In defense of Hall

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Young Blood
    On the rise
    • Apr 2005
    • 541

    In defense of Hall

    Yes it was indisciplined but did not deserve 150m or the consequent attention it will receive.

    First 50 - not there. If this hadn't been paid, end of story.
    Second 50 - technically there but should not have been paid - Roughead initiated contact then acted for all he was worth
    Third 50 - guilty, your honour

    I'm sad that this is likely to damage his recovery, quite possibly terminally (for his career). Clearly he has his troubles, and this undeserved attention is not going to help his mental state.

    PS What odds that he'll still be on 'One week at a time' on Monday??
  • satchmopugdog
    Bandicoots ears
    • Apr 2004
    • 3691

    #2
    There are times when I feel sorry for him.

    He didn't mean to hurt that Xavier Ellis ..that was unfortunate.

    He is crucified by the umpies at times..

    but I still don't like him.
    "The Dog days are over, The Dog days are gone" Florence and the Machine

    Comment

    • Bear
      Best and Fairest
      • Feb 2003
      • 1022

      #3
      Originally posted by Young Blood
      Yes it was indisciplined but did not deserve 150m or the consequent attention it will receive.

      First 50 - not there. If this hadn't been paid, end of story.
      Second 50 - technically there but should not have been paid - Roughead initiated contact then acted for all he was worth
      Third 50 - guilty, your honour

      I'm sad that this is likely to damage his recovery, quite possibly terminally (for his career). Clearly he has his troubles, and this undeserved attention is not going to help his mental state.

      PS What odds that he'll still be on 'One week at a time' on Monday??
      One-eyed stupidity.
      "As a player he simply should not have been able to do the things he did. Leo was a 185cm, 88kg full-back and played on some of the biggest, fastest and best full-forwards of all time, and constantly beat them." Roos.
      Leo Barry? you star! We'll miss ya, ''Leapin''.

      Comment

      • Bloodlines
        On the Rookie List
        • Jan 2008
        • 29

        #4
        Hally should have got a free because his arm was being held. But he behaves like such a pork chop the umpires just ignore him. But that being said he is a highly paid player and should know how to control himself. That was a 12 point brain explosion. He lost us the game At the time we had all the momentum.took us about five minutes to get the air back in the team and start going forward again. In replays I saw a little Hally chin music being administered which could see him having a holiday.
        Mickey was stiffed about three times in front of goal as well.
        Up in our seats we call Reg "apple" as in turnover. Is he really the best on the list of up and comers? PS he is a terrible defender

        Comment

        • R&WtilIDie
          Blood 4 ever
          • Oct 2007
          • 105

          #5
          Originally posted by Young Blood
          Yes it was indisciplined but did not deserve 150m or the consequent attention it will receive.

          First 50 - not there. If this hadn't been paid, end of story.
          Second 50 - technically there but should not have been paid - Roughead initiated contact then acted for all he was worth
          Third 50 - guilty, your honour

          I'm sad that this is likely to damage his recovery, quite possibly terminally (for his career). Clearly he has his troubles, and this undeserved attention is not going to help his mental state.

          PS What odds that he'll still be on 'One week at a time' on Monday??
          Agree completely. The first 50 was for the f-bomb he dropped. meh. too precious. i hate those 50's. I don't think it's terminal though. Roosy isn't prone to hysteria.

          Comment

          • Xie Shan
            Senior Player
            • Jan 2003
            • 2929

            #6
            Originally posted by satchmopugdog
            There are times when I feel sorry for him.

            He didn't mean to hurt that Xavier Ellis ..that was unfortunate.

            He is crucified by the umpies at times..

            but I still don't like him.
            Fair summation satch. He can still be a pretty good player when he puts his head down and contributes to the cause but even if the three 50s were excessive, he really should know better by now and it cost the team dearly today when it looked as if we were headed for victory. A real heartbreaker, especially for the younger guys, because I thought it was terrific team effort today. There were mistakes yes but the application was there the whole way.

            I think he cost himself any chance of a contract extension today, and perhaps that's a good thing as we need to be exploring new forward options.

            Still he's given us great service over the years and we wouldn't have won a flag without him.

            Comment

            • Robbo
              On the Rookie List
              • May 2007
              • 2946

              #7
              He should of just STOOD THE MARK AND DONE NOTHING. This makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the umpires to ping you for more infringements. If he had of stood still and said nothing then the umpires CAN'T do anything. That's the bottom line.

              Comment

              • Mogg0
                On the Rookie List
                • Sep 2006
                • 211

                #8
                You're not taking into account the emotion he plays with. Clearly, he plays with plenty.

                We can all sit back and say what he should have done, but it's pretty worthless coming from us.
                Grandson of South Melbourne legend Keith Schaefer.

                Comment

                • pinkemu
                  Silver member, not Gold
                  • Sep 2006
                  • 419

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Bear
                  One-eyed stupidity.
                  Stupid reply

                  Comment

                  • Puppy Eyes
                    Pushing for Selection
                    • Apr 2009
                    • 85

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Robbo
                    He should of just STOOD THE MARK AND DONE NOTHING. This makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the umpires to ping you for more infringements. If he had of stood still and said nothing then the umpires CAN'T do anything. That's the bottom line.
                    Ever played football, Robbo? I just love these comments on blogs on what people should have done. HIS ARM WAS BEING HELD IN A MARKING CONTEST!!! Once again, he wasn't given a fair chance in a contest. 4 frees against. 0 frees for.

                    Comment

                    • ROK Lobster
                      RWO Life Member
                      • Aug 2004
                      • 8658

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Puppy Eyes
                      Ever played football, Robbo? I just love these comments on blogs on what people should have done. HIS ARM WAS BEING HELD IN A MARKING CONTEST!!! Once again, he wasn't given a fair chance in a contest. 4 frees against. 0 frees for.
                      When he was looking to take the mark and put the team well into the lead.

                      Comment

                      • Robbo
                        On the Rookie List
                        • May 2007
                        • 2946

                        #12
                        But the point is, once an umpire has made a decision, no amount of crying or tantrum throwing is going to change his mind.....therefore you don't, I repeat....DON'T throw tantrums. That is the bottom line.

                        Playing football with emotion can be great, but clearly he can't keep his emotions in check, therefore it's a problem for him.

                        And yes I have played football, I still play football. When an umpire makes a decision, it means he has made a decision. As a player all you can do is get on with playing the game.

                        Comment

                        • 573v30
                          On the bandwagon...
                          • Sep 2005
                          • 5017

                          #13
                          It's hard not to throw a tantrum when umpires repeatedly make stupid decisions or crucify you to the point you want to knock out an opponent.

                          It wouldn't surprise me if he kicks a bagful next round and we all love him again, like we did last week.
                          I only support one team: The SYDNEY SWANS!!!!! :adore

                          Comment

                          • Puppy Eyes
                            Pushing for Selection
                            • Apr 2009
                            • 85

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Robbo
                            But the point is, once an umpire has made a decision, no amount of crying or tantrum throwing is going to change his mind.....therefore you don't, I repeat....DON'T throw tantrums. That is the bottom line.

                            Playing football with emotion can be great, but clearly he can't keep his emotions in check, therefore it's a problem for him.

                            And yes I have played football, I still play football. When an umpire makes a decision, it means he has made a decision. As a player all you can do is get on with playing the game.
                            He said 5 words. "He was holding my arm". That's it. If that was 50m, you'd have 50 of them per match. Tell me you've never protested an incorrect decision.

                            Comment

                            • Young Blood
                              On the rise
                              • Apr 2005
                              • 541

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Robbo
                              He should of just STOOD THE MARK AND DONE NOTHING. This makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the umpires to ping you for more infringements. If he had of stood still and said nothing then the umpires CAN'T do anything. That's the bottom line.
                              I don't really disagree with this. But I also believe the punishment didn't match the crime, and I fear that the resulting attention will further damage Hall's seemingly fragile psyche. He shouldn't be hung, drawn and quartered for a relatively minor disciplinary breach.

                              Comment

                              Working...