Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 41

Thread: #AFL Round 17 Weekly Discussion Thread

  1. #25
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    8,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Hotpotato View Post
    Giants have brought a similar intensity and urgency and are giving a genuine contest.

    Watching on mute so I can read a book as well and noticing that in today’s contested footy kicking to a pack of 4 or more rarely results in a mark being taken.... even by bean poles.

    The exception is someone like Jack R. using both hands on someone’s shoulder to propel himself higher . Is that still technically legal?
    I think it is as long as you take the mark. I think this aspect of the rule was clarified in Capper's glory days because he used his hands quite a bit to propel himself......but Jack's example tonight was borderline infringement as he completely shoved Davis out of the contest.
    Last edited by stevoswan; 14th July 2018 at 10:49 PM.

  2. #26
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    8,177
    Giants win by two points......bloody good game in the end.

  3. #27
    That’s how I like it played .

    Very attractive, both teams playing desperately and quickly.

    Really happy for the Giants to win this .

  4. #28
    The old Boiler! Wardy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Goulburn NSW
    Posts
    6,676
    The giants winning might put the tigers back in their box for a while - I do love it when the Hawkes and the Tigers get beaten on the same day.

  5. #29
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    This continues the Tigers’ run of being unable to win outside Victoria. It may not matter for them in the end, but might put the dampeners on certain footy journalists declaring them a super team. A super team ought to be able to win the occasional game on the road.

  6. #30
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Castlemaine, Vic.
    Posts
    8,177
    With their run home, ie: pretty easy, the Tigers will likely finish top two so away form is of no concern to them I would imagine.....cosy in the knowledge that if they keep winning at home, they win the premiership.

  7. #31
    But if they lose their first final ...

  8. #32
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,732
    Confession: I went to the Giants game tonight, as my partner likes the Tigers (without being a fan as such) and this was their only Sydney outing.
    I rather enjoyed it, close exciting game but without the stress of it being your team. Gee, Tigers fans are an entitled bunch though. Never heard so many complaints about completely fair and legitimate things like your opponent tackling, or contesting the ball. It was worth going just to hear them fall silent at the end

  9. #33
    Tigers produce another super-human 4th quarter. 4 goals to 1.
    Doesn't seem natural to me.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I get the feeling the giants are better off without Patton.

  10. #34
    Regular in the Side
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    949
    One comment I saw recently was that each Melbourne team has to play one home game at Etihad. Building on that why can we not have a rule that each non MCG tenant has to play one home game each year at the MCG against a non MCG tenant. This would go some way in negating the finals favouritism that each MCG tenant enjoys seeing that it looks like the Grand Final will be played at the MCG for the next one hundred years or so. Still would mean more travel for non Victorian teams but would start to level the playing field a little.

  11. #35
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    16,393
    Quote Originally Posted by rb4x View Post
    One comment I saw recently was that each Melbourne team has to play one home game at Etihad. Building on that why can we not have a rule that each non MCG tenant has to play one home game each year at the MCG against a non MCG tenant. This would go some way in negating the finals favouritism that each MCG tenant enjoys seeing that it looks like the Grand Final will be played at the MCG for the next one hundred years or so. Still would mean more travel for non Victorian teams but would start to level the playing field a little.
    I'm not sure why the non MCG tenants need to play MCG games against other non-tenants. There are plenty of away games in each team's schedule for each non-MCG tenant to play several games at the MCG each year (with priority to be awarded to those who finished the prior season high on the ladder). I think we got to play four or five games at the MCG last season but this year it was cut to just the two, and we were drawn to play an MCG tenant (Richmond) at Etihad.

  12. #36
    The MCG is a political hotbed in Victoria. No logic when it's treated like a religion.

    The MCG trust must be the most politically astute people on earth. Has any other patch of grass and concrete ever been elevated to such high levels before.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Let them pray to their fake dietie.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO