Autopsy Round 5 = Brisbane 98-91 Collingwood

[Apex36]

Obviously not to improve his vision because he is as incapable as ever of taking a mark - in fact his marking seems worse this year. Channel 7 commentators said time and again that the glasses were to protect his eyes from damage, so I guess that has to be the reason.

Commentators are idiots and wrong. They’re prescription lenses and tinted to combat light sensitivity that he acquired due to his eye injuries.
Having said that, there’s now no excuse for his absolute inability to hold a mark or significantly impact contests anymore. And he’s also lost his goal kicking accuracy which was one of his very few redeeming qualities.
Let him dominate the undersized rucks in the VFL for the rest of the year and then cut him loose. He’s officially dead weight at the club now.

 

[danielnajdek]

Point of impact. If Gardiner had collected Daicos in the head he'd be enjoying a holiday for a fortnight or so. Body contact + Daicos getting up quickly helped his case.

It was a scum act, but the way the rules are set up ensure that this kind of act isn't as punishable.

Danger got up quickly and played the rest of the match after Jordans tackle on him........

 

[gouki88]

Danger got up quickly and played the rest of the match after Jordans tackle on him........

He did, but the dangerous tackle action is more prohibited than bumps to the body. Or so it seems to me, via the matrix.

 

[Apex36]

Danger got up quickly and played the rest of the match after Jordans tackle on him........

Also had head contact with the ground, albeit minor. The rules are ****ed.

 

[gouki88]

Commentators are idiots and wrong. They’re prescription lenses and tinted to combat light sensitivity that he acquired due to his eye injuries.
Having said that, there’s now no excuse for his absolute inability to hold a mark or significantly impact contests anymore. And he’s also lost his goal kicking accuracy which was one of his very few redeeming qualities.
Let him dominate the undersized rucks in the VFL for the rest of the year and then cut him loose. He’s officially dead weight at the club now.

Thanks for reminding me about the missed kick for goal. That was a huge momentum swing their way - pretty sure they went straight down the other end off of his behind to kick a goal. Essentially a two-goal swing. Or, in other words, the game!

 

[Apex36]

Thanks for reminding me about the missed kick for goal. That was a huge momentum swing their way - pretty sure they went straight down the other end off of his behind to kick a goal. Essentially a two-goal swing. Or, in other words, the game!

Not going to pin that directly to him as it happened a few times iirc, with us missing then getting immediately punished.
But if you’re only good at one thing and then you aren’t anymore… the harsh reality is that there’s no place in the 22 for you.

 

[Jekyll and Hyde]

 

[gouki88]

Not going to pin that directly to him as it happened a few times iirc, with us missing then getting immediately punished.
But if you’re only good at one thing and then you aren’t anymore… the harsh reality is that there’s no place in the 22 for you.

I respect the rationality, but I've thrown that out the window with Cox (where he seems to have thrown his ability to mark and kick). He made me embarrassed

 

[barrackers]

It is still a thing, but more for high contact incidents:


strong consideration will be given to the potential to cause injury, particularly in the following cases:
» Intentional strikes, such as those with a swinging clenched fist, » raised forearm or elbow;

High bumps, particularly with significant head contact and/or Player momentum;

» Any head-high contact with a Player who has his head over the ball, particularly when contact is made from an opponent approaching from a front-on position;

» Forceful round arm swings that make head-high contact to a Player in a marking contest, ruck contest or when tackling;

» Any contact that occurs when the Victim Player should not reasonably be expecting or is not reasonably prepared for contact (i.e. contact off the ball);

» Any dangerous tackle.

While it was intentional with the elbow/forearm raised the charge was rough conduct not striking, so potentially only the second last of those could apply. Contact was deemed late by the payment of a 50 therefore it could be argued contact wasn’t reasonably expected. The success of which may depend on how much emphasis is placed on the off the ball example given.

 

[sr36]

While it was intentional with the elbow/forearm raised the charge was rough conduct not striking, so potentially only the second last of those could apply. Contact was deemed late by the payment of a 50, so could be argued contact wasn’t reasonably expected depending on how much emphasis is placed on the off the ball example given.

I think you're expecting contact when taking that mark.

 

[Bianconeri]

I think it may have - no Mcreery, Elliott and Mihocek meant that hitting one on one contests was not a good idea as our available forwards were pretty uncontested - so we went the bomb it to a pack option instead.

We were bombing it long beforehand anyways those player availability didn’t change that.

 

[barrackers]

I think you're expecting contact when taking that mark.

Yeah, when taking the mark certainly. Not so sure that late though.

 

[JB007]

While it was intentional with the elbow/forearm raised the charge was rough conduct not striking, so potentially only the second last of those could apply. Contact was deemed late by the payment of a 50 therefore it could be argued contact wasn’t reasonably expected. The success of which may depend on how much emphasis is placed on the off the ball example given.

It was a 50 and nothing more imo……..but I thought De Goey’s was a free and nothing more also

 

[sr36]

We were bombing it long beforehand anyways those player availability didn’t change that.

I'd need to rewatch the other games to be confident, but it felt to me like we switched to really attacking packs in the hotspot in this game, rather than trying to hit people on the lead or putting it into a bit more space for contests with fewer in it.

 

[No SPIN]

i agree. He has played enough games. We can judge his performances. He does well in the VFL and then he is a headless turkey in the seniors. This effort thing results in him trying to tackle but often he is too small to have an effect. We are wasting games on him now

He is not to small - he is the same height as Rowell and many other mids.

 

[barrackers]

It was a 50 and nothing more imo……..but I thought De Goey’s was a free and nothing more also

That’s what gets me. Which action is more against the spirit of the game, Gardiner or DeGoey. The 50 vs a free kick suggests the former, but the penalty the latter despite only being a new rule.

The weighting system provides some certainty albeit it can be fixed to returned a desired outcome, but there can also be incidents that don’t really sit probably largely based on the AFL’s focus at the time.

 

[No SPIN]

Surely 'Fly' is fully aware of the inability of certain players like the Brown brothers or Cox to ever make the grade at AFL level. If he has to waste a year giving players so obviously bereft of the qualities required to be an AFL footballer an opportunity to prove their worth, then he is a poor judge of AFL talent.

Maybe Fly knows a bit more about the game than BF posters.

 

[gouki88]

He is not to small - he is the same height as Rowell and many other mids.

Sure, he's 179cms. That works if you're a fierce tackler like Rowell, or dynamite like Neale.

Brown is neither

 

[JB007]

That’s what gets me. Which action is more against the spirit of the game, Gardiner or DeGoey.

The weighting system provides some certainty albeit it can be fixed to returned a desired outcome, but there can also be incidents that don’t really sit probably largely based on the AFL’s focus at the time.

Spot on mate De Goey’s motion in the tackle at the end was excessive but hard to control.

Gardner’s action was dirty but not suspension worthy imo.

It isn’t fair De Goey couldn’t be fined also considering Danger played on.

To be honest Josh was average after that hit.

 

[sr36]

Yeah, when taking the mark certainly. Not so sure that late though.

It does seem really unjust that accidents when legitimately attacking the contest cop a week - like Kreuger's one did, whilst blatantly dirty stuff doesn't. I think the answer is to shift all the intentional stuff up a band on the punishment matrix. Surely being intentional makes it significantly worse.

 

[gouki88]

It does seem really unjust that accidents when legitimately attacking the contest cop a week - like Kreuger's one did, whilst blatantly dirty stuff doesn't. I think the answer is to shift all the intentional stuff up a band on the punishment matrix. Surely being intentional makes it significantly worse.

The focus needs to incorporate intent more than it does. Bad decisions can have relatively minor consequences, while fine decisions can result in disaster. Drunk drivers can get home fine, yet sober drivers can crash just like anyone else.

We punish the former more.

 

[Markfs]

He is not to small - he is the same height as Rowell and many other mids.

i watch him and he's too small. Rowell is 1cm taller.

 

[Markfs]

Surely 'Fly' is fully aware of the inability of certain players like the Brown brothers or Cox to ever make the grade at AFL level. If he has to waste a year giving players so obviously bereft of the qualities required to be an AFL footballer an opportunity to prove their worth, then he is a poor judge of AFL talent.

well its got to do with getting to the club and telling the players that they can start again .... if you do that, you need to give them time. Cox and Brown are effectively hanging themselves at the moment and the rest of the group will see that and they will happily wave them goodbye at the end of the year.

The other advantage is that it slows the rebuild so we can get better draft picks...

 

[No SPIN]

i watch him and he's too small. Rowell is 1cm taller.

And CB is 2 kg heavier.

 

[Markfs]

Maybe Fly knows a bit more about the game than BF posters.

The proof of the pudding will be when Callum is playing VFL permanently next year. And hopefully his brother too. If they arent delisted and they are playing next year and continuing to fail, then the proof will be seen then.