R18: Carlton v North Melbourne (Post match discussion)

dane · **Joined:** Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:14 am **Posts:** 22357

cortez wrote:

Stefchook wrote:

emtwenty wrote:

Unless we have another injury crisis, I can't see how we could be worse than we are now next year. The only player who has had a marginal impact on this season we might lose is Judd. Not saying we'll jump up the ladder, I just can't see us going backwards. Despite Monga telling MLG last night on 3AW we'll finish 17th next year.

Gee, what an astonishing thing to hear from Monga. :hitcomputer:

He's about as independent as Kevin Sheedy or Joffa. His hard-hitting media career is all about having a go at Carlton. And basically no one else.

On Marngrook last week "Hungry" Bartlett said North by 100points.

He always says that.

Effes · **Posted:** Mon Jul 21, 2014 1:47 pm

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-21/m ... medium=RSS

Mitch Robinson, Carlton, has been charged with a level two engaging in rough conduct offence (225 points, two-match sanction) for engaging in rough conduct against Leigh Adams, North Melbourne, during the first quarter of the Round 18 match between Carlton and North Melbourne, played at Etihad Stadium on Friday July 18, 2014.

In summary, due to his previous poor record, his two-match sanction must remain at two matches, even with an early plea.

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the North Melbourne Football Club, the incident was assessed as negligent conduct (one point), medium impact (two points) and high contact (two points). This is a total of five activation points, resulting in a classification of a level two offence, drawing 225 demerit points and a two-match sanction. He has an existing bad record of three matches suspended within the last two years, increasing the penalty by 10 per cent to 247.50 points and a two-match sanction. He also has 20.31 demerit points carried over from within the last 12 months, increasing the penalty to 267.81 points and a two-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 200.86 points and a two-match sanction.

dane · **Joined:** Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:14 am **Posts:** 22357

Was it high?

Punter22 · **Posted:** Mon Jul 21, 2014 1:56 pm

ON one angle there looked to be contact with the head. He's been stupid before, in this case I think he was more unlucky than stupid. It was like Fyfe's - well executed with an unlucky outcome.

dane · **Joined:** Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:14 am **Posts:** 22357

If it doesn't hit the head its not high right?

Wojee · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:17 am **Posts:** 35135

Shame he's not a Good Bloke or he'd be allowed to break jaws scot free.

The Rhino · **Joined:** Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm **Posts:** 6923

Yep, @#$%&! it. Should be challenged over 20 loading points. I don't reckon he hits head at all. Bullshit.

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10557

This needs to be challenged. Enough is enough. Not high at all. :mad:

jim · **Joined:** Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:21 pm **Posts:** 8201

keogh wrote:

Cazzesman wrote:

keogh wrote:

Great win
Graham shows something
Bell will be a godd on baller
Rowe has improved heaps and Jammo is better for it
Gibbs will win the b and f has improved this year
Not having Carrazzo and McLean helps up in defensive pressure in the open space
Wood is a better alternative to Warnock my bet is they will both play against Freo
Still need another ruck on the list

North are the hardest team to figure out they were shit tonight
They lack a star Harvey is their best player

Waite is the Noth Melbourne of Carlton in a singular sense

Aliens have landed and taken over Keogh's body. Someone call Scully and Mulder.

A positive post Keogh. That must have hurt to type. :clap:

Regards Cazzesman

Didn't
I am a realist and not delusional unlike some
Don't forget where 6 and 11

That's what's frustrating. Better work ethic/attitude and we should've beaten Richmond, Melbourne, Brisbane and GWS. They're non-negotiables. No-one to blame but ourselves there. Should've beaten Geelong too. Imagine the difference.

Nothing that can't be sorted without a bit of head down/arse up and into it. Probably a bit more to it but that'd be a great start.

jim · **Joined:** Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:21 pm **Posts:** 8201

idle wrote:

Walker up forward with Casbolt and Henderson as the main targets. Menzel and Garlett lurking around leaves Walker to be the 3rd tall up. Who's missing from that scenario? I'm a little worried about Waite to be honest. I know folks are saying times up, but if ever there was a player who has the x-factor up forward its him. He really can be the difference between winning and losing. I'd just hate to see first Betts leaves and then we get rid of Waite? That's a lot of goals to account for.

From what I can make of it Malthouse likes a team of interchangeable players that he can mix and match due to match-ups and or form / injury. A player like Waite is that kind of player. Even against North his work up the ground was good. Walker, Henderson, Waite, Yarran, and White, all interchangeable players who can go forward or back. I'm not too sure about Waite. Personally I don't think we've seen the best he has to offer. Could next year be that year? I hope so.

Waite's frustrating but is extremely classy. We often look at players faults but not so often their strengths, which is what they are in the side for. Sides like Hawthorn, Geelong, Collingwood would snap him up. With that ability you'd want him playing for us rather than him strengthening our opposition and cutting us up.

The Rhino · **Joined:** Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm **Posts:** 6923

I've been pondering this for the last few minutes at my desk:

"What would your reaction be on Grand Final day if Jarrad Waite does a Brian Lake and wins the Norm Smith whilst single handedly dragging another team across the line for a flag?"

Probably somewhat akin to the time I finally stopped backing Temple of Boom to win despite being a great Doomben specialist after about a dozen shocking runs, for it to win at 34s..

Stone Free · **Posted:** Mon Jul 21, 2014 2:40 pm

dane wrote:

Was it high?

The North player was seen pointing to his upper chest after it happened, then came back on to finish out the game. If he got hit in the head and suffered concussion, the doctors over at Norf are more incompetent than ours. He probably hurt himself more when he landed like a sack of sh1t.

dane · **Joined:** Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:14 am **Posts:** 22357

So not high.

Wojee · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:17 am **Posts:** 35135

dane wrote:

So not high.

Didn't look high when it happened and the replay I saw was inconclusive.
The MRP are guessing IMO.

camel · **Posted:** Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:08 pm

Wojee wrote:

dane wrote:

So not high.

Didn't look high when it happened and the replay I saw was inconclusive.
The MRP are guessing IMO.

Tend to agree, although I think he had enough time to lay a tackle instead of a bump. That probably hasn't helped his cause, along with his poor record, of course.

When it happened live I thought it was okay. The replay makes it a little greyer.

dane · **Joined:** Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:14 am **Posts:** 22357

Its either conclusively high or not.

MPH78 · **Posted:** Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:58 pm

Remember we are dealing with the NM medicos here. I'm sure the medical report shows he was clinically dead.

Steve_C7 · **Joined:** Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm **Posts:** 1002

camelboy wrote:

Wojee wrote:

dane wrote:

So not high.

Didn't look high when it happened and the replay I saw was inconclusive.
The MRP are guessing IMO.

Tend to agree, although I think he had enough time to lay a tackle instead of a bump. That probably hasn't helped his cause, along with his poor record, of course.

When it happened live I thought it was okay. The replay makes it a little greyer.

Player had already disposed of the ball, so only option was to bump and he had too much momentum to pull out.

It is the sort of case that needs to be challenged, if he didn't make contact with the head, then there is absolutely nothing to answer for and the AFL can HTFU.

Stone Free · **Posted:** Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:21 pm

The head is sacrosanct!

kezza · **Joined:** Thu May 11, 2006 6:11 pm **Posts:** 14986

Stone Free wrote:

The head is sacrosanct!

Unless you are Buddy Franklin.

R18: Carlton v North Melbourne (Post match discussion)

Who is online