Ok so - My theory is accurate. Draper is the new Ginni
3 Likes
What about the Ridley holding the ball? With zero prior.
Explains a bit
Isn’t there a bloke here who was mates with Jacob mollison? Should get him to tell him personally that he’s a deadset fraud
2 Likes
WE ARE GEEKING
THE GREATEST TEAM OF ALL !!!
i’m sure he just doing as instructed
Was that from brads presser or the bombers x account lol
I think Brad Scott deliberately used the term “a series of unfortunate events” because it’s vague. We all know (or at least hope) he was referring to the umps, but if the AFL is upset about it he can just say he was talking about our players’ skill errors.
3 Likes
Brad should just come out and say what he means. Who gives a ■■■■ about a fine.
8 Likes
I’m an Essendon member and regularly attend games.
I know my team isn’t entitled to win and can accept that we’re not very good. It’s not a big deal.
I’m always hopeful that we’ll turn a corner and become a powerhouse again but recognise that we’re not there yet. And there’s no guarantee that we ever will be.
Some teams are simply better than us and sometimes we get outplayed. Other times, we play really poorly and it’s a little harder to digest, but I’m still getting the product I paid for, my football team versus another, may the best team win.
What I never signed up for was umpires hijacking games and having a bigger impact than the players.
Games like last night’s make me feel like my time and money have been stolen. Cheating is a strong accusation, but when it’s so coordinated and obvious, there’s no point calling it anything else. They (the maggots) had a plan and the executed it to perfection. I really want the same from Essendon. To be as focussed and ruthless as Nicholas Brown (13), Brendan Hosking (16), Jacob Mollison (32) and Martin Rodger (37) were in that 3rd quarter.
The cheating broke us. The players dropped their bundle and so did I, so I’d be a hypocrite to judge them too harshly. But we simply have to evolve to the point where abhorrent umpiring doesn’t matter. We were 3-4 goals better than Geelong in the first half but didn’t put it on the scoreboard. If we did, the cheating could’ve been overcome.
Brad Scott has indicated that we won’t be seeking clarification on the cheating and that’s really disappointing. Our Brad also defended Dangerfield’s tackle during the week. The same Brad that said there were no grounds to defend Harry Jones a few weeks earlier. I acknowledge that we would’ve been unsuccessful on appeal because the outcomes are clearly predetermined, but the lack of fight is still disappointing…even if it saved us a few thousand dollars.
I’ve already decided to skip the next couple of games because following this mess of a footy club and sport is giving me zero joy. The AFL and Essendon already have my money, but I ‘ll be taking back some of my time, even though I have f*** all to do.
31 Likes
Sheedy would’ve stood near the umpires race and stared them down, shaken his head and pointed to his Bombers polo.
1 Like
What are the odds next week a Collingwood player will get away with a delibrate rushed next week due to a change of interpretation.
12 Likes
Pencil it in.
Pencil in 720degree spin and no htb for Pendlebury, daicos and degoey.
We will get pinged for a trip.
Not standing even if we are standing like the tin man.
Pinged gor not passing the ball delicately enough back to the umpire.
Pinged for going within 5 metres if daicos
If it clearly hits the post and snaps it, the pies will be awarded a goal.
1 Like
I don’t bet on horses, as he convinced me that only Bookmakers win.
Sadly for my Dad, he started doing SP at a pub in West Melbourne on the side and got nabbed by the Police, lost his licence and had to get a real job. I was too young to remember, but Mum said later that he was lucky not to go to jail, so his Bookmaking days were over.
1 Like
100% agree
2 Likes
My dad used to say that the bookies go to the races in a Mercedes.
The punters are on the tram.
4 Likes
From my vantage point at the City end right forward pocket
- was absolutely a free to Draper. „right in front of me!“
- in the second or third quarter there was a clear deliberate against Geelong on the southern stand side. Umpire #32 blew the whistle for out of bounds, looked inboard at three Essendon players appealing for deliberate (one of them was Draper) and only then called for a ball-in
- Stengle with a clear ITB on Ridley in the last. The umpire on the scene had the perfect angle on it and still called a mark
- Umpire #37 looking very reluctant to pay us a blatant HTB in the middle of the ground in the last quarter
Re the Menzie incident, it sucks that there’s nothing in the rules defining what “immediate physical pressure” is (which of course makes it a grey area and possible to justify any decision as correct. IMO it sounds like it should mean “being tackled,” but that would make several previous umpiring decisions wrong.) Despite there being multiple Geelong players within 5m running toward him, apparently that doesn’t qualify as immediate physical pressure. Other players have been allowed to rush behinds under significantly less “immediate pyhsical pressure.”
The Spirit and Intention of the deliberte rushed behind rule is “Encourage players to keep the ball in play,” and the ump thought that Menzie wasn’t under “immediate physical pressure,” so paid the free. However earlier in the game, a Geelong player took possession on the wing, and to avoid a tackle simply ran the ball over. The Spirit and Intention of the oob rule is also to “Encourage players to keep the ball in play,” but the ump decided that in deliberately running the ball over the line to avoid a tackle, the Geelong player (who was under even less “immediate physical pressure” than Menzie) demonstrated sufficient intent to keep the ball in play, and instructed the boundary ump to throw the ball in.
1 Like