Viney, Hannebury, Cooney in successive weeks all not guilty or thrown out, or in Hurleys case it was Hurley fault, he either had back technique or was playing for a freekick.
You bet your ■■■ Hocking will get weeks.
i did get in trouble from mrs pre for losing my ■■■■.The FOX commentators last night suggested that Hannebury got to the ball earlier than Hocking!
As far as I could tell, Hannebury went for Hurley first and then chose to pick up the ball!
I yelled several expletives when I heard them say that.
True. The game was played 2 weeks earlier. But, still doesn't change the fact that the commentators stated that Hannebery got to the ball earlier than Hocking did!
It was reckless. Tried to play it off as going for the ball by keeping his hands down. Will get something for it.
Mayo said on the radio this morning he reckons he must get weeks, so I’d say we have nothing to worry about.
Greatest image on blitzcast of all time.
Intercepted the ball? The hell were you watching? The ball was under Hurley's nose, Hanneberry put his hip into his head with a token effort to look like he was going for the ball. Then claimed he never saw Hurley.
The FOX commentators last night suggested that Hannebury got to the ball earlier than Hocking!
As far as I could tell, Hannebury went for Hurley first and then chose to pick up the ball!
I watched it a few times. Hurley was head down "dribbling" the ball it veered to the right and hanneberry was there and intercepted the ball. Hurley, with head down kept coming and Hannebury watched him coming, then braced for impact..
Here is the problem. If you run while looking down, you need to lift your head at some point, if that is just before impact, the potential for neck injury is far greater, because of the weak muscles in the front of the neck. Better to run in a more erect posture. Thats essentially what a lot of the commentators said and I tend to agree.
Of course the commentators version of the hurley incident varies. Amazing how many people see the same thing and describe it differently,
NO WAIT
This one:
I clearly missed something a few weeks ago... what's the repeat Mayo reference about?
What the media want, the media gets. They wanted Viney off - eventually it happened. They quickly said they didn't want Hannebery charged. They got that. They very quickly said they wanted Hocking to get some - so he will.................1+carry over = 2.
It sucks, its wrong - but it's my fairly confident prediction. Of course I hope I'm wrong and I'm wrong often on BB, so hoping my form continues!!
Watch it again slowed down. The ball is well and truly up for grabs and they both go in at basically the same height. If they're not going to put Hanneberry out for his where he was basically upright to the hip and the ball was under another guy... they can't possibly put this one out.It was reckless. Tried to play it off as going for the ball by keeping his hands down. Will get something for it.
I clearly missed something a few weeks ago... what's the repeat Mayo reference about?
It was reckless. Tried to play it off as going for the ball by keeping his hands down. Will get something for it.
Reckless? The Richmond player was following the ball when it bounced sideways, he turned into the path of Hocking, unless Hocking is supposed to be physic how could he avoid a FRONT ON collision?
The big issue is you see Buddha get up with a look of regret, as if ‘I shouldn’t have done that’.
The AFL are not only confusing the players with differing interpretations, but also creating rules that go against natural instincts.
I reckon the carry over points issue is going to go against him on this one!
oh and the fact he wears an Essendon jumper aswell
Greatest image on blitzcast of all time.
Ralphy loves sticking things down his throat doesn't he.
Spin the penalty wheel. Anywhere between 0 and four.
I suspect that if Hocking is suspended the club will appeal to the tribunal.
No case to answer
None.
Lennon contributed far more to that than Hurley did to his. Hurls followed a straight path, Lennon turned into his. Not that he was at fault in any way either.