so now we tunnell

[ShockOfHair]

I disagree. I think Roos and the club have handled it very well. The last thing we want is a public slanging match that will give oxygen to this BS non-story. Roos has had enough distractions this season already without getting embroiled in one more.

I see Realfooty has the gall to run a story on this with a graphic of a swans player getting under the legs of a saints player.

Roos says Ross Lyon is fine about the whole issue, which suggests that Archie Fraser is out there on his own on this one.

[BSA5]

But, if a player is running along side or behind the leading player who leaps for the ball, and then uses his body to push him off balance mid flight, that's another story.

But if a forward jumps in the air, then he will slow down, so if he jumps too early, like Riewoldt did on a number of occasions, the defender will of course catch up and end up underneath the forward. That's what happened with Bolton and Riewoldt. Riewoldt jumped, he hung in the air for too long, allowing Bolton to catch up, and when he came down, his legs got tangled with Bolton's arm. Now, the situation could have been avoided if Bolton had stopped, but you can't ask a player to simply stop. That's ridiculous. Bolton maintained his line, maintained his speed, and had eyes for the footy. There was no pushing off balance in mid flight. All there was was Riewoldt landing on Bolton.

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

I'm glad that most on RWO have seen the incident for what it was, unlike the crap that's been posted on bigfooty about it

It is interesting that it is only fans of clubs with an axe to grind with us (ie Eagles, Saints) are the only ones dishing it out. Wankers!

JF

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

Spot on Liz. Why Roos always tries to play the nice guy on all these slurs angers me a little. We've seen so far this season - only to round 1 - allegations that Roos has sent instructions out to throw a match and that our number 1 defender uses illegal tactics to unsettle and maybe injure a key forward from St Kilda. The clear inference is that Roos is behind that tactic as well. I suppose you could add the Demetriou comments in 2005 into the mix.

Surely the Swans as a club should start to stand up for themselves a bit. Where is the support from Colless?

Roos may say he has nothing against St Kilda but I am sure privately he and the club are seething. So why not make those feelings public? Is it because we are separated from the football cocoon this is Melbourne? I am sure the likes of Malthouse and Matthews would not be so pleasant is dealing with such a slur.

Could you imagine how Eddie would have reacted had that said that somebody like Wakelin was engaging in 'illegal conduct'? It would have been all over the media with the Saints guy having to publicly retract his statement through the embarrassment & negative publicity.

Let's hope the attention given to Riewoldt only results in teams getting fed up with it all & creaming him, legally of course.

Then widdle Nickie will see what happens when a club chief executive opens his mouth in the way this Archie character has done over the last 48 hours.

JF

[Wardy]

It is all getting a bit silly isnt it - and I agree with Liz - this "taking it on the chin" rubbish is becoming tiresome. It is getting to the point that everything a Swans player does will be put under the microscope. For fear of sounding like a paranoid old bat, one could be forgiven in thinking that perhaps a memo went around from our besties at AFL house to the 15 other clubs to "keep a look out for anything untoward and report back to control headquarters". .
I'm keen to see what comes about in the next few weeks - whether it is determined that the Swans are responsible for Global Warming or rising petrol prices - because if Vlad and his sidekick could pin it on us, they would.

[Lucky Knickers]

I'm not sick of Paul - he comes across as being dignified. Why should be lower himself to the level of StK or the AFL? I feel a bit sorry for Reiwoldt - he's probably majorly embarassed about the furore and there isn't a peep out of him on the issue.
The way issues are presented in the media, particularly print, are deliberately inflammatory and this is a case in point. Look at the accompanying headlines. What was really disgusting is that stupid diagram that accompanied the articles giving it a pseudo-scientific feel and therefore making the great unwashed over at Big Footy believe there was real evidence of this.
Good on Johno Brown in todays Real Footy section sticking up for Bolts. Makes StK and Richo look like sooks.

[ScottH]

Interesting the Umps didn't see anything untoward on Sat nite.
Maybe they were too busy looking for chopping arms.

Has The Geisch said anything from an Umps POV yet?

I just had a read on the saints thread on BF. Sheesh, don't bother going there it's not worth it, they bring up the "sydney rugby" thing in the first post. Obviously understanding more than one code of footy is beyond those poor souls.

[Wardy]

I know - next week the Swans will be be put under the microscope for bad hair styles.

[swantastic]

Interesting the Umps didn't see anything untoward on Sat nite.
Maybe they were too busy looking for chopping arms.

Has The Geisch said anything from an Umps POV yet?

I just had a read on the saints thread on BF. Sheesh, don't bother going there it's not worth it, they bring up the "sydney rugby" thing in the first post. Obviously understanding more than one code of footy is beyond those poor souls.

Thise nuff-nuffs on little footy aints are very scathing on the Swans and B2,and Swans supporters know nothing

IMHO B2 and the Swans should take the Aints to court and sue them for dragging B2's good name through the mud.

[goswannie14]

I just had a read on the saints thread on BF. Sheesh, don't bother going there it's not worth it, they bring up the "sydney rugby" thing in the first post. Obviously understanding more than one code of footy is beyond those poor souls.

Thise nuff-nuffs on little footy aints are very scathing on the Swans and B2,and Swans supporters know nothing

Shouldn't these comments be in the "Cashed Up Bogans" thread?

[swantastic]

Why Roos always tries to play the nice guy on all these slurs angers me a little. We've seen so far this season - only to round 1 - allegations that Roos has sent instructions out to throw a match and that our number 1 defender uses illegal tactics to unsettle and maybe injure a key forward from St Kilda. The clear inference is that Roos is behind that tactic as well. I suppose you could add the Demetriou comments in 2005 into the mix.

Surely the Swans as a club should start to stand up for themselves a bit. Where is the support from Colless?

Roos may say he has nothing against St Kilda but I am sure privately he and the club are seething. So why not make those feelings public? Is it because we are separated from the football cocoon this is Melbourne? I am sure the likes of Malthouse and Matthews would not be so pleasant is dealing with such a slur.

Not bad there hammo and i agree with you 150%,the Swans need to grow some balls and have a go back.

I reckon Demetriou is seething over Roosy getting off on the match fixing allegations and the little matter of the ugly 2005 premership and is now head hunting the Swans and Roosy.

[Chow-Chicker]

But if a forward jumps in the air, then he will slow down, so if he jumps too early, like Riewoldt did on a number of occasions, the defender will of course catch up and end up underneath the forward. That's what happened with Bolton and Riewoldt. Riewoldt jumped, he hung in the air for too long, allowing Bolton to catch up, and when he came down, his legs got tangled with Bolton's arm. Now, the situation could have been avoided if Bolton had stopped, but you can't ask a player to simply stop. That's ridiculous. Bolton maintained his line, maintained his speed, and had eyes for the footy. There was no pushing off balance in mid flight. All there was was Riewoldt landing on Bolton.

Lets forget the Bolton / Reiwoldt example for a second. There is a potential problem if players are deliberately employing this tactic to throw the leaping player off balance. That's the issue......whether it is a deliberate tactic to take the player out of the contest. The difficulty is for the umpires to determine whether the player's only intention was to do so. I am not arguing the point of whether Bolton was guilty of it or not.

[goswannie14]

Lets forget the Bolton / Reiwoldt example for a second. There is a potential problem if players are deliberately employing this tactic to throw the leaping player off balance. That's the issue......whether it is a deliberate tactic to take the player out of the contest. The difficulty is for the umpires to determine whether the player's only intention was to do so. I am not arguing the point of whether Bolton was guilty of it or not.

The other problem is that of players leaping early, or with no hope of completing a mark. This then stops the defenders from having any chance of playing the ball.

[swansrule100]

if a defender cannot pressure a player for risk of injury then soon enough wont we have to outlaw tackling, bumping and anything else that may risk injury?

[goswannie14]

A player leaping early, with no realistic chance of marking, and landing on their opponent will have a free kick paid against them.

Agreed, that's what should happen, but it is usually only paid when the player flies from behind. Not as was the case with Riewoldt on saturday night.

As long as the umpires are consistent I don't mind what they call, the problem is the inconsistency of the umpires.