Round 2: Swans v Bombers @ SCG

[SCGonasunnyday]

Such a nice weekend when we win.

I saw a media headline bemoaning Papley for hypocrisy (presumably because we have at times in the last 150 years also gone physically hunting an opposition).

I love that implicit in this is that players who have just run 15km+ and entertained us for 3 hours have all the time in the world to plan what to say, consider all angles, get a statement checked off by a legal department etc

No wonder it is safer to just say ‘yeah, nah full credit to the boys’.

[neilfws]

Terrific game to attend. Clearly the most physical of the 3 games so far, the Bombers always look like a huge side at the ground. The crowd got right into it after the Wright incident and stayed there through to the end.

Good to see the Swans (mostly) not get sucked in and just stick to the game plan. And they ran out the game really well, better than the Bombers, though both sides were clearly close to spent by the end.

Defence was a little shakier than of late in the first half, maybe the adjustment to losing Fox plus Cunningham so early on. Rampe was huge, saved the day on several occasions running in for spoils or marks, and another great game for Roberts. Grundy got a bit monstered early on but rebounded well, I especially liked his handball from the ground to Hayward for a goal.

I was behind the Swans' goal in the last quarter so I got to enjoy the champagne moments from Jordon and Warner, as well as Amartey's cheeky backheel. Errol is back to the top of his game too, and Heeney continues to impress. The younger Warner struggled with the pace a bit early on, as to be expected, but stuck at it, stayed involved and didn't let it overwhelm him.

Great night out at the footy, 3-0, great start to the season!

[neilfws]

never understood this free kicks have to be close thing it’s a rule or a requirement lol

I have come to see the free kick count as one of those footy things that fans simply love to talk about: along with the "tiny SCG", the "curse of the bye", or going badly in the wet (or in a milestone game). It lies beyond the power of rational argument

[MattW]

I have come to see the free kick count as one of those footy things that fans simply love to talk about: along with the "tiny SCG", the "curse of the bye", or going badly in the wet (or in a milestone game). It lies beyond the power of rational argument

The 2016 grand final and the Serong/Stephens draft are two RWO classics of the genre.

[dejavoodoo44]

Wright has been sent to the tribunal, while also for Essendon, Draper has been fined for rough conduct and Caldwell for engaging in a melee. For us, McCartin, McInerney and Blakey have been fined for engaging in a melee.

[i'm-uninformed2]

What’s the word on Fox’s condition? If he’s fit, he’s an obvious swap for Cunningham in the side, with Campbell or Lloyd to slide back into a small defender role.

If not, you’d think Mitchell might be a chance for a debut. Either he or Warner play half forward, the other sub. His own form warrants it, but I don’t look at any of the other runners in the twos who could naturally come in and I doubt we’re going to bring in another tall.

FWIW, I thought Corey had some good moments without doing anything special. He probably didn’t appreciate he had a bit more time on one or two of those snaps. I’m still not sure whether he is going to be one of those players too good for vfl level footy but lacking a trait that makes him successful at AFL level, but he seems ferociously dedicated and willing to give himself every chance. He’s improved rapidly.

- - - Updated - - -

Wright has been sent to the tribunal, while also for Essendon, Draper has been fined for rough conduct and Caldwell for engaging in a melee. For us, McCartin, McInerney and Blakey have been fined for engaging in a melee.

I wouldn’t have been surprised if Isaac got a fine for his back handed slap on Hinds, but he plays for Essendon, so he deserved it…

[mcs]

Wright has been sent to the tribunal, while also for Essendon, Draper has been fined for rough conduct and Caldwell for engaging in a melee. For us, McCartin, McInerney and Blakey have been fined for engaging in a melee.

I've had to laugh at some of the dribbling Bombers fans going around today. Some genuinely think that Cunningham 'shouldn't have jumped into Wright's landing space', that 'Wright couldn't have possibly seen Cunningham was there' and that 'Cunningham should be cited for tunnelling.'

They are a strange bunch to put it nicely.

I reckon he will get a month, as he should. In the modern age of footy, there will be an ever increasing 'duty of care' on a player to not make unnecessary contact to the head. Had he truly led with the arms to mark the ball, and not turned his body at all, he could have a case that he did nothing wrong. But clearly turned his body/shoulder into Cunningham's head - and while I fully understand the split seconds involved in such decisions and the difficulty it creates, that is an avoidable action. Especially when he clearly knew Cunningham was there and going to be in the contest (its not like Cunningham came from behind him, or outside the range of his reasonable vision - unless Peter Wright was wearing horse blinkers haha).

[dejavoodoo44]

I wouldn’t have been surprised if Isaac got a fine for his back handed slap on Hinds, but he plays for Essendon, so he deserved it…

Personally, I would have fined Hind for overacting.

- - - Updated - - -

I've had to laugh at some of the dribbling Bombers fans going around today. Some genuinely think that Cunningham 'shouldn't have jumped into Wright's landing space', that 'Wright couldn't have possibly seen Cunningham was there' and that 'Cunningham should be cited for tunnelling.'

They are a strange bunch to put it nicely.

I reckon he will get a month, as he should. In the modern age of footy, there will be an ever increasing 'duty of care' on a player to not make unnecessary contact to the head. Had he truly led with the arms to mark the ball, and not turned his body at all, he could have a case that he did nothing wrong. But clearly turned his body/shoulder into Cunningham's head - and while I fully understand the split seconds involved in such decisions and the difficulty it creates, that is an avoidable action. Especially when he clearly knew Cunningham was there and going to be in the contest (its not like Cunningham came from behind him, or outside the range of his reasonable vision - unless Peter Wright was wearing horse blinkers haha).

Yes, generally to make an argument that you're going for the ball, you have to go for the ball.

[Mel_C]

I wouldn’t have been surprised if Isaac got a fine for his back handed slap on Hinds, but he plays for Essendon, so he deserved it…

He also deserved it after all his sooking whenever he gave away a free or when the umpire didn't pay a free. The dissent rule has obviously disappeared this year.

[Captain]

Agree 100%....it was disgustingly biased and irresponsible umpiring. Makes a mockery of this league's 'seriousness' in protecting the head. Will be interesting to see if the MRP have the same slack Victorian attitude.

How they missed that is beyond me. Disgusting act and even more disgusting umpiring.

- - - Updated - - -

Personally, I would have fined Hind for overacting.

- - - Updated - - -


Yes, generally to make an argument that you're going for the ball, you have to go for the ball.

The commentators compared it to Maynard. I totally disagree with the comparisons, Maynard’s was a footy act, Wright’s was a dog act.

[Hotpotato]

I took a visiting English bloke and a visiting NZ Bloke to the game.
Both were astonished there was no penalty to P. Wright, no red card, no sin bin, not even a free kick and that H. C. plays no further part in the game whilst Wright could carry on and (possibly) play a significant role in the outcome.

[Thunder Shaker]

I've had to laugh at some of the dribbling Bombers fans going around today. Some genuinely think that Cunningham 'shouldn't have jumped into Wright's landing space', that 'Wright couldn't have possibly seen Cunningham was there' and that 'Cunningham should be cited for tunnelling.'

They are a strange bunch to put it nicely.

I wouldn't be surprised if one of these supporters said that jumping in the air and hitting Cunningham in the head was a legitimate spoiling technique, or Cunningham had no business trying to mark the ball with Wright nearby.

They will not like the 4 weeks or more that Wright is likely to receive as a penalty.

I took a visiting English bloke and a visiting NZ Bloke to the game.
Both were astonished there was no penalty to P. Wright, no red card, no sin bin, not even a free kick and that H. C. plays no further part in the game whilst Wright could carry on and (possibly) play a significant role in the outcome.

Sending players off is in the Laws of Australian Rules Football (Law 23). The sending off rules doesn't apply to the AFL but can apply in other leagues.

[Hotpotato]

I wouldn't be surprised if one of these supporters said that jumping in the air and hitting Cunningham in the head was a legitimate spoiling technique, or Cunningham had no business trying to mark the ball with Wright nearby.

They will not like the 4 weeks or more that Wright is likely to receive as a penalty.

A commentaor (C. Middlemass) on THE INSIDERS (ABC) supported this view ‘That Wright had no alternative to his action’.

The host Kelli Underwood completely disagreed.

[i'm-uninformed2]

There’s a mad mix of supporters in Melbourne.

Entitled racists: Hawthorn
Weird, but harmless and occasionally funny: Richmond, St Kilda, Melbourne.
Feral a-holes: Collingwood and Bulldogs
Irrelevant: Norf

But the two most strangest, deluded and objectionable are Carlton and Essendon. They both still think in terms of being a ‘big club’ as if that’s enough. They haven’t worked out that thinking is why they’re such miserable failures who resorted to rorting the salary cap or performance enhancing drugs as a way through, then wonder why they spend a decade in the wilderness.

Even Brad Scott last night . . . He clearly only inherited about a quarter of the IQ available in the twins. Imagine saying in the press conference, we can’t compete athletically and skills wise, so we better get physical. You’re basically saying your side is crap and your players suck. And their supporters lap it up. Just brain dead stuff.

I’ve been seriously off my chops plenty of times in my life, but I’ve never been that off the planet.

[Thunder Shaker]

But the two most strangest, deluded and objectionable are Carlton and Essendon. They both still think in terms of being a ‘big club’ as if that’s enough. They haven’t worked out that thinking is why they’re such miserable failures who resorted to rorting the salary cap or performance enhancing drugs as a way through, then wonder why they spend a decade in the wilderness.

Carlton: Five wooden spoons this century, the most of any club. Equal longest time since a Grand Final appearance of any club (tied with North Melbourne, who defeated Carlton in 1999).
Essendon: No finals win for 20 years. Their previous longest time without a finals win was 13 seasons (1927 to 1939) when they did not make the finals.

The decline is real...

- - - Updated - - -

Also of note: Wright has been sent straight to the Tribunal. Careless conduct, severe impact, high contact.