Luke Shuey's ducking

Remove this Banner Ad

And the majority of Shuey's free kicks should not be given as HE is the one causing the contact, the free kick is for an opposition player causing high contact on the player in question. Shuey purposefully ducks his head into traffic, into the arms of players to get free kicks.
A lot of players do it but Shuey, Selwood (J) etc do it a lot.

If Shuey causes the contact it should be play on.

It's a dangerous tactic he'll get a knee in the jaw or a compression neck injury at the way he's going, he needs to stop.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

1st example was a poor tackle, more than anything Shuey might have done to get low in the tackle. The 2nd example was just blatant free-milking........interestingly, immediately after Selwood tried the same tactic without luck.

Exactly what I was just going to post.... As if it's not a directive for West Coast players to attempt that when they get the ball in traffic. Selwood gets it and runs forward, head down hoping for contact.... Alas, there was no player waiting.

This is exactly why I hope one of their heads gets ripped clean off and is mounted on a stick outside AFL HQ as an example.
 
I was at a pub watching the game over the weekend in Richmond.
Found myself chatting to a West Coast supporter and even she was embarrassed by Shuey.
Even said 'Oh... Not again..." then started laughing.... (She was a VERY nice girl)

***This had nothing to do with the result over the weekend, WC were the better side on the night.
 
His post does seem to suggest that.

But this is Big Footy, let's trust that he doesn't really mean he wants to see Shuey (or anyone else) get decapitated.

Completely decapitated..... How else are we going to mount his head on a pike?
 
Completely decapitated..... How else are we going to mount his head on a pike?
ask him.

RTEmagicC_martin-pike.jpg.jpg
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

you can't just end the story there!

She was quality Jacko. A nice Perth girl who knew a few of the WC Eagles fellas.
I called her bluff she then proceeded to show me a few photos on her phone of her and friends which included some of the WC players.

Lets just say a couple of stories were shared along with a couple of pints.

(Yeah I know the photos might not have meant she knows them)
 
She was quality Jacko. A nice Perth girl who knew a few of the WC Eagles fellas.
I called her bluff she then proceeded to show me a few photos on her phone of her and friends which included some of the WC players.

Lets just say a couple of stories were shared along with a couple of pints.

(Yeah I know the photos might not have meant she knows them)
Just a tip : don't use that tactic if you meet a girl who says she knows any Saints players.
 
I actually hope his head gets ripped completely from his shoulders one game..... The injury sustained should be enough to deter him (he'll probably have to retire.... being headless and all) and all the other ducking ****wits.... ie Joel & Scott Selwood, from continuing to play the game in a way that, while legal (just), is like bowling an entire innings of Trevor Chappel specials.

West Coast supporters..... "offended" and "Victorian Whinger" comments?? Really?? sheesh!!

Would rather be a duck then a seagull.
 
To add some sensible content into an otherwise Bayworthy thread, some of the missed tackles can be attributed to this new fad of pinning one arm in a tackle. Not easy to do and only a few players can do it without it ending up as a clothesline.
Other than, poor tackling of guys who are legitimately trying to evade being caught holding the ball within the current way that particular law is applied.
 
To add some sensible content into an otherwise Bayworthy thread, some of the missed tackles can be attributed to this new fad of pinning one arm in a tackle. Not easy to do and only a few players can do it without it ending up as a clothesline.
Other than, poor tackling of guys who are legitimately trying to evade being caught holding the ball within the current way that particular law is applied.

And like in the second example, the head down and rush is also partly evasive - Scott Selwood uses it to get low and PAST a defender and get the disposal away. Luke Shuey on the other hand legitimately had his head over the football in the process of picking it up at the time. I daresay if Scott had hit the player whilst running through it would have been play on because he already had possession and clearly was looking to evade his opponent and he would have been the one to cause the impact. In the Shuey case, however, protecting the person with their head over the football was a key tenet of the rule and no umpire is going to call that play on, no matter how infamous the player on the receiving end.

By the way, what was the consensus amongst Collingwood fans on the free kick where Sinclair and Gaff collided over the ball and Gaff's hip and Sinclair's head collided?
 
And like in the second example, the head down and rush is also partly evasive - Scott Selwood uses it to get low and PAST a defender and get the disposal away. Luke Shuey on the other hand legitimately had his head over the football in the process of picking it up at the time.
We all see things differently. I see Shuey legitimately having his head down as he takes possession ; then choosing to keep his head down to make high contact with Rawlings who didn't run at him, didn't seek to make high contact.........he essentially stood still and was penalised.
 
Ran at him and stopped - personally I don't see that one as much different to where Gaff was penalised for the high contact on Sinclair in Saturday night's game ... well, although I was a bit dicier with that one because Gaff also had his head over the football.

...

Okay, well maybe that's a bad example.

But either way, Shuey was trying to collect the ball at speed, hunched over, its tricky to change course or get back to full height straight away. When you watch the full time version, no one in the situation had much of an available reaction time.
 
I daresay if Scott had hit the player whilst running through it would have been play on because he already had possession and clearly was looking to evade his opponent and he would have been the one to cause the impact.

Rubbish!!! It would have been a free kick.... The exact outcome that he was looking for.
Don't try and pretend like that's not what he was doing..... It's as clear as day!!

By the way, what was the consensus amongst Collingwood fans on the free kick where Sinclair and Gaff collided over the ball and Gaff's hip and Sinclair's head collided?

If i'm remembering correctly, it was clumsy but nothing in it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Luke Shuey's ducking

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top