Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
Have to agree with Campbell Brown's comments after the game. I hope Lloyd does play next season.
Have to agree with Campbell Brown's comments after the game. I hope Lloyd does play next season.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Lloyd gone.
- Thread starter Zeke
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
so you get done in an argument, run out of things to say, and resort to this
its quite clear you do care as youve posted in numerous threads on it all morning
just to add- the members was looking quite empty yesterday
so you get done in an argument, run out of things to say, and resort to this
its quite clear you do care as youve posted in numerous threads on it all morning
just to add- the members was looking quite empty yesterday
Re: The Official Neutral Lloyd/Sewell Thread
1) Did Lloyd intentionally injure Sewell? Yes. He could have tackled, chose to bump, that scenario should never have been a bump. He was over the ball, playing the ball, and Lloyd was not trying to regain possession of the ball or win a free kick, he was trying to be a physical presence.
2) Is there a difference between the Buddy incident and the Lloyd incident. Yes - Buddy's height meant he got Cousins high. Aside from that it was a fair bump. In this case, Sewell was hunched over and his head was probably 1m off the ground. A bump was always going to be dangerous and get him high.
3) Essendon are arguing that Lloyd was pushed - what are your thoughts? No. Have seen the vision, there was no momentum in the players hands on Lloyds back - he was trying to grab him and pull him back - why would he push him closer to his team-mate with the ball, giving him the opportunity to tackle/regain possession?
4) How many weeks do you think Lloyd will get 4-5 less any discount
5) How many weeks do you think Lloyd should get 6-7 less any discount
1) Did Lloyd intentionally injure Sewell? Yes. He could have tackled, chose to bump, that scenario should never have been a bump. He was over the ball, playing the ball, and Lloyd was not trying to regain possession of the ball or win a free kick, he was trying to be a physical presence.
2) Is there a difference between the Buddy incident and the Lloyd incident. Yes - Buddy's height meant he got Cousins high. Aside from that it was a fair bump. In this case, Sewell was hunched over and his head was probably 1m off the ground. A bump was always going to be dangerous and get him high.
3) Essendon are arguing that Lloyd was pushed - what are your thoughts? No. Have seen the vision, there was no momentum in the players hands on Lloyds back - he was trying to grab him and pull him back - why would he push him closer to his team-mate with the ball, giving him the opportunity to tackle/regain possession?
4) How many weeks do you think Lloyd will get 4-5 less any discount
5) How many weeks do you think Lloyd should get 6-7 less any discount
- May 28, 2008
- 16,902
- 4,882
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
You're sooking because you hate the fact we've made the finals. And labelling a player a coward for going hard at the footy resulting in a great bump? More damning evidence on your part.
Suck it up princess. And yes i have a copy of yesterday's game.
You're sooking because you hate the fact we've made the finals. And labelling a player a coward for going hard at the footy resulting in a great bump? More damning evidence on your part.
Suck it up princess. And yes i have a copy of yesterday's game.
- Banned
- #856
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
Hard at the ball? You are kidding he ran 15 metres to hit a bloke with his head over the ball. Great bumps don't get 4 weeks. I always thought he was weak now I have my proof. You can call him a champion all you like but diving and weak acts is what I remember him for.
You do realise you cannot win next week?
Hard at the ball? You are kidding he ran 15 metres to hit a bloke with his head over the ball. Great bumps don't get 4 weeks. I always thought he was weak now I have my proof. You can call him a champion all you like but diving and weak acts is what I remember him for.
You do realise you cannot win next week?
Gak Attack
Brownlow Medallist
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
Problem with this thread is a lot of people don't like the Hawks and their constant whinging and then there is a lot of people like you who hate Lloyd(I am not a big fan either) but few people seem to be stepping back and looking at the situation without the bias.
I think even the Bombers fans admit Lloyd will get weeks and unless he does not I don't see the point in whinging, he will get what he deserves. Those people saying he came in with his only intent being to take out Sewell because he was playing well....PLEASE wake up to yourselves, you are telling me he lined up one bloke and was able to guess where exactly he would be after the bounce, after the Bombers had first touched the ball and it had bounced around a bit.... after all that you are telling me Lloyd was able to know where he would be and lined him up perfectly to knock him out? It is obvious to anyone using their brain that Lloyd came in to bust bodies but not the head, if you argue otherwise you clearly never have played the game because if you had you would know by that stage Lloyd was not going to be able to do much, perhaps he could of tried harder but in the end of the day if you wanted it be full contact to the head he could of done it a lot worse.
Finally on Brown and Clarkson. I am sorry but Campbell Brown you are about as weak as people that talk tough on the internets, when you have a history of dog acts and had basically a half to do something about Lloyd and you failed to do that.... or do anything worthwhile in the football game then I think you should shutup. He is an average player who gets talked up as being a hardman because of his old man but in reality is an angry little midget with limited footballing ability. How about trying to win the hard ball and make some good plays to help your side win? instead he goes and slaps a bloke, does some soft pushes, barely gets a touch(if any in the second half?) and cries after the game. At least when Maxwell sooked in the media he was at least the captain of a club going ok and went out and continued to smash our mob in the actual game instead of trying to sniper to 'even up'.
W3llsy, past indescretions are irrelevent? You have to be kidding!! Of course Brown and Clarkson are intitled to comment but they deserve everyone crying 'hypocrit!' right back at them. By your logic I guess if some of the scum that bash people in Melbourne came out and called someone else a dog we should respect their opinion and their right to voice it?
Problem with this thread is a lot of people don't like the Hawks and their constant whinging and then there is a lot of people like you who hate Lloyd(I am not a big fan either) but few people seem to be stepping back and looking at the situation without the bias.
I think even the Bombers fans admit Lloyd will get weeks and unless he does not I don't see the point in whinging, he will get what he deserves. Those people saying he came in with his only intent being to take out Sewell because he was playing well....PLEASE wake up to yourselves, you are telling me he lined up one bloke and was able to guess where exactly he would be after the bounce, after the Bombers had first touched the ball and it had bounced around a bit.... after all that you are telling me Lloyd was able to know where he would be and lined him up perfectly to knock him out? It is obvious to anyone using their brain that Lloyd came in to bust bodies but not the head, if you argue otherwise you clearly never have played the game because if you had you would know by that stage Lloyd was not going to be able to do much, perhaps he could of tried harder but in the end of the day if you wanted it be full contact to the head he could of done it a lot worse.
Finally on Brown and Clarkson. I am sorry but Campbell Brown you are about as weak as people that talk tough on the internets, when you have a history of dog acts and had basically a half to do something about Lloyd and you failed to do that.... or do anything worthwhile in the football game then I think you should shutup. He is an average player who gets talked up as being a hardman because of his old man but in reality is an angry little midget with limited footballing ability. How about trying to win the hard ball and make some good plays to help your side win? instead he goes and slaps a bloke, does some soft pushes, barely gets a touch(if any in the second half?) and cries after the game. At least when Maxwell sooked in the media he was at least the captain of a club going ok and went out and continued to smash our mob in the actual game instead of trying to sniper to 'even up'.
W3llsy, past indescretions are irrelevent? You have to be kidding!! Of course Brown and Clarkson are intitled to comment but they deserve everyone crying 'hypocrit!' right back at them. By your logic I guess if some of the scum that bash people in Melbourne came out and called someone else a dog we should respect their opinion and their right to voice it?
- May 11, 2006
- 16,589
- 3,993
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls, Aussie Swim Team,
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
agree 100%
I am amused at all the stuffed posted by Hawk fans after last week and Buddy's incident and then this week when Lloyd has done the same thing they screaming blue murder. It is very hypocritical really.
agree 100%
I am amused at all the stuffed posted by Hawk fans after last week and Buddy's incident and then this week when Lloyd has done the same thing they screaming blue murder. It is very hypocritical really.
- May 28, 2008
- 16,902
- 4,882
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
Unbelievable, i can't take people blinded by hate seriously. Surely, you'd be able to understand that. As for next week, you have to be in it to have any sort of chance. And guess what, we're in it.
Unbelievable, i can't take people blinded by hate seriously. Surely, you'd be able to understand that. As for next week, you have to be in it to have any sort of chance. And guess what, we're in it.
Strachuniee
Team Captain
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
OF course they are relevant. Brown's actions in the past do not preclude him from having an opinion on Lloyd's bump, however if his beliefs/opinions on the matter contradict his own actions in the past, then he is a hypocrite. Hence the relevancy of his past actions.
OF course they are relevant. Brown's actions in the past do not preclude him from having an opinion on Lloyd's bump, however if his beliefs/opinions on the matter contradict his own actions in the past, then he is a hypocrite. Hence the relevancy of his past actions.
catempire
Premium Platinum
Re: The Official Neutral Lloyd/Sewell Thread
Good thread and good questions to ask.
IMO:
1. No. Viewing the footage in slow-motion here, I think it was split second and he just braced himself for inevitable impact.
2. Yes, in that the Buddy incident did not have the element of whether he was pushed into the clash.
3. They might have a case here. Again, the footage shows that his opponent definitely had his hands in Lloyd's back. Whether or not he caused Lloyd to make that contact is really hard to tell.
4. It all hinges on (3) really. There's no doubt that there was high impact, high contact. But the doubt is whether it was in Lloyd's control or not to avoid the collision. I think there's a better than even chance he'll get off.
5. If it can be sustained that he was pushed, none. If it can't, he should get 3-4 weeks.
Good thread and good questions to ask.
IMO:
1. No. Viewing the footage in slow-motion here, I think it was split second and he just braced himself for inevitable impact.
2. Yes, in that the Buddy incident did not have the element of whether he was pushed into the clash.
3. They might have a case here. Again, the footage shows that his opponent definitely had his hands in Lloyd's back. Whether or not he caused Lloyd to make that contact is really hard to tell.
4. It all hinges on (3) really. There's no doubt that there was high impact, high contact. But the doubt is whether it was in Lloyd's control or not to avoid the collision. I think there's a better than even chance he'll get off.
5. If it can be sustained that he was pushed, none. If it can't, he should get 3-4 weeks.
- Banned
- #863
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
Sorry hard to like a diving coward. But if that is something that appeals to then all the best.
Thats great you think your sort of a chance - looking foward to the end of next weekend.
Sorry hard to like a diving coward. But if that is something that appeals to then all the best.
Thats great you think your sort of a chance - looking foward to the end of next weekend.
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
God there are some ridiculous comments in here.
If I was running the tribunal:
Franklin - 0 weeks
Lloyd - 1 week
Franklin was unlucky. Cousins feigned the handball, and then slipped as he was trying to change direction. That's not Buddy's fault. Buddy looked as though he was going to try to tackle Cousins until Cousins changed direction. After that, he had a fraction of a second to shape up for the bump. Unfortunately, he caught him in the head.
Lloyd was simply unlucky that he caught Sewell in the head. Yes, I believe there was more intent at the last-second to run through Sewell, but it was still a split second decision on Lloyd's part to do that. (Lloyd also has a responsibility to protect himself you know) And if people actually look at the footage again (and NOT just that close-up they keep showing on tv that shows only the impact!), you will clearly see that Lloyd is in fact going for the ball (with a Hawthorn player arguably holding him and then pushing him I might add) and only makes the decision to bump Sewell at the last fraction of a second when he breaks free of (possibly pushed by) the Hawthorn player and realises that Sewell is going to get the ball first. Unfortunately, he caught him in the head.
The only questions I have is:
1. Could Lloyd have tackled Sewell, rather than bumping him? (the same could be asked of Buddy's too)
I don't know. At the pace Lloyd was eventually travelling at when he hit Sewell.... ? Again, people need to remember that Lloyd also has a responsibility to protect himself.
2. If Lloyd was pushed by the Hawthorn player, then that HAS to be taken into account as well. It could certainly be argued that if he wasn't pushed, he wouldn't have hit Sewell in that manner.
For me, perhaps Lloyd's was a little bit reckless, but it was certainly wasn't his intention to hit Sewell from the beginning as many hysterical morons (Hawthorn supporters) in here are claiming, and the Lloyd hit and Franklin hit are certainly not "poles apart" as some hysterical morons (Hawthorn supporters) in here are also claiming.
Both Lloyd and Frankin made last second decisions to shape up and bump their opponents. In both cases, there were other factors involved. (Cousins feigning the handball and slipping as he tried to change direction, and Lloyd possibly being pushed by the Hawthorn player)
The other thing that people seem to be forgetting is that in both cases, if there hadn't been accidental high contact, it would be play on and we wouldn't even be discussing these incidents.
That said, based on Franklin's 1 week he was given originally, I think Lloyd should get 2 weeks.
And finally, I think that some of the hysetrical morons (Hawthorn supporters) in here should get some ****ing perspective on what are actually deliberate and malicious bumps and watch this video:
[YOUTUBE]-BOzQwj4fSE[/YOUTUBE]
God there are some ridiculous comments in here.
If I was running the tribunal:
Franklin - 0 weeks
Lloyd - 1 week
Franklin was unlucky. Cousins feigned the handball, and then slipped as he was trying to change direction. That's not Buddy's fault. Buddy looked as though he was going to try to tackle Cousins until Cousins changed direction. After that, he had a fraction of a second to shape up for the bump. Unfortunately, he caught him in the head.
Lloyd was simply unlucky that he caught Sewell in the head. Yes, I believe there was more intent at the last-second to run through Sewell, but it was still a split second decision on Lloyd's part to do that. (Lloyd also has a responsibility to protect himself you know) And if people actually look at the footage again (and NOT just that close-up they keep showing on tv that shows only the impact!), you will clearly see that Lloyd is in fact going for the ball (with a Hawthorn player arguably holding him and then pushing him I might add) and only makes the decision to bump Sewell at the last fraction of a second when he breaks free of (possibly pushed by) the Hawthorn player and realises that Sewell is going to get the ball first. Unfortunately, he caught him in the head.
The only questions I have is:
1. Could Lloyd have tackled Sewell, rather than bumping him? (the same could be asked of Buddy's too)
I don't know. At the pace Lloyd was eventually travelling at when he hit Sewell.... ? Again, people need to remember that Lloyd also has a responsibility to protect himself.
2. If Lloyd was pushed by the Hawthorn player, then that HAS to be taken into account as well. It could certainly be argued that if he wasn't pushed, he wouldn't have hit Sewell in that manner.
For me, perhaps Lloyd's was a little bit reckless, but it was certainly wasn't his intention to hit Sewell from the beginning as many hysterical morons (Hawthorn supporters) in here are claiming, and the Lloyd hit and Franklin hit are certainly not "poles apart" as some hysterical morons (Hawthorn supporters) in here are also claiming.
Both Lloyd and Frankin made last second decisions to shape up and bump their opponents. In both cases, there were other factors involved. (Cousins feigning the handball and slipping as he tried to change direction, and Lloyd possibly being pushed by the Hawthorn player)
The other thing that people seem to be forgetting is that in both cases, if there hadn't been accidental high contact, it would be play on and we wouldn't even be discussing these incidents.
That said, based on Franklin's 1 week he was given originally, I think Lloyd should get 2 weeks.
And finally, I think that some of the hysetrical morons (Hawthorn supporters) in here should get some ****ing perspective on what are actually deliberate and malicious bumps and watch this video:
[YOUTUBE]-BOzQwj4fSE[/YOUTUBE]
Off The Couch
TheBrownDog
- Oct 4, 2007
- 51,003
- 68,480
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Bomber lawyers may want to look at a new line of defence. That push from schoey fractured sewells cheekbone and eye socket - now unless schoey is superman in disguise that is one almighty push.
- May 28, 2008
- 16,902
- 4,882
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
So am i, thats one more game than North Melbourne we get to play, regardless of the result.
Isn't that what footy is all about?
So am i, thats one more game than North Melbourne we get to play, regardless of the result.
Isn't that what footy is all about?
Smyth94
Norm Smith Medallist
Unbelievable reactions really.
Lloyd didn't even "bump" Sewell - it was just misfortunate that he was a little late, and the contact was to the head.
He'll go for weeks, but lets be serious here, the comments regarding sniping are totally incorrect.
Lloyd didn't even "bump" Sewell - it was just misfortunate that he was a little late, and the contact was to the head.
He'll go for weeks, but lets be serious here, the comments regarding sniping are totally incorrect.
Re: The Official Neutral Lloyd/Sewell Thread
1) Did Lloyd intentionally injure Sewell? Yes, it was reckless. He's done it before in the name of "leadership". He wanted to make his presence felt.
2) Is there a difference between the Buddy incident and the Lloyd incident. Yes, Buddy's was a more splitsecond reaction. Lloyd was pre-meditated aggression. The similarity is probaby that both could still have tried to lay a tackle.
3) Essendon are arguing that Lloyd was pushed - what are your thoughts? There was a very slight push that had little or no impact.
4) How many weeks do you think Lloyd will get - three weeks (with a discount)
5) How many weeks do you think Lloyd should get - four weeks (I think discounts should only be available for people who have perfect records coming to the tribunal).
1) Did Lloyd intentionally injure Sewell? Yes, it was reckless. He's done it before in the name of "leadership". He wanted to make his presence felt.
2) Is there a difference between the Buddy incident and the Lloyd incident. Yes, Buddy's was a more splitsecond reaction. Lloyd was pre-meditated aggression. The similarity is probaby that both could still have tried to lay a tackle.
3) Essendon are arguing that Lloyd was pushed - what are your thoughts? There was a very slight push that had little or no impact.
4) How many weeks do you think Lloyd will get - three weeks (with a discount)
5) How many weeks do you think Lloyd should get - four weeks (I think discounts should only be available for people who have perfect records coming to the tribunal).
Pie eyed
Premium Platinum
- Jun 26, 2007
- 42,992
- 24,084
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Magpies
Re: The Official Neutral Lloyd/Sewell Thread
God, your stupid comments are plastered in every thread on this subject.
It's over.
Get used to it.
If you can't add at least a single relevant comment go cry on your own board.
Pathetic.
God, your stupid comments are plastered in every thread on this subject.
It's over.
Get used to it.
If you can't add at least a single relevant comment go cry on your own board.
Pathetic.
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
It's clear to me that you as a Hawk fan, perhaps more than I originally thought, have clearly become bitter and unsure of your football club's identity as a whole. Your comments reek of hypocrisy. Campbell Brown's hit on Matthew kreuzer from behind earlier this year (correction: it was two years ago but still happened and doesn't change anything) is a perfect example of your one eyed fanaticism.
Yours is a team/club that's gone out of it's way over the past two seasons to ensure it plays 'unsociable' football. It got you a premiership, but the second the tables are turned you scream bloody murder and go out of your way to discredit whoever you can and bring into question the integrity of those that stand up against you.
Clearly you are all lost and have no idea what you want for football anymore. And I say that as you'd think after the ridiculous penalty imposed on Franklin you'd have more sense and see the bump for what it was. An accident.
Get over it.
The MRB will suspend Lloyd as the law now states, the AFL will review the bump rule as it now stands and hopefully over the Summer your club will start to focus on it's footy and just get on with it.
It's clear to me that you as a Hawk fan, perhaps more than I originally thought, have clearly become bitter and unsure of your football club's identity as a whole. Your comments reek of hypocrisy. Campbell Brown's hit on Matthew kreuzer from behind earlier this year (correction: it was two years ago but still happened and doesn't change anything) is a perfect example of your one eyed fanaticism.
Yours is a team/club that's gone out of it's way over the past two seasons to ensure it plays 'unsociable' football. It got you a premiership, but the second the tables are turned you scream bloody murder and go out of your way to discredit whoever you can and bring into question the integrity of those that stand up against you.
Clearly you are all lost and have no idea what you want for football anymore. And I say that as you'd think after the ridiculous penalty imposed on Franklin you'd have more sense and see the bump for what it was. An accident.
Get over it.
The MRB will suspend Lloyd as the law now states, the AFL will review the bump rule as it now stands and hopefully over the Summer your club will start to focus on it's footy and just get on with it.
allchinoman
Debutant
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
Lucky the tantrum himself kennett was not on the field, or we really would have seen some people getting knocked out.
Lucky the tantrum himself kennett was not on the field, or we really would have seen some people getting knocked out.
vonn
Bigfooty Legend
10k Posts
Pokemon is Life
Meet-Up Master
Pantskyle
Podcaster
WCE Wings Guernsey
Casey Tutungi Future Fund
- Sep 29, 2008
- 20,495
- 12,341
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Re: The Official Neutral Lloyd/Sewell Thread
1) Did Lloyd intentionally injure Sewell? No
2) Is there a difference between the Buddy incident and the Lloyd incident? yes
3) Essendon are arguing that Lloyd was pushed - what are your thoughts? Their was no way he could have backed out of it.
4) How many weeks do you think Lloyd will get? 3 or 4.
5) How many weeks do you think Lloyd should get? 2 weeks at most.
1) Did Lloyd intentionally injure Sewell? No
2) Is there a difference between the Buddy incident and the Lloyd incident? yes
3) Essendon are arguing that Lloyd was pushed - what are your thoughts? Their was no way he could have backed out of it.
4) How many weeks do you think Lloyd will get? 3 or 4.
5) How many weeks do you think Lloyd should get? 2 weeks at most.
clogwearer
Idiot Savant
Re: Brian Taylor on Matty Lloyd
No deal. I read a lot more than I write on BF and I'm confident I'm not the only one who sees that you have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to Essendon.
I think he'll get weeks, because that's the lay of the land these days. But getting weeks for an incident that happens right where the ball is doesn't automatically equate to a player being a weak sniping dog.
This is not about me being right or you being wrong according to the MRP's decision. I'm calling you out for having an agenda that paints anything Essendon does in a bad light, regardless of the actual truth.
I hope your bitterness gives you some satisfaction, because it won't achieve anything else of any consequence.
No deal. I read a lot more than I write on BF and I'm confident I'm not the only one who sees that you have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to Essendon.
I think he'll get weeks, because that's the lay of the land these days. But getting weeks for an incident that happens right where the ball is doesn't automatically equate to a player being a weak sniping dog.
This is not about me being right or you being wrong according to the MRP's decision. I'm calling you out for having an agenda that paints anything Essendon does in a bad light, regardless of the actual truth.
I hope your bitterness gives you some satisfaction, because it won't achieve anything else of any consequence.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
