're stills but in my mind the Scott Selwood one would be play on as he appears to duck the head into the tackle.

 

[HARKER]

We could always wear long-sleeved jumpers with the sleeves soaked in Chloroform.
That would stop any ducking in a hurry.

 

[zeeCFC]

Plenty of talk about state sides right now.

How would a Vic/All Stars side look?

The ruck for the all stars would be chosen out of Sandilands, Cox, Nickanackanoowy and Ryder!

Vics midfield would look like Judd, Ablett, Pendlebury, Swan, Murphy, Collins

 

[Peete]

The head should be sacrosanct - but defenders should be able to tackle as well. but in Aussie Rules tacklers haev a very limited amount of body to work with when it comes to tackling...

Keep teh head rule - just allow tackles to use teh whole body - ie including legs.

The whole trip/legged idea if a tackler tackles the oppnonet by teh legs - is silly always was and always will be.

 

[Blue since 72]

The head should be sacrosanct - but defenders should be able to tackle as well. but in Aussie Rules tacklers haev a very limited amount of body to work with when it comes to tackling...

Keep teh head rule - just allow tackles to use teh whole body - ie including legs.

The whole trip/legged idea if a tackler tackles the oppnonet by teh legs - is silly always was and always will be.

Agree the head should be sacrosanct but if, as the tackled player you then intentionally use your head in such a way as to glean a free kick, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Blue since 72]

Let me add to that; if you're going to shrug the shoulders or bend the knees to change the legality of the tackle play on should be the call.

 

[zeeCFC]

If it leads to less high tackle frees, I'm for it.

 

[LemmingMaster]

I have less problems with the shrug, more problems with players leading with their heads into stationary players.

 

[40yearBLUE]

Let me add to that; if you're going to shrug the shoulders or bend the knees to change the legality of the tackle play on should be the call.

I would say if you are going to bend the knees to change the legality of the tackle you are breaking the rules and a free kick ought to be paid against you for attempting to cheat. That would stop the practice dead. If there is no risk to the player attempting to con the ump what incentive is there to stop trying to milk the free. A few frees in front of goal as a result of the acting and lets see if it doesnt disappear as a tactic.

Tough gig for the ump to call but they already are making a judgement call anyway.

 

[Blue since 72]

I would say if you are going to bend the knees to change the legality of the tackle you are breaking the rules and a free kick ought to be paid against you for attempting to cheat. That would stop the practice dead. If there is no risk to the player attempting to con the ump what incentive is there to stop trying to milk the free. A few frees in front of goal as a result of the acting and lets see if it doesnt disappear as a tactic.

Tough gig for the ump to call but they already are making a judgement call anyway.

Yeah, as you say though, tough for the Ump to call on a bending of the knees. My thinking was two fold; if they're not getting frees for it then they may stop doing it (see AFL's current view on leading with the head) and it keeps the game flowing.

The way I see it one of two things will happen: tackled player shrugs the tackler and off he goes or he falls over during the action and gets jumped on. Then the ball is either in dispute or it's a ball up. (maybe that's four things)