Will be the MOTY Quinella for sure.
Jurrahs just
Jurrahs just
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.
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
That's about it. I'm biased, I was there for Jurrah's and it was pretty damned amazing. Here's a way to gauge it, Port fans applauded Jurrah - did Tigers fans applaud Goddard?Goddard's was fantastic. Jurrah's unbelievable.
Watts is 196, already been stated in the thread (page 2 I think), also been stated it's negated by Pattison being 198 in the Goddard mark so both effectively jumped over "tall blokes" to get it.
Obviously bias leans towards Goddards for mine, but like already stated it was basically perfect execution of his intent whereas Jurrahs had an element of "unco" for mine with his half chest / half extended mark that I just didn't like, very minimal mind you, quite happy for either of them to take it.
Odd..most comments on the thread seem to back Goddard...yet Jurrah is well ahead in the poll.......Melbourne boyzs been busy...
Goddards came from further back, at greater speed and was over a pack situation. IMO Jurrahs was a little set up for a leap. Both worthy winners but Goddard just for me.
Obviously biased, you said it. Especially when you get things like the player he took the mark over. Pattison was coming in but he did not take the mark over him. It was Lynch who is listed at 192cm and 4cm shorter than Watts.
Unco? Not only did Jurrah have more hang time, he also had to get up higher. Which means he needed to be more balanced and thus making it a far technically more difficult mark to take. You will see many marks were they launch at the pack but few with so much hang time and up that high. That is why Jesaulenko is regarded mark of the century.
I'm not the one who referenced them to begin with, take that issue up with those who did, I believe the inherent point was that both took marks over tall individuals, while depth would reduce the height visually, comparison can be made as Patto was beside the pack while Watts in effect was the pack when both marks were taken. Might also want to get your players right though, as there was no one by the name of Lynch that played in that game.
Obviously yourself and that Demon supporter are getting caught up on terminology as opposed to intent of the statement which is why the word was wrapped to begin with, so that one can substitute terminology. The intent was that it was not a classical procedure for a mark in which the arms are contracted (chest mark) or extended. From my view Jurrah half looked like he was bracing on the way down (as you would) considering he was coming down from the apex of his jump. This did not make it as enjoyable for me since if he is on the way down then he mistimed his leap yes? If his arms are not fully extended in front of him then he misread the flight or the ball dipped or any other variable then yeah?
It was 29, Tom Lynch (officially listed as 192cm), but Pattison was rubbing the back of his head immediately after so I'm pretty sure Goddard clipped himIt looked like number 29 but it must of been 25 Sam Fisher who is even shorter. In regards to who referenced Pattison first, it's a moot point when you go with it and not correct it.
It was 29, Tom Lynch (officially listed as 192cm), but Pattison was rubbing the back of his head immediately after so I'm pretty sure Goddard clipped him
I'm not the one who referenced them to begin with, take that issue up with those who did, I believe the inherent point was that both took marks over tall individuals, while depth would reduce the height visually, comparison can be made as Patto was beside the pack while Watts in effect was the pack when both marks were taken. Might also want to get your players right though, as there was no one by the name of Lynch that played in that game.
Obviously yourself and that Demon supporter are getting caught up on terminology as opposed to intent of the statement which is why the word was wrapped to begin with, so that one can substitute terminology. The intent was that it was not a classical procedure for a mark in which the arms are contracted (chest mark) or extended. From my view Jurrah half looked like he was bracing on the way down (as you would) considering he was coming down from the apex of his jump. This did not make it as enjoyable for me since if he is on the way down then he mistimed his leap yes? If his arms are not fully extended in front of him then he misread the flight or the ball dipped or any other variable then yeah?
As I said, very happy for Jurrah or Goddard to take it as its a minimal niggle based on aesthetics of execution. If you scoff at bias then simply move on and dismiss it, especially when all you have to go on is that I couldn't find a better word to articulate my thoughts.