- Thread starter
- #76
Family was away this weekend
I had a bowl of special K for dinner with strawberries and bananas
Breakfast for dinner ...love it
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Mumford ....should be called for blocking at every ruck contest - he doesn't jump at the ball
- Thread starter dave123
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Family was away this weekend
I had a bowl of special K for dinner with strawberries and bananas
Breakfast for dinner ...love it
It's one game sample mate. Once he has played in 3-4 if he is lucky then that is worth commenting on.
Bluengold91
Senior List
- Aug 14, 2016
- 174
- 140
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Shuey doesn't duck yes he may drops his knees a fair bit and get a fair few high descions but is it really his fault he is first to the ball and opposition players still haven't worked out how to tackle properly???
The thing is I have noticed Mumford do this to all ruckmen. So yes, it should be against the rules. All players deserve a fair run at the ball and the rule is there. Just needs to be enforced. Unfortunately the afl arent very good at enforcing the rules correctly. And when they fail that they decide to bring in new rules of the week.
You shouldn't expect moronic Freo and other supporters to understand this.
Stanley beat him.
Bluengold91
Senior List
- Aug 14, 2016
- 174
- 140
- AFL Club
- West Coast
You honestly have no idea about footy do you ??? Or do u watch 3 eagles games a year and think your an expert??
Just going on yesterday's game against GWS the same he's that absolutely embarrassed the 3time reigning premiers he had 38disposals 23contested 13 clearances 6 tackles 2goals which were both kicked in the last quarter. to call someone "the softest mid in the comp" even though he can rack up 23 contested touches and 6 tackles against a top 4 side away from home is just restarted. Especially when you have Brad hill and Isaac Smith in your team who together only average 8.5 contested possessions a game.
As for the Gf he might have played below his best but still had 26 touches 6 tackles n 1 goal (first goal of the game) Hardly the signs of a soft midfielder
Bluengold91
Senior List
- Aug 14, 2016
- 174
- 140
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Get to the ball before shuey n u don't have to worry about tackling him which means u won't give away stupid careless free kicks, it's pretty simple but I guess the gimps have to whinge about something
- Thread starter
- #85
Yup it's very simple
In umpiring the first thing they teach you is the bloke first to the ball must be protected
I have asked this before
I'll ask it again ...why does the ball carrier owe the tracker some kind of moral obligation to not move in a way to draw a free kick when this happens In other positions on the ground
I'm not a fan of straight ducking which shuey did NOT DO to win those frees late in the game ....both were single lowering of the hips (while still moving at pace by the way)
Ryan griffin is tall and he should know that .....you'd think he know that ...the tackle that he laid on shuey was high ....shuey had just taken possession of the ball and tell me why he has to stand up straight (why would you do that then get slammed) he was not ducking as he was still looking to offload the ball
The ones where players duck and barge in with head first ...fair enough that's prior and holding the ball ....shuey doesn't do that and he did t do that yesterday at all.
As Jonathan Brown said we have to protect the bloke with the ball and the bloke who first gets the ball ......shuey is highly skilled at getting it like Dangerfield and Selwood and many others
He does to owe the tackler any moral obligation to let himself be tackled in a way that's fair ......that's up to the tackler to assess and react to shueys body movement ....not the other way around
Could you imagine a golfer walking up to another golfer and saying you can't swing like that or putt like that .......you play well with that skill
Sorry it's rubbish and people need to get over it
In umpiring the first thing they teach you is the bloke first to the ball must be protected
I have asked this before
I'll ask it again ...why does the ball carrier owe the tracker some kind of moral obligation to not move in a way to draw a free kick when this happens In other positions on the ground
I'm not a fan of straight ducking which shuey did NOT DO to win those frees late in the game ....both were single lowering of the hips (while still moving at pace by the way)
Ryan griffin is tall and he should know that .....you'd think he know that ...the tackle that he laid on shuey was high ....shuey had just taken possession of the ball and tell me why he has to stand up straight (why would you do that then get slammed) he was not ducking as he was still looking to offload the ball
The ones where players duck and barge in with head first ...fair enough that's prior and holding the ball ....shuey doesn't do that and he did t do that yesterday at all.
As Jonathan Brown said we have to protect the bloke with the ball and the bloke who first gets the ball ......shuey is highly skilled at getting it like Dangerfield and Selwood and many others
He does to owe the tackler any moral obligation to let himself be tackled in a way that's fair ......that's up to the tackler to assess and react to shueys body movement ....not the other way around
Could you imagine a golfer walking up to another golfer and saying you can't swing like that or putt like that .......you play well with that skill
Sorry it's rubbish and people need to get over it
- Jun 23, 2008
- 33,486
- 27,233
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Norwood, Everton, Detroit Red Wings
"Blocking" is a bullshit rule in footy. It should just be considered good/smart positioning, and should be praised, not penalised.
Orange C
Senior List
- Jul 28, 2011
- 202
- 483
- AFL Club
- West Coast
There just needs to be a clear direction around ruck contest and what the rules are trying to achieve.
If this site wasn't full of people uninterested in talking about footy there's a serious question here, do we want rucks to both primarily go for the ball? Then Mumford's technique yesterday needs to be penalised properly, because he was focused on negating the other ruckman more than anything else.
Or should ruckman be free to contest in any which way, minimise contentious rucking free kicks that no-one really understands, give big ruckman a place in the game, and put the onus on the Naitanui types to find a way to get to the ball?
I'd actually like to see less ruck free kicks, give ruckman more freedom, even if it makes Nic's job tougher, but it needs be balanced by fixing the third man up, because at the moment having your ruckman keep the other grounded and having the extra go up is very popular, and it's too confusing to police what is blocking at a ruck contest, and what is getting in front of your man and fighting for position.
If this site wasn't full of people uninterested in talking about footy there's a serious question here, do we want rucks to both primarily go for the ball? Then Mumford's technique yesterday needs to be penalised properly, because he was focused on negating the other ruckman more than anything else.
Or should ruckman be free to contest in any which way, minimise contentious rucking free kicks that no-one really understands, give big ruckman a place in the game, and put the onus on the Naitanui types to find a way to get to the ball?
I'd actually like to see less ruck free kicks, give ruckman more freedom, even if it makes Nic's job tougher, but it needs be balanced by fixing the third man up, because at the moment having your ruckman keep the other grounded and having the extra go up is very popular, and it's too confusing to police what is blocking at a ruck contest, and what is getting in front of your man and fighting for position.
Bokonon
Cancelled
- May 3, 2016
- 4,376
- 2,703
- AFL Club
- GWS
I love it when he knocks them into tomorrow, and they insist it was perfectly legitimate.
- Thread starter
- #90
Well ask a kid if he likes seeing Nic Nat jumping at the ball or watching a player just stand there like a light post
Get back to me once you've asked a few kids please
It's a simple rule ....jump at the ball ...eyes on the ball and arm attempting to go at the ball
In a marking contest if you take your eyes off the ball just to make body contact it's usually a free kick .....why is the ruck any different
I get it that Nic Nat will have a massive advantage ....yup
Are we going to say to Cyril Rioli ...hey Cyril your not allowed to run that fast because it's an advantage
Watching yesterday made me cringe and think that's not what a ruckman is supposed to do (Mumford) ....Not jumping at the ball just to make contact is blocking
But gutless umpires won't pay it
- Thread starter
- #91
And you'll see blokes get injured ...a lot
Sorry I like to see the ball palmed down to speeding runner going past .......isn't that what we want to see
We bang on about congestion but yet we say ruckman can just block making it harder to get the ball clear
That makes no sense
Apex36
Hall of Famer
- Mar 26, 2014
- 41,011
- 88,191
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I hear you can't be a real Hawks supporter before you make a Big Footy account...
- Thread starter
- #93
I'm curious where he was when Nic Nat burst away from the pack and kicked the winning goal ?
Just curios
Yeah thought so ....standing there watching after he tried to block again
James Colorado
Making a Mess in Aisle 10
- Aug 25, 2014
- 9,766
- 19,265
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- The Fighting Furies Sweet FA FC
Question shouldn't even need to be asked. Shuey's elite, and I'd love him at the Hawks.
- Jun 23, 2008
- 33,486
- 27,233
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Norwood, Everton, Detroit Red Wings
I don't think it has to be about "the look". Nobody has a right to just get the ball without someone trying to stop them. I just don't see why simply positioning yourself to stop your opponent touching or getting the ball (whether it's in ruck contests, stoppages or marking contests) is seen as a negative thing that should be penalised. If there's no overt holding going on, I don't really see what's "wrong" with getting in your opponent's way and not affording them a clear path to the ball. Seems like a perfectly valid tactic and strategy, and smart play from a bigger, more earth-bound ruckman like Mumford, and I don't think it should be something that free kicks should be given for.
- Jun 5, 2004
- 9,222
- 6,915
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I loved the part where he couldn't hold onto Natanui's neck. Nick just said "**** off campaigner", took the ball of the ground and bossed it.
- Thread starter
- #97
Ok if you're a defender and stand still in front of pack to block the contest it's a fee kick....why because we do t want to see that in our game
Positioning is fine ....by all means so long as your objective is tap the ball or at least go for the ball in some meaningful way
If he's at least making half an attempt to tap the ball I have no issue ......most times he just stands making NO attempt to win the ball at all
We have rules like unrealistic marking attempts
We have rules which prevent forwards from being blocked
Why? Because it decreases the spectacle of the game ....many times Mumford made zero attempt to get the ball.
- Jun 23, 2008
- 33,486
- 27,233
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Norwood, Everton, Detroit Red Wings
Personally I just see it as good positioning and defending, and don't feel it should be penalised in a ruck contest or marking contest. I don't really care if it's "not attractive", because most defensive work isn't. Fair enough if you disagree.
Bokonon
Cancelled
- May 3, 2016
- 4,376
- 2,703
- AFL Club
- GWS
Why did you respond to me with a question yiu answered fir yourself? That's just nonsense
- Thread starter
- #100
I said I'm curious to why Mumford didn't try to stop Nic Nat
I did answer it because I know you can't
