Player Watch Rookie Pick #45 (2015) - Dan Houston

[Palpatine_Power]

Do we have good QC?

No.

I think Dennis Denuto would be better than whatever we keep rolling out.

 

[Palpatine_Power]

'does he play for Collingwood'......

I posted a light troll on the main board about this, using the same defence. It's flying hard and fast over everyone's head on that thread too. Footy fans are goldfish

 

[davo999]

Dans mind/body coordination is elite , pity he got Ranki e so flush , perfect bump back in the day but it’s knocked him into next week which is the problem . Can only argue on the fact it wasn’t high and hope to get it down to 3 games

 

[GremioPower]

Whateley is a good commentator of the game.

As an anchor of an opinion show, he is insufferably pompous and tedious.

I’ve written a post almost verbatim.

 

[PortWTF]

Again, marking contests would be covered under this point here in the classification.

“The player was contesting the ball and it was reasonable for the player to contest the ball in that way”. Contesting the ball in a marking contest which results in concussion is a football accident unless someone is cannoning into someone or acting in a way which is not considered reasonable (aka 2MP earlier), or Cameron who got multiple weeks for elbowing Andrews a couple years ago in a marking contest.

So the reality is, your wrong Philly.

Bumps resulting in concussion have been multiple week suspensions all year.

And before you jump in and say it, Houston wasn’t contesting the ball in this situation as Rankine already had control of the ball. It wasn’t in dispute and he could have tackled.

How can you say he wasn't contesting the ball? Rankine had the ball. Houston bumped him to make him lose control of the ball. Which he did, and we got a mark out of it. Bump or tackle, that is still contesting the ball.

 

[Lighthouse End]

Unpopular opinion but there's no point in being invested in this. He's going to be out for the season and there's nothing we can do about it. He's also now for all intents and purposes a former Port player so my investment in him as a player is effectively nil.

Yes we all know it would be different if it was a Victorian club. That's just part of the institutional bias in this league that is well told. Move past it and get on with business.

Don't wish to talk out of school on this one, but from the point of view of an outsider looking in, this has been Port's issue ever since coming into the competition. They set a precedent very early for what you call ' institutional bias ' by allowing everyone from Collingwood to the umpires to the AFL to the MRP dictate to them and get away with shafting them at every turn. I could name a page full of instances where Port have been screwed over and blithely walked away playing the ' honourable lets not rock the boat and just move on ' card. You were cheated out of a grand final in 2014 and an elimination final win in 2018 (?) by blatant poor umpiring that gave opposition players soft free kicks at the end of those games which cost the wins, and didn't complain. You have an underachieving Victorian club dictating you can't wear your traditional guernsey with AFL sanction, and don't give a yelp. Every year you get handed a garbage draw, and never make an issue. And your players cop bigger sanctions than most clubs in situations like this, and your hierarchy lets it go. I'm all for being an honourable and sporting loser, but there comes a time when you need to bang the flag in the ground and say enough is enough. And this is your time.

 

[TeeKray]

Get on with business? Like winning a premiership?
Do you think this is possible, despite the institutional bias?

It makes it much harder, we all know that. Sydney are alongside Geelong as the dominant club in the competition and they've only managed two this century.

You think back to Maynard last year. The media were straight in with the excuses. It was a smother, he was in the air and couldn't control himself, Brayshaw turned at the last second, no case to answer.

Even think back to the Higgins tackle on Aliir earlier this year. It was Aliir's fault because he made the totally unpredictable move of trying to kick the ball when he was being tackled.

We know the media set the table for what happens at the tribunal and that the AFL and its 'independent' tribunal come to conclusions based on this. To be clear, Houston would still get weeks if he was playing for a Victorian club but the media would have created a narrative by now that there is a lesser culpability due to not actually hitting the head or something like that and he'd probably end up with 3.

 

[philthy05]

Again, marking contests would be covered under this point here in the classification.

“The player was contesting the ball and it was reasonable for the player to contest the ball in that way”. Contesting the ball in a marking contest which results in concussion is a football accident unless someone is cannoning into someone or acting in a way which is not considered reasonable (aka 2MP earlier), or Cameron who got multiple weeks for elbowing Andrews a couple years ago in a marking contest.

So the reality is, your wrong Philly.

Bumps resulting in concussion have been multiple week suspensions all year.

And before you jump in and say it, Houston wasn’t contesting the ball in this situation as Rankine already had control of the ball. It wasn’t in dispute and he could have tackled.

Houston was contesting the ball until it was apparent he was going to be 1/20ths of a second late.

He was no less contesting the ball than any marking contest where a clash occurs.


Again, there is absolutely no blanket “make contact , player gets concussed = ban” rule in real world application in the afl.

It just doesn’t exist in reality otherwise we would have seen bans from marking contests where players get concussed.


What we do have is free license for the afl to apply that rule as they like.

I’m not arguing that making contact in a bump doesn’t get a ban, it does, but there’s a fair portion of people posting quotes and suggesting letter of the law, when letter of the law is not applied whatsoever.

 

[Jojay]

Lol check out the hubris of Mark Bickley

Mark Bickley

Age

55

Ht

178cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.4

5star

K

11.7

4star

HB

7.8

5star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.7

4star

No current season stats available

D

21.2

5star

K

11.0

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

3.2

4star

T

3.8

5star

.. trying to compare a textbook shirt front to his dog act elbow

 

[Janey]

Lol check out the hubris of Mark Bickley.. trying to compare a textbook shirt front to his dog act elbow

Only similarity is that Dan is being treated exactly the same by the media.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Only similarity is that Dan is being treated exactly the same by the media.

*Worse

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Caro called out Dan changing his mind on being traded to Melbourne when the FC panel was talking about the power of player managers.

She queried his right to deny Port the two first round picks Melbourne had guaranteed for the trade.

Their view was, if you are going back to Melbourne (the city) for family reasons or whatever, that shouldn't give you the right to dictate which club you go to.

 

[Vagabond0]

Don't wish to talk out of school on this one, but from the point of view of an outsider looking in, this has been Port's issue ever since coming into the competition. They set a precedent very early for what you call ' institutional bias ' by allowing everyone from Collingwood to the umpires to the AFL to the MRP dictate to them and get away with shafting them at every turn. I could name a page full of instances where Port have been screwed over and blithely walked away playing the ' honourable lets not rock the boat and just move on ' card. You were cheated out of a grand final in 2014 and an elimination final win in 2018 (?) by blatant poor umpiring that gave opposition players soft free kicks at the end of those games which cost the wins, and didn't complain. You have an underachieving Victorian club dictating you can't wear your traditional guernsey with AFL sanction, and don't give a yelp. Every year you get handed a garbage draw, and never make an issue. And your players cop bigger sanctions than most clubs in situations like this, and your hierarchy lets it go. I'm all for being an honourable and sporting loser, but there comes a time when you need to bang the flag in the ground and say enough is enough. And this is your time.

Yep should call out their bullshit every chance we get.

Lachie Jones gets tunnelled, nothing to see because he was lucky, but had he fallen mm's either way could have been career ending and then the suspension would have been handed out. Reality is if Lachie wasn't such a man child and the size of Rankine, he probably would have been worse off for the hit.

Both incidents umps called play on. Problem is the league and the "standards" they think they set.

Dan's almost 200 games in, first suspension and shouldn't be made a scape goat to appease frothing media campaign.

Personally they have hours of video footage of worse hits that got 3 or less. No way they should just roll over without appealing down every possible avenue.

 

[1954]

Don't wish to talk out of school on this one, but from the point of view of an outsider looking in, this has been Port's issue ever since coming into the competition. They set a precedent very early for what you call ' institutional bias ' by allowing everyone from Collingwood to the umpires to the AFL to the MRP dictate to them and get away with shafting them at every turn. I could name a page full of instances where Port have been screwed over and blithely walked away playing the ' honourable lets not rock the boat and just move on ' card. You were cheated out of a grand final in 2014 and an elimination final win in 2018 (?) by blatant poor umpiring that gave opposition players soft free kicks at the end of those games which cost the wins, and didn't complain. You have an underachieving Victorian club dictating you can't wear your traditional guernsey with AFL sanction, and don't give a yelp. Every year you get handed a garbage draw, and never make an issue. And your players cop bigger sanctions than most clubs in situations like this, and your hierarchy lets it go. I'm all for being an honourable and sporting loser, but there comes a time when you need to bang the flag in the ground and say enough is enough. And this is your time.

You can blame the don't rock the boat and continually turn the other cheek stuff on our house wive's tv president, who I suspect if born in a different time could have got a gig in the sultan's harem without requiring the operation!

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Carlton interested but don’t wanna give their first rounder, then why are you chasing him. It’s two first rounders, if you don’t want to give 1 then don’t even look.

I get this time of year is full of bull crap trying to lower players trade value but my god that made me laugh this morning

 

[bringbackbucky]

His role is replaceable in the mid-long term, but I don't reckon we can win it this year without him...

 

[FishingRick04]

Dan is in trouble. The AFL also in trouble, in babying the players the players no longer protect themselves. Rankine voluntarily left himself open. It’s crazy, have your hands in a better position to protect yourself, assume there’s going to be contact and turn your body.

As for Dan not going as hard to avoid collision, I thought the rule was go in timid and get hurt.

 

[Lighthouse End]

Yep should call out their bullshit every chance we get.

Lachie Jones gets tunnelled, nothing to see because he was lucky, but had he fallen mm's either way could have been career ending and then the suspension would have been handed out. Reality is if Lachie wasn't such a man child and the size of Rankine, he probably would have been worse off for the hit.

Both incidents umps called play on. Problem is the league and the "standards" they think they set.

Dan's almost 200 games in, first suspension and shouldn't be made a scape goat to appease frothing media campaign.

Personally they have hours of video footage of worse hits that got 3 or less. No way they should just roll over without appealing down every possible avenue.

I really hope your hierarchy pulls out all stops on this one. Personally I'm sick of this soft**** sanitisation of the game into a mamby pamby television soap opera or bastardised version of ' Dancing With The Stars'. This was a pure football collision and not a malicious act. Furthermore I hope they present the vision of Dan's obvious distress after the incident and use the remorse card to further mitigate any penalty. Giving the AFL a good kick in the pants here might make them sit up and take notice and stop them treating Port like a whipping boy.

 

[Lighthouse End]

You can blame the don't rock the boat and continually turn the other cheek stuff on our house wive's tv president, who I suspect if born in a different time could have got a gig in the sultan's harem without requiring the operation!

I get your point but I have to disagree. Some time before I moved to SA, I was at the hotel in South Melbourne where Port had their supporter base having dinner with some friends who were Port supporters, after Port had played at the MCG in the afternoon. The players and club officials, as was the practice, came back to the hotel and mingled with the supporters. I had a conversation with Greg Boulton, who I believe was President at the time, as to why the club didn't argue the ridiculous 2 match ban handed to Michael Stevens - a tiny rover - for striking St Kilda ruckman Stewart Loewe, when it was actually a spoiling attempt by a much smaller player that accidentally clipped Loewe high. His response was ' It's not club policy, we don't want to make waves ' . So this has been a problem that is entrenched a lot further back than Koch.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Caro called out Dan changing his mind on being traded to Melbourne when the FC panel was talking about the power of player managers.

She queried his right to deny Port the two first round picks Melbourne had guaranteed for the trade.

Their view was, if you are going back to Melbourne (the city) for family reasons or whatever, that shouldn't give you the right to dictate which club you go to.

Which suggests that Caro's contact at the club is not happy Dan has changed his mind and is now worried we will end up with a lesser return.

 

[PowerLil]

Which suggests that Caro's contact at the club is not happy Dan has changed his mind and is now worried we will end up with a lesser return.

Clearly not heeding Rexie J 's advice!

 

[Ford Fairlane]

 

[OneGreatClub]

Caroline Wilson said Nicks told Ken it was a dog act. Wow.
I reckon Nicky’s was a bit sensitive after the loss.

 

[240volt]

Caroline Wilson said Nicks told Ken it was a dog act. Wow.
I reckon Nicky’s was a bit sensitive after the loss.

He should be,lately they have beaten us and that covers over there shyt season.
Losing to Port pushes him closer to the firing squad.

 

[PortWTF]

What are they doing to the game? If he didn't him high, why the suspension? 3 games! It's crazy.