So did Robertson after he ironed out Kelly in 2005. There's no doubt that Selwood hit Coulter high. Get the tape and look at it. There's not much point arguing from what Selwood's attitude was and speculating that Coulter's blood nose might have came from impact with the ground.
I said nothing like that. "Both obscure the point of contact" is what I said. There is footage from two angles. It would be better if there was side on footage but I haven't seen any. The footage from behind Selwood shows Coulter's head below the level of Selwood's shoulder. The footage from behind Coulter shows the head flung back and Selwood's upper body higher than Coulter's. Coulter is in the hands of the trainers for a long time, all the attention is to his face. I have no doubts whatsoever.
Doesn't mean they are taking it seriously. Newsworthy because of the fights and the over the top reactions and comments, talked about on "Bigfooty" because people like an argument (and a laugh). I've made plenty of comments about this hybrid game, that doesn't mean that I take it seriously I can assure you ! An "exhibition" rather than a sport, which seems to be achieving nothing but bringing out the aggro in people !
Who's making a big deal of it ? I responded to an assertion by eagles 87 that it was a legitimate bump. You've taken it further by trying to argue that the contact wasn't high and that Coulter's bloodied nose came from contact with the ground. Still not satisfied, you are now accusing me of bias and lacking objectivity ! Get hold of a tape of the incident, view it and satisfy yourself.
I looked at the incident in slow motion again this morning. The first vision is more from the side. No ifs about it. Selwood's shoulder strikes Coulter's face. As he goes down, Coulter's right arm cushions his fall in front of his face. His face does not touch the ground.
Pretty much all of my posts have recited what I observed to have occurred on the pitch. All have been in response to whitewash comments, an example of which is the most recent suggestion that Coulter's blood nose was contact with the ground. I haven't used words like "thuggish", that's a conclusion you've drawn. All commentators observe that players from both sides went outside the rules and were involved in scuffes. That's different from both being at fault. If a victim protects himself from an aggressor, or retaliates, that doesn't mean that the victim is at fault. I have no doubt in my mind that the AFL players set out to rough up the Irish players. They were at fault in doing that. I've equally no doubt that the GAA players stood up to them and retaliated. Both trying to blame the GAA players for the fights by accusing them of starting them and attributing equal blame to them is a bully's cop out and demands a response.
I have just watched the links.
McInerney didn't need it. He saw what happened and applied the appropriate penalty. The slow motion confirms that he got it right. You boast that you "have a copy on my PVR. (Have yet been unable to work out how to transfer this to a standard format )." If that's the case you'll know that there is no vision at all of any headbutts. You'll also know that neither of Quartermain nor Ger ?, the Irish commentator, were able to say that they had seen what happened to O'Keefe and that later in the commentry Quartermain says he "understands" that O'Keefe was headbutted but doesn't say where he gets his understanding from. You'll also know that there was not only no vision of any other incidents of headbutt, you use the plural so you must think that more than one such incident occurred, but nobody complained about them. To answer your jibe, though, yes, I did look for headbutt(s), very carefully. There were none.
If O'Keefe received high contact, then an offence must have been committed. No penalty was applied. Why not ? I'd say it was because nobody, especially not the umpires, saw it. You can't expect the umpires to penalise what they don't see and lack of vision means no trial by video.
.
So the alleged head butter watched the umpires and the cameras and when he was sure that nobody was watching, he went up to O'Keefe and headbutted him ? Other than that you desperately want to believe that O'Keefe was headbutted, why are you so adamant ? Lockhart may or may not have but, apart from the hysterics who post here and whose assertions don't stand up to scrutiny, like yours don't, there has been nothing reliable published anywhere that you know of.
