Bombertalk

for the hands in the back rule. Your little ripper!

We never deserved that win.

The rule is a disgrace.

Kevin Bartlett should be lynched for defending that stupid rule.

They werent the only ones that had the rule go against them tonight...

Lloyd is King wrote:We never deserved that win.

The rule is a disgrace.

Kevin Bartlett should be lynched for defending that stupid rule.

Agree.

Glad WE got the points, but that f****** rule.....look the umpy got it right but that new rule.......I feel very sorry for Richo and that decision changed the result of the game. Could you imagine the uproar if this was the Grand Final?

As I said hapy to win, but really we didn't deserve to because we tried our hardest to f*** it up! Bloody 12 goals 20!!!!!!! Geeeeeez

Lloyd is King wrote:We never deserved that win.

The rule is a disgrace.

Kevin Bartlett should be lynched for defending that stupid rule.

Agree 200%.

f*** off Bartlett, you have turned this game into SHIT.

FFS scrap this bastard interpretation and get back to some common f****** sense.

Lloyd is King wrote:We never deserved that win.

The rule is a disgrace.

Kevin Bartlett should be lynched for defending that stupid rule.

Lighten up, we won! I would have hated to have seen what you would have written if we had lost. For me, I've always been confused about what was and wasn't a free kick for a push out from full forwards and all this crap about being one or two actions. Hands in the back and it's a free kick now - pure and simple. Players should be rewarded for playing in front, not in the back. The arm chop rule for me, however, is a different story and I don't agree with this one. Nobody can deny this wasn't a free kick, not even Robert Walls and everybody knows how much he loves Essendon! Richardson knows the rules now, bet you he thought he had got away with it when he had kicked that goal. Any other team and the f@#ker would have kicked it out on the full...

Lloyd is King wrote:We never deserved that win.

The rule is a disgrace.

Kevin Bartlett should be lynched for defending that stupid rule.

We did deserve the win. We were the better team for a majority of the night - our atrocious kicking from set shots distorted the true balance of the game, which is that we were the better team.

We might not have deserved to win once we were 20 points down in the 4th, but i think it was less of a travesty that we won as opposed to them.

I'm starting to get very nervous if we kick the first three goals of the game ladies and gents.

Outside of Adelaide. We did it against Carlton, Collingwood, Hawthorn and lost and did it again tonight and we did everything possible to lose.

Wait for Bartlett to be destroyed via talkback all week in his morning 9am till 12 spot on SEN.

What a stupid crusty old tool. He is a **** footy caller and a **** rule maker.

come on guys Richo got a goal in the 2nd from a worse example of the rule.

The only thing that should have cost us the game tonight is our disgraceful kicking at goal.

Bomber_Fan wrote:

Lloyd is King wrote:We never deserved that win.

The rule is a disgrace.

Kevin Bartlett should be lynched for defending that stupid rule.

Lighten up, we won! I would have hated to have seen what you would have written if we had lost. For me, I've always been confused about what was and wasn't a free kick for a push out from full forwards and all this crap about being one or two actions. Hands in the back and it's a free kick now - pure and simple. Players should be rewarded for playing in front, not in the back. The arm chop rule for me, however, is a different story and I don't agree with this one. Nobody can deny this wasn't a free kick, not even Robert Walls and everybody knows how much he loves Essendon! Richardson knows the rules now, bet you he thought he had got away with it when he had kicked that goal. Any other team and the f@#ker would have kicked it out on the full...

The interpretation is A LOAD OF SHIT.

If its an interpretation, its the wrong inteerpretation. Bartlet has as many brain cells as he does handballs.

Interpretation be damned. He didn't just place his hands in Michael's back, he pushed him. Push in the back: Free kick.

Richo is a hack, a sook, and a petulant child in the body of a (Mentally unstable) man. f*** him.

Terrible rule.

bomberdonnie wrote:come on guys Richo got a goal in the 2nd from a worse example of the rule.

The only thing that should have cost us the game tonight is our disgraceful kicking at goal.

There were many examples of what a complete crock of shit the rule interpretation is. Bartlett has f***** the spectacle of the game.

Our kicking at goal tonight was pathetic to say the least.

IT is a stupid rule, but I reckon it was a push rather than simply putting the hands there. I havent seen the replay yet but I will soon.

But the rule is a joke and has to be scrapped. Like a caller on SEN said on talkback tonight; "these days, when the ball is kicked long in the forward line, you are expecting a free kick to be paid"

It was the correct decision, its a shit interpretation.

dingus wrote:
Richo is a hack, a sook, and a petulant child in the body of a (Mentally unstable) man. f*** him.

LOL. Courageous to play with that injury though.

Still, you are spot on.

There were plenty of poor decisions tonight, and we weren't the only ones on the receiving end. However, as bad as that rule is, that free wasn't a bad decision.

As jimmy said, we were the better team for most of the night but our pathetic kicking in front of goal almost cost us. I called it very early, and damn it nearly bit us on the butt. We were 3.10 from set shots at one stage. That's pathetic. Most of those were within about 30-35 out as well, and a lot of them on slight (if any) angles. I could have kicked most of the goals we missed from set shots.

The fact that I play amateur league and these guys get paid big dollars to do it for a living is a disgrace... especially the misses from Lucas and Monfries. McVeigh's miss was pretty poor as well. Ok, very poor. Houli missed some pretty straight forward shots tonight too.

While I'm extremely happy we managed to win a scrap for a change (which could be a turning point for us), I'm very disappointed in our skills in front of goal.

Does Lloyd need to see a psychologist or something? His kicking has gone out the window since his hamstring injury. I'd back him 99 times out of 100 to kick the goals he missed tonight, except this season. Since he came back he's been hesitant to kick goals outside 40-45 and when he does have a crack he's just not the same ol' Lloyd. If he's not able to kick that far, then a) he shouldn't be on the park or b) he should stay closer to goal. He went missing a lot tonight, but there was one great grab arms up above the head, plucked a spearing Hird pass out of the air on the burst. Pity he kicked a behind.

Lloyd is King wrote:

dingus wrote:
Richo is a hack, a sook, and a petulant child in the body of a (Mentally unstable) man. f*** him.

LOL. Courageous to play with that injury though.

Still, you are spot on.

I would say just plain stupid to play with that injury. The club doctor should get the sack for allowing it.

Why risk Richo at this point when you're 0-8 with nothing riding on the game? It's not like they can expect to win every game from here on and play finals. It's not like it was a final. There was NOTHING riding on this game for Richmond. Why risk him? It was just plain stupid. Not to mention no protection when he DID play. He's lucky noone crunched him in a marking contest. Any sort of knock to that you'd think he'd be in a pretty bad way. I don't think that bandage over it was going to give him much, and he only had that after half time.

great game. was right in front of richo when kicked it. saw the ump signal free, then 50.
my lungs hurt.


monday morning 9am sen will be interesting. the guys have put kb in the callback crosshairs....im sure pattie smith will have his back though

nuts to this "public" people keep talking about. these are professional football.
poor tiges. great rule