Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
BigMart wrote:The really was only one sad thing to come out of that incident. And only 1 victim.... The other was self inflicted...
His object was to knock Greening out, illegally.... It was callous and malicious....
It's that simple really!
Leigh Matthews incident was no different! Disgusting, and he's admitted as such!
Not sure how you know that he wanted "to knock Greening out"??
"Callous and malicious", again a bit difficult to state without ANY evidence.
Who "admitted as such", Matthews or O'Dea??
Yes, outcome was self inflicted, but the rest of your comments, I believe, are baseless.
Give me one flag & I'll go to my grave a happy man.
It's probably the most scrutinised incident in VFL history.... Do some research....
John Greening has an interesting take on it.... I think he believes it was callous and malicious, as do the reporters, supporters and players who have commented on it.
And please do tell
Why do you 'king hit' a person?
I would suggest to incapacitate him?
WTF do you obsessively respond minutes after anything I post? I don't read your replies, if I did I wouldn't consider them....
You need to get a life and stop stalking me....
As i have said many times I dont have you on ignore and if I think you have written rubbish i will reply and in this case I think it was clearly rubbish. You on the other hand have me on ignore but cant ignore me. it seems you are the one who is stalking.
BigMart wrote:It's probably the most scrutinised incident in VFL history.... Do some research....
John Greening has an interesting take on it.... I think he believes it was callous and malicious, as do the reporters, supporters and players who have commented on it.
And please do tell
Why do you 'king hit' a person?
I would suggest to incapacitate him?
None of this gives me any further comfort on your knowledge of the incident.
If you did some research you would know there has NEVER been any evidence, be it video footage or even a photo. Even those who told the tribunal they saw it had differing versions.
Reporters, supporters and players' comments are just that, comments. No evidence, no basis. If I tallied all those people who said they saw it, there would have been in excess of 165,000 at that ground that day. Additionally, 20%-30% of those would have been less than 5 years old or not even born when they saw what happened.
Give me one flag & I'll go to my grave a happy man.
Had contact with both parties late 70's to early 80's
Had a couple of drinks with Jimmy and a seconds player who finished up a journo (BILL CANNON?)
Jimmy had copped an elbow to the head in the previous days game but described it as "perfect shirtfront, just wish I was on the other end of it!"
Greening on the other hand was a pissweak bookmaker at the greyhounds who I had no time for at all.
If it makes people sleep easier, then continue living in fairy land.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
So Greening was felled legitimately.... No wher near the footy?!
Ok..... I believe that.... A guy who ATT was the best player in the VFL just happened to end up in hospital...
Is there any lengths some wont go to to 'loyally' support our 'boys'
FFS
I've actually played a bit (in Tassie in the 80's onwards when that crap was common) and understand what the reasons people are felled off the ball.... And it isn't to not to say hello... Generally it's a thug trying to take out a star....
Was Greening weak, because his body reacted the way it did from being king hit? Perhaps the weak prick should have just got up and run it off?
Why can't it just be accepted that it was a dog act and its not worth defending.... It was a low moment in StK history
BigMart wrote:So Greening was felled legitimately.... No wher near the footy?!
Ok..... I believe that.... A guy who ATT was the best player in the VFL just happened to end up in hospital...
Is there any lengths some wont go to to 'loyally' support our 'boys'
Please point out a single quote from anybody in this thread that would cause you to post this errant crap.
You weren't there.
You've never seen vision of the incident, because there is none.
The only 'facts' you know are those you've heard from people who were either not there or didn't see the incident and yet you are willing to categorically 'call' what happened.
BTW, Greening has never said what happened because apparently he cannot remember.
So the only person who really knows what happened is O'Dea, and he has never publicly spoken about it.
I don't agree with your definition.
I believe there needs to be a pre-meditated intent for it to be classified as a 'king hit'.
ala Matthews on Bruns
ala Hall on Staker
ala Hall on Goose, although the blow was to the body rather than the head.
BigMart wrote:So Greening was felled legitimately.... No wher near the footy?!
Ok..... I believe that.... A guy who ATT was the best player in the VFL just happened to end up in hospital...
Is there any lengths some wont go to to 'loyally' support our 'boys'
FFS
I've actually played a bit (in Tassie in the 80's onwards when that crap was common) and understand what the reasons people are felled off the ball.... And it isn't to not to say hello... Generally it's a thug trying to take out a star....
Was Greening weak, because his body reacted the way it did from being king hit? Perhaps the weak prick should have just got up and run it off?
Why can't it just be accepted that it was a dog act and its not worth defending.... It was a low moment in StK history
Your words were his objective was to knock greening out. You or others wouldnt have a clue if that was his objurctive. it is made up rubbish. I certainly aint defending O'Dea and never have but not knowing what was in his mind i would never suggest his motive was to knock him out. Does that mean every player who hits someone behind play wants to knock someone out? Very doubtful. Matter of fact te answer is most certainly no. Kosi elbowed someone this year behind play. Dont think he was trying to knock him out. maybe O'Dea did exactly the same thing but got him somewhere in the head that caused injury. Unless O'Dea has told you that was his objective then you certainly shouldnt say it.
BigMart wrote:So Greening was felled legitimately.... No wher near the footy?!
Ok..... I believe that.... A guy who ATT was the best player in the VFL just happened to end up in hospital...
Is there any lengths some wont go to to 'loyally' support our 'boys'
FFS
I've actually played a bit (in Tassie in the 80's onwards when that crap was common) and understand what the reasons people are felled off the ball.... And it isn't to not to say hello... Generally it's a thug trying to take out a star....
Was Greening weak, because his body reacted the way it did from being king hit? Perhaps the weak prick should have just got up and run it off?
Why can't it just be accepted that it was a dog act and its not worth defending.... It was a low moment in StK history
Can I suggest that a king hit might not just be to take out a star, it might be to take out a really, really really unlikeable bloke...just saying.
His objective was to hit him in the head,,anytime you hit someone on the head especially with intent and force you stand a fair chance of knocking them out!
PADDLEPOP1001 wrote:His objective was to hit him in the head,,anytime you hit someone on the head especially with intent and force you stand a fair chance of knocking them out!
He we go, another one who both saw the incident and heard from O'Dea what his intent was.
We all have some idea of the what may have transpired, but it annoys the bejesus out of me when people make statements without basis or fact.
Give me one flag & I'll go to my grave a happy man.
PADDLEPOP1001 wrote:His objective was to hit him in the head,,anytime you hit someone on the head especially with intent and force you stand a fair chance of knocking them out!
He we go, another one who both saw the incident and heard from O'Dea what his intent was.
We all have some idea of the what may have transpired, but it annoys the bejesus out of me when people make statements without basis or fact.
Well he certainly didn"t have an eppeleptic seizure!
PADDLEPOP1001 wrote:His objective was to hit him in the head,,anytime you hit someone on the head especially with intent and force you stand a fair chance of knocking them out!
He we go, another one who both saw the incident and heard from O'Dea what his intent was.
We all have some idea of the what may have transpired, but it annoys the bejesus out of me when people make statements without basis or fact.
Well he certainly didn"t have an eppeleptic seizure!
No he didnt. he got hit in the head by O'Dea but like BM how do you know that was his objective?
