Pugilism: Sheedy's legacy?

Remove this Banner Ad

Under Sheedy, Essendon was the most dangerous team against which to play as players in the opposition team, especially key players, we're targetted to be "softened up." Sheedy once admitted this tactic in an interview.

After watching three of Sydney's best sustain injuries due to excessively rough play early in the game against GWS, I cannot persuade myself that Sheedy''s pugalistic legacy at the club is not perpetuated by Leon Cameron.

I hope Leon is a better man than Sheedy and will promote a more sportsmanlike culture at GWS, like Mark Thompson did at Essendon.

Clarko like this :thumbsu:

Wallace ran "in the gun"

Whars new?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

image.jpeg

I said to Terry " Young Dermie is getting a bit full of himself down there and starting to get on top of our blokes. I want you to start on him this qrt and I want you to punch him as hard as you can in the back of the head in the marking contests and don't let the ####er kick another goal. K.Sheedy



Under Sheedy, Essendon was the most dangerous team against which to play as players in the opposition team, especially key players, we're targetted to be "softened up." Sheedy once admitted this tactic in an interview.

After watching three of Sydney's best sustain injuries due to excessively rough play early in the game against GWS, I cannot persuade myself that Sheedy''s pugalistic legacy at the club is not perpetuated by Leon Cameron.

I hope Leon is a better man than Sheedy and will promote a more sportsmanlike culture at GWS, like Mark Thompson did at Essendon.
 
I heard Hart, but it was just a story - more than possible names got mixed up.

Was definitely Hart. Sheeds wrote about in one of the many books he wrote. Got em all in the bookcase.
 
Smacking blokes was part of football in Sheedys playing days ... you gave some and you copped some and nobody seen a thing, then you would have a beer together after the game and laugh about it. Now with all the Camera's everywhere if you 'pass wind' it goes before the match review panel.

Players are bigger and stronger and still hit hard so players get hurt but as others have said its finals and you push your own physical limits. If you go beyond the rules these days you take a huge risk.
 
Only a couple of the responders to this thread have the capacity to comprehend the difference between playing hard and deliberately injuring the opposition as a means of winning. The latter is more akin to pugilism, the former to field sport. Seems that skill and hard, competative sportsmanship are taking a back seat to the Marxist philosophy of the end justifies the means--that is, be a phony in pretending to play hard when the intent is to take your opponent out of the game...win any way you can...take the "rules" out of Australian Rules Football.

Those that failed to understand my OP naturally resorted to vitriol. As is so common at forums, unwittingly leftist indoctrinated minds do not permit expression of opinions that are contrary to their own: they cannot attack the argument, so they attack the petson. That is how I see Sheedy's approach to playing football...for the most part: if you can't manage to kick the ball, kick the man accidentally on purpose.

Just my 'pinion.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Its called finals football, the intensity goes up another level compared to home and away games. Who cares about sportsmanlike culture when there is a premiership at stake (as long as within the rules)
Johnson ran around fending off with a forearm. Then he ran through Kennedy with an elbow to the head,
That's not finals football.

Mumford tackle on Tippett was hard but fair. That's finals football.
 
Only a couple of the responders to this thread have the capacity to comprehend the difference between playing hard and deliberately injuring the opposition as a means of winning. The latter is more akin to pugilism, the former to field sport. Seems that skill and hard, competative sportsmanship are taking a back seat to the Marxist philosophy of the end justifies the means--that is, be a phony in pretending to play hard when the intent is to take your opponent out of the game...win any way you can...take the "rules" out of Australian Rules Football.

Those that failed to understand my OP naturally resorted to vitriol. As is so common at forums, unwittingly leftist indoctrinated minds do not permit expression of opinions that are contrary to their own: they cannot attack the argument, so they attack the petson. That is how I see Sheedy's approach to playing football...for the most part: if you can't manage to kick the ball, kick the man accidentally on purpose.

Just my 'pinion.
You're opinion is you're really smart, that's obvious, why didn't you inlude a poll?
 
Only a couple of the responders to this thread have the capacity to comprehend the difference between playing hard and deliberately injuring the opposition as a means of winning. The latter is more akin to pugilism, the former to field sport. Seems that skill and hard, competative sportsmanship are taking a back seat to the Marxist philosophy of the end justifies the means--that is, be a phony in pretending to play hard when the intent is to take your opponent out of the game...win any way you can...take the "rules" out of Australian Rules Football.

Those that failed to understand my OP naturally resorted to vitriol. As is so common at forums, unwittingly leftist indoctrinated minds do not permit expression of opinions that are contrary to their own: they cannot attack the argument, so they attack the petson. That is how I see Sheedy's approach to playing football...for the most part: if you can't manage to kick the ball, kick the man accidentally on purpose.

Just my 'pinion.

Or alternatively they just don't agree with you. Not everything needs to be a leftist indoctrinated conspiracy theory.

Sheedy was a coach for 678 games across 29 seasons. He is one of the few coaches who enjoyed great success but was also capable of facilitating a successful rebuild. In other words, his coaching style was adaptable to the changing demands of the sport. As a coach he valued hard and physical play but find me a successful coach or team that didn't value these qualities. The last team he coached which I viewed as physically tough were the 2000-01 team; the latter of which was beaten down by a more physical Lions outfit.

GWS attacked the ball hard on Saturday. Supporters do them a great disservice if they believe that their success on Saturday was due to 'pugilism'. They hunted in packs and they tackled hard; they physically intimidated a team renown for their hard-tackling and physical nature.

Across the day there were one or two incidents - largely isolated to a single player - which were questionable. That player was suspended in accordance to the rules. His playing style does not appear to have changed materially since moving to the GWS. This brings us to the broader point: it simply isn't possible to approach the game with an intent to intentionally injure your opponents. Video cameras catch everything.

You are taking a few incidents - unfortunate though they may be - and drawing an awfully long bow. I'd advise not arriving at such strong conclusions based on such a small sample size.
 
Sheedy will be given too much credit by the media for GWS success and no doubt he will take even more himself. Granted he was probably a good figure head to set up the club but deserves next to no credit for what's happening on the field now, give him credit for that he probably had a effect off the field and setting up a culture but even thats a stretch.
 
I understand the intensity goes up in the finals. But all year, GWS has stamped itself as the most jingoistic team in the league. Sheedy's influence is visible. GWS is talented enough. They don't not need to play like animals. Footy is a sport, or has that changed...to a gladiator-like spectacle?



I respectfully disagree. For example,
Some of us like the biff and 'animal' stuff, sport isn't just about kicking the ball and looking fancy you know. It's about toughness, attrition and 'playing to the line'.
 
Under Sheedy, Essendon was the most dangerous team against which to play as players in the opposition team, especially key players, we're targetted to be "softened up." Sheedy once admitted this tactic in an interview.

After watching three of Sydney's best sustain injuries due to excessively rough play early in the game against GWS, I cannot persuade myself that Sheedy''s pugalistic legacy at the club is not perpetuated by Leon Cameron.

I hope Leon is a better man than Sheedy and will promote a more sportsmanlike culture at GWS, like Mark Thompson did at Essendon.
:rolleyes::drunk::$
 
Well well well. Here we go. Dragging down the giants over playing the game hard. Didnt hear Mitchell complain after cats game. Suck it up. Dont complain. Respond on the field.

On SM-G935F using BigFooty.com mobile app

I hate the Giants and everything they represent, but I couldn't agree more with your post.

Hearing a Doggies supporter whining about players getting touched up on a footy field is a new experience for me. Danny Southern played for them didn't he ?

Other than that Go Doggies :thumbsu:

ps I don't hate you gav :D
 
I hate the Giants and everything they represent, but I couldn't agree more with your post.

Hearing a Doggies supporter whining about players getting touched up on a footy field is a new experience for me. Danny Southern played for them didn't he ?

Other than that Go Doggies :thumbsu:

ps I don't hate you gav :D
Nor is there hate in my heart.

On SM-G935F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Pugilism: Sheedy's legacy?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top