the tackle

[terry smith rules]

I don't understand why there has been no talk of mcguane getting sited.

If that was not unduly rough play not sure what is.

The ball was metres away and he held Nick and drove him into the ground.

I though there would have been more comments in the press on it. If doing that to a player only results in a free kick tehn I think that is wrong.

I am all infavour f tough hard footy but there was nothing tough about pinning a players arms and driving him into the ground.

And if they go on the damage done by the unduly rough play he must get a tleast 2 weeks

fqf

[Richter]

I haven't seen the replay but I must say that live it looked a pretty ordinary effort by McGuane.

[plugger66]

It was a tackle. Nothing in it at all.

[satchmo]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

[plugger66]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

Fancy tackling someone without the ball. Wait isnt that holding the man. Yes a free kick and that is it.

[Dan Warna]

6 weeks if baker did anything...

i hear they want to site him for that incident in the geelong v brisbane game

[plugger66]

6 weeks if baker did anything...

i hear they want to site him for that incident in the geelong v brisbane game

Get over it.

[SaintBot]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

Fancy tackling someone without the ball. Wait isnt that holding the man. Yes a free kick and that is it.

Do you oppose general opinion just for the sake of being different? Its getting rather boring and old seeing you disagree with everything anyone writes.

[Life Long Saint]

What I don't get, and this is where we need to get smarter, is that if Riewoldt was clearly injured why didn't someone else take the kick?

It was also a case of the umpire not playing the advantage rule. Hayes was away and running into an open goal. But the over officious moron in green decides to penalise the side and make a clearly inured player take a kick.

Riewoldt came off the ground as soon as he had the shot.

Poor decision making all round by the umps and the Saints.

[Spinner]

I don't understand why there has been no talk of mcguane getting sited.

If that was not unduly rough play not sure what is.

The ball was metres away and he held Nick and drove him into the ground.

I though there would have been more comments in the press on it. If doing that to a player only results in a free kick tehn I think that is wrong.

I am all infavour f tough hard footy but there was nothing tough about pinning a players arms and driving him into the ground.

And if they go on the damage done by the unduly rough play he must get a tleast 2 weeks

fqf

Caused unnecessary injury.....But the drop kicks in the media don't even mention it.

Its pathetic. He didn't have possession. McGuane should get 2 weeks for it.

[AlpineStars]

I already posted on another post the only intention of the Richmond player was to injure Reiwoldt the ball was well gone and it was disgraceful pinned arms and slammed into the deck there was a video distributed to clubs by the AFL regarding these tackles so I excpect it will be looked at.

[plugger66]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

Fancy tackling someone without the ball. Wait isnt that holding the man. Yes a free kick and that is it.

Do you oppose general opinion just for the sake of being different? Its getting rather boring and old seeing you disagree with everything anyone writes.

When it is crap I do. Dont read it or is it a rule that you cant be boring.

[spyglass]

What I don't get, and this is where we need to get smarter, is that if Riewoldt was clearly injured why didn't someone else take the kick?

It was also a case of the umpire not playing the advantage rule. Hayes was away and running into an open goal. But the over officious moron in green decides to penalise the side and make a clearly inured player take a kick.

Riewoldt came off the ground as soon as he had the shot.

Poor decision making all round by the umps and the Saints.

When Roo looked like he wasn't going to take the kick, the Ump actually signalled to Lenny to take it, but Roo obviously decided that he was ok to take it.

[saintwill66]

When Roo looked like he wasn't going to take the kick, the Ump actually signalled to Lenny to take it, but Roo obviously decided that he was ok to take it.

Yet another example of poor judgment by the skipper - he lacks confidence kicking for goals at the best of times let alone when he's injured his knee - if he was smart he would have opted for Lenny to take the kick.

[sainteronline]

I don't understand why there has been no talk of mcguane getting sited.

If that was not unduly rough play not sure what is.

The ball was metres away and he held Nick and drove him into the ground.

I though there would have been more comments in the press on it. If doing that to a player only results in a free kick tehn I think that is wrong.

I am all infavour f tough hard footy but there was nothing tough about pinning a players arms and driving him into the ground.

And if they go on the damage done by the unduly rough play he must get a tleast 2 weeks

fqf

Caused unnecessary injury.....But the drop kicks in the media don't even mention it.

Its pathetic. He didn't have possession. McGuane should get 2 weeks for it.

agreed

definatly "UNDULY ROUGH PLAY"

[derby Street]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

Fancy tackling someone without the ball. Wait isnt that holding the man. Yes a free kick and that is it.

Do you oppose general opinion just for the sake of being different? Its getting rather boring and old seeing you disagree with everything anyone writes.

When it is crap I do. Dont read it or is it a rule that you cant be boring.

Plugger like a lot others I am getting a little sick of your dribble. It is also actually a free kick if you punch someone in the head BUT WAIT you can also get reported for it. Perhaps every team can target all the opposition key players and pound them into the ground when they haven't got the ball - after all it is only free kick for holding the man. That should make things interesting.
This incident with Nick was the same unecessary act as the one done on Lenny by one of the the KRAY twins. I suppose you thought that was fair enough too !

[perfectionist]

The incident is worth looking at but relies on the panel reaching a conclusion about the player's motives, which they may be reluctant to do. I have no doubt, like others, that he meant to injure Nick - and he succeeded. That is Unduly Rough Play and deserves time.

I also agree that Nick showed woeful judgement in taking the kick. Not only was he never going to kick it properly but he risked doing a "Buckenara" in the process since he injured his left knee.

[Life Long Saint]

When Roo looked like he wasn't going to take the kick, the Ump actually signalled to Lenny to take it, but Roo obviously decided that he was ok to take it.

Maybe he was concussed too.

His expectation exceeds his ability at the best of times...It would have been goal of the century had he kicked that on one leg. That was clearly not one of his smarter decisions.

[Carl Mynott]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

Fancy tackling someone without the ball. Wait isnt that holding the man. Yes a free kick and that is it.

Do you oppose general opinion just for the sake of being different? Its getting rather boring and old seeing you disagree with everything anyone writes.

Just ignore the idiot......................i do

[plugger66]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

Fancy tackling someone without the ball. Wait isnt that holding the man. Yes a free kick and that is it.

Do you oppose general opinion just for the sake of being different? Its getting rather boring and old seeing you disagree with everything anyone writes.

Just ignore the idiot......................i do

Idiot. Very clever. You must have finished year 5 at least to think of something like that.

[Carl Mynott]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

Fancy tackling someone without the ball. Wait isnt that holding the man. Yes a free kick and that is it.

Do you oppose general opinion just for the sake of being different? Its getting rather boring and old seeing you disagree with everything anyone writes.

Just ignore the idiot......................i do

Idiot. Very clever. You must have finished year 5 at least to think of something like that.

It's a conclusion i came to after reading 3000 of your posts........


keep up the consistency.....

[Lennon]

When Roo looked like he wasn't going to take the kick, the Ump actually signalled to Lenny to take it, but Roo obviously decided that he was ok to take it.

Yet another example of poor judgment by the skipper - he lacks confidence kicking for goals at the best of times let alone when he's injured his knee - if he was smart he would have opted for Lenny to take the kick.

"Yet another example of poor judgment"? So what are the hundreds of other examples? Your tone implies there are many indeed.

I don't think Lenny would have made the distance, personally.

Roo's kick, with his injured leg, did so easily, was just off-line.

Probably he didn't want to believe the extent of the injury until then, looked pretty keen to stay on before that, but went straight off grimacing after he tried the kick.

[plugger66]

Nothing in it at all.

Especially not the ball.

Fancy tackling someone without the ball. Wait isnt that holding the man. Yes a free kick and that is it.

Do you oppose general opinion just for the sake of being different? Its getting rather boring and old seeing you disagree with everything anyone writes.

Just ignore the idiot......................i do

Idiot. Very clever. You must have finished year 5 at least to think of something like that.

It's a conclusion i came to after reading 3000 of your posts........


keep up the consistency.....

Ignoring Me. Confused. And i'm an idiot you read 3000 of my posts.

[kp83]

Get over it.

Spot on.

It was a tackle deserving of a free kick...which is what we got.

You can't cite every player who causes an injury in a tackle.

[st.byron]

It was a tackle. Nothing in it at all.

agree. If one of our guys had laid a tackle like that we'd be applauding him. Nothing in it. Just bad luck