Post Match. Pies demolish Dees. All comments.

[Gerry Cooper]

For the preliminary ill select a line up like this:

FB: Frampton Moore Quaynor
CB: Maynard Murphy Crisp
C: Josh Daicos Pendles Nick Daicos
CF: Hill Checkers McCreery
FF: Elliott McStay Adams
R: Cox JDG Mitchell
INT: Cameron WHE Side Howe
SUB: Ginny

If Maynard is rubbed out then Howe takes his spot on CB and Lipinski comes in.

Good to have Nick back as well.

No Oleg lol

[slangman]

Act of making vs a spoil. But I agree. I’d be using similar examples. Someone going for a big mark then collecting a player is a football act. The argument comes down to, was it careless or a football act. Dunno. I’m expecting 3 weeks.

Hypothetically, if Maynard got a fingertip on the ball and then collected Brayshaw would that influence the outcome?….

The footage shows Maynard more so landing on Brayshaw than cannoning into him as Pickett did with his hit on Bailey Smith earlier this year. Pickett ONLY received a two game suspension which was a far worse act than Maynards.

… Except Pickett’s ‘victim’ got up and played on from memory. Like it or not, Brayshaw getting stretchered off will have some bearing.

So the player that you collide with's history of concussion has a bearing on the outcome?
Thats a pandoras box that if opened will get legally very messy.

[piffdog]

Hypothetically, if Maynard got a fingertip on the ball and then collected Brayshaw would that influence the outcome?….

The footage shows Maynard more so landing on Brayshaw than cannoning into him as Pickett did with his hit on Bailey Smith earlier this year. Pickett ONLY received a two game suspension which was a far worse act than Maynards.

… Except Pickett’s ‘victim’ got up and played on from memory. Like it or not, Brayshaw getting stretchered off will have some bearing.

So the player that you collide with's history of concussion has a bearing on the outcome?
Thats a pandoras box that if opened will get legally very messy.

Don’t conflate his *history* of concussion - that’s got nothing to do with it. He was concussed from that incident on the night. Fact. And you’re living under a rock if you don’t think that the medical outcome of the player being hit has no bearing. Picket would have got more if the guy was subbed off for concussion.

It may well be messy from a legal perspective but the outcome has played a part in judicial decisions for several years.

[Meredith1965]

I always thought Hiss was a spoof account

I, er, think that might be the case. Whether spoof or genuine original, he is the funniest thing on here by miles.

[Gerry Cooper]

I always thought Hiss was a spoof account

I, er, think that might be the case. Whether spoof or genuine original, he is the funniest thing on here by miles.

Hiss didnt fight in 47 wars to be made fun of on this board! He's been at every home game since 1892!

[Haff]

I always thought Hiss was a spoof account

I, er, think that might be the case. Whether spoof or genuine original, he is the funniest thing on here by miles.

+1 makes my day every post

[Meredith1965]

^that would be interesting wouldn’t it. What would happen if he fully smothered it then braced for impact?
Don’t envy MC at all here.

MC and/or the tribunal just needs to show some balls and accept that ordinary football acts which were not intended to make contact with the player are part of the game and not an offence. Suspension cannot be as a result of ordinary play, otherwise it is a lottery and a travesty of justice.

[lazzadesilva]

I don’t know why the history of the injured player has anything to do with it. I mean if a player is struck on the field, what relevance would the amount of times he has been struck before have to do with the outcome? Surely the penalty doesn’t increase if the fact is that the player has been struck before? Duhh………..

[lazzadesilva]

^that would be interesting wouldn’t it. What would happen if he fully smothered it then braced for impact?
Don’t envy MC at all here.

MC and/or the tribunal just needs to show some balls and accept that ordinary football acts which were not intended to make contact with the player are part of the game and not an offence. Suspension cannot be as a result of ordinary play, otherwise it is a lottery and a travesty of justice.

Exactly. Otherwise it will just become yet another non contact sport

[Gerry Cooper]

Has anyone else noticed some of our ruck work in the first half? Both Cameron and Cox at times were either punching or slapping the ball hard into the turf so it bounced out of the immediate close contest around the bounce? That's something I haven't seen much before and it was quite effective at times.

[K]

Why is everyone going on about Melbourne’s bad goal kicking? Elliott missed 2 in the first qtr as did Mihocek. Kick a couple of those and the match is over at qtr time.

Nah... Melbourne's misses were a lot more and a lot worse than those.

[What'sinaname]

Why is everyone going on about Melbourne’s bad goal kicking? Elliott missed 2 in the first qtr as did Mihocek. Kick a couple of those and the match is over at qtr time.

Nah... Melbourne's misses were a lot more and a lot worse than those.

You're both right.

[K]

...
For talk of Melbourne's inaccuracy, they kicked 7.8 and we rushed 3. Other than Fritch's howler their kicking was bad without being atrocious. Quite a few of those misses, including the OOFs were under pressure - real and perceived.

No, disagree. It was atrocious. We got lucky.

Re "7.8 and we rushed 3", that's like the bogus free-kick count argument. (There's no reason free kicks should be split 50-50 all the time.) It's expected goals that counts, not whether the mix of goals and behinds looks okay.

[doriswilgus]

...
For talk of Melbourne's inaccuracy, they kicked 7.8 and we rushed 3. Other than Fritch's howler their kicking was bad without being atrocious. Quite a few of those misses, including the OOFs were under pressure - real and perceived.

No, disagree. It was atrocious. We got lucky.

Re "7.8 and we rushed 3", that's like the bogus free-kick count argument. (There's no reason free kicks should be split 50-50 all the time.) It's expected goals that counts, not whether the mix of goals and behinds looks okay.

Melbourne always kick like that,They have no forward line to speak of,and are terrible converters.Why do people always assume that they were unlucky and that they’ll magically kick better the next time they play us?It just won’t happen.

[K]

Yep, Doris, they have no forward line... But Fritsch is usually deadly accurate.

It's not unlucky when they don't get I50 marks. It is unlucky they stuffed up the shots so badly.

Also unlucky with injuries to Petty, Melksham, McDonald, Fritsch. (Last two are back, of course. But McDonald so rusty, he looked almost as bad as Grundy. Almost.) Petty kicked a lazy 6 his first time forward. Next week, season-ending injury. And Melksham made them much better. Last week, possibly career-ending ACL injury.


Looking ahead... We're "lucky" most finals opponents have bad forward lines. At most one good forward. (e.g. Curnow, Toby, ...)

Port are very Melbourne-like. Star-studded midfield. No forward line. Brissy are the huge exception. Big Joe, C. Cameron, Raynor, Hipwood, ...