Yep, no question that was there.
Finals
Collapse
X
-
-
Not surprised one bit. The elephant in the room will get bigger n bigger as the years go by n as we get closer to the MCG contract ending n then they'll have no choice to change things or say goodbye to MCG grand finals.Comment
-
I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his timeComment
-
It's pretty exhilarating playing finals from outside the top four. I like it, and it appears the players do as well.Comment
-
I just pressed the button on the AFL site, on the poll about who wins next week, between us and Geelong. I was expecting around a 60/40 split in our favour, but if you can trust the figures, of the 22,000 voter so far, 87% think that we'll win.Comment
-
Lets not get ahead of ourselves. 19,140 people could be wrong.Comment
-
On the Footy Show this morning the showed Mitchell dribbling spit next to the head of a Port player on the ground. What a putrid grub.Comment
-
Re another 'controversial' umpire's call in the same match, I've watched the Wingard goal that was sent to video review several times. To me, the ball was clearly touched as the ball was on Wingard's boot. But then equally clearly Wingard's boot continued to make contact with the ball after the touch and so the goal was the correct decision.
Port should have won that match, they only have themselves to blame for poor goal kicking and some poor field decisions.Comment
-
That one was a goal too imo Meg.
Fingers left the ball while Wingard was still in contact.
Port gave that game away although Jetta was pretty critical in extra time to swing it back around. Shame for Dixon he missed so many, he was immense.
No issue with the Eddie Betts chase down of Lobb from me either.He ate more cheese, than time allowedComment
-
I'm not sure about the Betts' tackle. Originally he was in the protected area behind Lobb because he was following a GWS player within 2 metres which I think was ok. But then he turned and chased a second player while still within the protected zone which I would have thought was not ok. And it was while he was doing that the umpire called play-on which led Betts to change direction and tackle Lobb. I think (but would love to hear an expert discuss) that Betts had no right to be in the position to make the tackle.Comment
-
That one was a goal too imo Meg.
Fingers left the ball while Wingard was still in contact.
Port gave that game away although Jetta was pretty critical in extra time to swing it back around. Shame for Dixon he missed so many, he was immense.
No issue with the Eddie Betts chase down of Lobb from me either.
- - - Updated - - -
I'm not sure about the Betts' tackle. Originally he was in the protected area behind Lobb because he was following a GWS player within 2 metres which I think was ok. But then he turned and chased a second player while still within the protected zone which I would have thought was not ok. And it was while he was doing that the umpire called play-on which led Betts to change direction and tackle Lobb. I think (but would love to hear an expert discuss) that Betts had no right to be in the position to make the tackle.I knew him as a gentle young man, I cannot say for sure the reasons for his decline
We watched him fade before our very eyes, and years before his timeComment
-
The thing that confused me a bit with Betts on Lobb is I thought you could follow your player through/out of the protected zone, but I'm certain he changed players he was following through that play. The first player would have taken him directly out of the zone, then he switched and followed I think Shaw, which took him back towards Lobb.
- - - Updated - - -
Just posted my comment then saw your response- glad I'm not bonkers (or at least that I have company!).Comment
-
Hopefully ticketmaster will behave itself this morning. Just waiting to press the button to secure tickets.Comment
-
Comment