One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: WA Tiger on May 13, 2012, 01:20:51 PM
-
Just watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
-
Judy watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
Well he will be after that DH Barrett highlighted three tackles on the footy show morning and said that of all three, Nahas' was the worst. I can't see how it could be though, he did'nt sling him and a free kick was'nt even paid.
-
Judy watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
Well he will be after that DH Barrett highlighted three tackles on the footy show morning and said that of all three, Nahas' was the worst. I can't see how it could be though, he did'nt sling him and a free kick was'nt even paid.
Yeah that's where I saw it, you just never know though.
-
Just watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
that's good. I'm over nanas. I'd rather we try a youngster with a body and some strength. Trade him for Chris Knights.
-
Flog
-
Just watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
that's good. I'm over nanas. I'd rather we try a youngster with a body and some strength. Trade him for Chris Knights.
Another trade, let's trade the team, every player, get rid of them all... :whistle :whistle ::) ::)
-
Just watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
that's good. I'm over nanas. I'd rather we try a youngster with a body and some strength. Trade him for Chris Knights.
Another trade, let's trade the team, every player, get rid of them all... :whistle :whistle ::) ::)
Arent you happy to have the last pick in the draft instead of Shane Edwards ??
-
Good game from Edwards yesterday
-
Just watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
that's good. I'm over nanas. I'd rather we try a youngster with a body and some strength. Trade him for Chris Knights.
Another trade, let's trade the team, every player, get rid of them all... :whistle :whistle ::) ::)
Arent you happy to have the last pick in the draft instead of Shane Edwards ??
Yep, but do you think he is better than Nahas??
-
Just watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
that's good. I'm over nanas. I'd rather we try a youngster with a body and some strength. Trade him for Chris Knights.
Another trade, let's trade the team, every player, get rid of them all... :whistle :whistle ::) ::)
Arent you happy to have the last pick in the draft instead of Shane Edwards ??
Yep, but do you think he is better than Nahas??
I don't like Edwards either. Actually both of them are too skinny for my liking. Too easily pushed off the ball.
Although I believe nanas will have more trade value than Edwards. But I'd like to see the back of both of them because I don't think they'll make it in finals. You need agressive players with big bodies to play finals footy. These guys will get smashed when we finally play some finals in a couple of years. They only play good games against lesser clubs and when against big boys in finals teams they go missing. Too easily pushed off the ball.
Look nanas has done great for himself that's why I think we should trade him now before we play finals because he'll get found out big time.
-
Look nanas has done great for himself that's why I think we should trade him now before we play finals because he'll get found out big time.
Nah you have it wrong, the time to trade apparently is when their currency is at the lowest.
-
I thought Nahas' pressure in the forward 50 was excellent yesterday.
-
I don't think Nahas will be in trouble for his tackle but I do think Lovett-Murray will be in a world of hurt for his. If Barrett reckons Nahas' was worse than Lovett-Murray's then he is truly clueless. Which we all knew anyway. :wallywink
-
I thought Nahas' pressure in the forward 50 was excellent yesterday.
Don't be silly......trade him..... :whistle, no good at all apparently..go figure.
Honestly, apparently he is no good but we should trade him, Edwards is no good either but untradeable.....go figure... ::)
-
Just watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
that's good. I'm over nanas. I'd rather we try a youngster with a body and some strength. Trade him for Chris Knights.
Another trade, let's trade the team, every player, get rid of them all... :whistle :whistle ::) ::)
Arent you happy to have the last pick in the draft instead of Shane Edwards ??
Yep, but do you think he is better than Nahas??
Absolutely, I think the coaching staff do also
-
Agree Nahas's forward pressure was very good yesterday as was his leads. When he ran literally 100metres to spoil that was fantastic. His speed is his main asset as well as his tackling. Needs to use his speed more often to the advantage of the team
-
Nahas at his best is better than Edwards. Edwards at his best is a pretty good player. Normally both of them are average players and Nahas gets pushed off the ball way too easily like Tigra said. It would be good if Mitch Morton had a defensive side. he would be a gun half forward if he did. but we are stuck with pygmies
-
Nahas at his best is better than Edwards. Edwards at his best is a pretty good player. Normally both of them are average players and Nahas gets pushed off the ball way too easily like Tigra said. It would be good if Mitch Morton had a defensive side. he would be a gun half forward if he did. but we are stuck with pygmies
WTF has Mitch got to do with anything?
:huh
-
Nahas at his best is better than Edwards. Edwards at his best is a pretty good player. Normally both of them are average players and Nahas gets pushed off the ball way too easily like Tigra said. It would be good if Mitch Morton had a defensive side. he would be a gun half forward if he did. but we are stuck with pygmies
WTF has Mitch got to do with anything?
:huh
You're not very smart. This discussion is about undersized forwards. You are aware that Mitch Morton played a lot of football for the Richmond football club? You are aware that he's 185cm tall and 80+ kgs? I'm saying it's a shame he doesn't have a defensive side. If he did then he'd be playing some good footy for us right now.
Do you understand that, guy?
-
Since when have you become an expert?
You're (or is that your) just a punter like the rest of us.
Tell me, have you actually coached a team?
:bow
-
Since when have you become an expert?
You're (or is that your) just a punter like the rest of us.
Tell me, have you actually coached a team?
:bow
I'm not an expert but I reckon my comments are not fair off the mark here, 65'. What problem do you have with my post? Morton was a good forward. His goal kicking record proves that. What he lacked was a defensive side to his game. Now I would have thought that if he had a defensive side he would be a quite a good player. It would be a pleasant change from blokes like Nahas & Edwards offering very little in the air and when it comes to competing for the hard ball.
Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree then state why. It's called debating. Although it seems you're not capable of serious football discussion most of the time.
Why should we listen to a bloke that thinks Brett Deledio can't play midfield?
-
I like Nahas when he gets busy.
And I'm not talking downtown either ;D
-
Since when have you become an expert?
You're (or is that your) just a punter like the rest of us.
Tell me, have you actually coached a team?
:bow
I'm not an expert but I reckon my comments are not fair off the mark here, 65'. What problem do you have with my post? Morton was a good forward. His goal kicking record proves that. What he lacked was a defensive side to his game. Now I would have thought that if he had a defensive side he would be a quite a good player. It would be a pleasant change from blokes like Nahas & Edwards offering very little in the air and when it comes to competing for the hard ball.
Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree then state why. It's called debating. Although it seems you're not capable of serious football discussion most of the time.
Why should we listen to a bloke that thinks Brett Deledio can't play midfield?
Once again WTF has Morton got to do with anything?
-
Since when have you become an expert?
You're (or is that your) just a punter like the rest of us.
Tell me, have you actually coached a team?
:bow
I'm not an expert but I reckon my comments are not fair off the mark here, 65'. What problem do you have with my post? Morton was a good forward. His goal kicking record proves that. What he lacked was a defensive side to his game. Now I would have thought that if he had a defensive side he would be a quite a good player. It would be a pleasant change from blokes like Nahas & Edwards offering very little in the air and when it comes to competing for the hard ball.
Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree then state why. It's called debating. Although it seems you're not capable of serious football discussion most of the time.
Why should we listen to a bloke that thinks Brett Deledio can't play midfield?
Once again WTF has Morton got to do with anything?
Classic, 65'. Can't debate the point. Pop in over at the Collins/Grigg thread and ask everyone what Collins has to do with anything. Make sure a former player never gets mentioned in any other thread too.
Cheers!
The Coach
-
so we traded Morton for Nahas and Edwards??
:wallywink
-
so we traded Morton for Nahas and Edwards??
:wallywink
Did we trade Jay Schulz for Brad Miller? The longer this goes on the worse it looks for you, dude.
-
so we traded Morton for Nahas and Edwards??
:wallywink
Did we trade Jay Schulz for Brad Miller? The longer this goes on the worse it looks for you, dude.
Once again, WTF?
-
I thought Nahas' pressure in the forward 50 was excellent yesterday.
Don't be silly......trade him..... :whistle, no good at all apparently..go figure.
Honestly, apparently he is no good but we should trade him, Edwards is no good either but untradeable.....go figure... ::)
Some people believe it better to trade a player who has currency, hence the 'trade Nahas' calls. Some people believe a player who has no currency is not worth trading, hence the 'don't trade' Edwards calls.
IMO, keep Nahas and Edwards. There are few more on our list that will go or need to go before them two. That is not a ringing endorsement of those two but an illustration of our lack depth.
-
so we traded Morton for Nahas and Edwards??
:wallywink
Did we trade Jay Schulz for Brad Miller? The longer this goes on the worse it looks for you, dude.
Once again, WTF?
How come you're not telling everyone that Wallace has nothing to do with Richmond in the Vickery thread? Your inconsistency is your downfall, 65'. Please stop this.
How come you think Deledio is a poor player?
-
I thought Nahas' pressure in the forward 50 was excellent yesterday.
Don't be silly......trade him..... :whistle, no good at all apparently..go figure.
Honestly, apparently he is no good but we should trade him, Edwards is no good either but untradeable.....go figure... ::)
Some people believe it better to trade a player who has currency, hence the 'trade Nahas' calls. Some people believe a player who has no currency is not worth trading, hence the 'don't trade' Edwards calls.
IMO, keep Nahas and Edwards. There are few more on our list that will go or need to go before them two. That is not a ringing endorsement of those two but an illustration of our lack depth.
Don't try to have a blew with me GR12 just cause CD and 65 are at it.... :lol.. ;)
-
so we traded Morton for Nahas and Edwards??
:wallywink
Did we trade Jay Schulz for Brad Miller? The longer this goes on the worse it looks for you, dude.
Once again, WTF?
How come you're not telling everyone that Wallace has nothing to do with Richmond in the Vickery thread? Your inconsistency is your downfall, 65'. Please stop this.
How come you think Deledio is a poor player?
Can't recall mentioning Wallace in the Vickery thread and...
Never said Lids was a poor player just not my favourite.
Forums are a wonderful place to make up poo.
:sleep
-
so we traded Morton for Nahas and Edwards??
:wallywink
Did we trade Jay Schulz for Brad Miller? The longer this goes on the worse it looks for you, dude.
Once again, WTF?
How come you're not telling everyone that Wallace has nothing to do with Richmond in the Vickery thread? Your inconsistency is your downfall, 65'. Please stop this.
How come you think Deledio is a poor player?
Can't recall mentioning Wallace in the Vickery thread and...
Never said Lids was a poor player just not my favourite.
Forums are a wonderful place to make up poo.
:sleep
There's a Wallace/Vickery thread.
I think you should go to sleep as well.
-
I thought Nahas' pressure in the forward 50 was excellent yesterday.
Don't be silly......trade him..... :whistle, no good at all apparently..go figure.
Honestly, apparently he is no good but we should trade him, Edwards is no good either but untradeable.....go figure... ::)
Some people believe it better to trade a player who has currency, hence the 'trade Nahas' calls. Some people believe a player who has no currency is not worth trading, hence the 'don't trade' Edwards calls.
IMO, keep Nahas and Edwards. There are few more on our list that will go or need to go before them two. That is not a ringing endorsement of those two but an illustration of our lack depth.
Don't try to have a blew with me GR12 just cause CD and 65 are at it.... :lol.. ;)
Nah no fear, not trying to start a blue at all WAT :thumbsup
I was actually trying to break the fight up :angel:
-
I thought Nahas' pressure in the forward 50 was excellent yesterday.
Don't be silly......trade him..... :whistle, no good at all apparently..go figure.
Honestly, apparently he is no good but we should trade him, Edwards is no good either but untradeable.....go figure... ::)
Some people believe it better to trade a player who has currency, hence the 'trade Nahas' calls. Some people believe a player who has no currency is not worth trading, hence the 'don't trade' Edwards calls.
IMO, keep Nahas and Edwards. There are few more on our list that will go or need to go before them two. That is not a ringing endorsement of those two but an illustration of our lack depth.
Don't try to have a blew with me GR12 just cause CD and 65 are at it.... :lol.. ;)
Nah no fear, not trying to start a blue at all WAT :thumbsup
I was actually trying to break the fight up :angel:
I know but :shh...it's working... :lol
-
Just watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
that's good. I'm over nanas. I'd rather we try a youngster with a body and some strength. Trade him for Chris Knights.
Tigra your full of insight. No hope next week trade this player and that what next how about we relocate to Saudi Arabia.
-
Need to replace Nahas with an AFL player who can kick with both feet.
Cost a goal at the 7:56 mark in first quarter, spilt ball in goal square tried to kick with the outside of his right foot.
Kick to Miller at 2:40 of second quarter was as embarassing, kicking off outside of right foot to curl right.
-
Judy watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
Well he will be after that DH Barrett highlighted three tackles on the footy show morning and said that of all three, Nahas' was the worst. I can't see how it could be though, he did'nt sling him and a free kick was'nt even paid.
We all know Damian Barrett is a wanker. That's what happens when you hang out with the Hairy Malaka. If you want to know what type of journo ratface is just watch his segment on the footy show on Thursday you'll get the idea. Nothing footy stories. Trash. Player A went into a deal with a man from company A and the deal fell through and there was a six figure settlement blah blah blah.
That's not footy journalism that's making a living out of people's private lives. Now suddenly he has found his footy acumen and he is calling the game which is what he was employed to do in the first place. Go and fornicate ratface.
-
Never said Lids was a poor player just not my favourite.
Sounds like something a Carlton supporter would say.................
-
Judy watched the tackle.....mmmmm, could be in strife :-\
Well he will be after that DH Barrett highlighted three tackles on the footy show morning and said that of all three, Nahas' was the worst. I can't see how it could be though, he did'nt sling him and a free kick was'nt even paid.
We all know Damian Barrett is a wanker. That's what happens when you hang out with the Hairy Malaka. If you want to know what type of journo ratface is just watch his segment on the footy show on Thursday you'll get the idea. Nothing footy stories. Trash. Player A went into a deal with a man from company A and the deal fell through and there was a six figure settlement blah blah blah.
That's not footy journalism that's making a living out of people's private lives. Now suddenly he has found his footy acumen and he is calling the game which is what he was employed to do in the first place. Go and fornicate ratface.
:thumbsup Great call Tucker.
I actually don't watch the footy shows (Thursday or Sunday) anymore for that very reason, just caught it on a channel surf. There are many more better quality shows than that one.
-
I watched the replay this afternoon
And I reckon Nahas is in trouble - didn't look good at all
-
Who would know with the MRP these days. However his head made contact with the ground so will be looked at, looked dangerous.
High Contact
In Play
Low Impact
Reckless
???
-
Who would know with the MRP these days. However his head made contact with the ground so will be looked at, looked dangerous.
High Contact
In Play
Low Impact
Reckless
???
Unfortunately it's your 1st sentence Pope that sums it up..the other stuff means very little
-
I'm trying to remember the incident. From memory didn't the Swans player duck and burrow into Nahas initiating the contact? From what I heard Eddie commentating on the Foxtel coverage defended Robbie.
-
I'm trying to remember the incident. From memory didn't the Swans player duck and burrow into Nahas initiating the contact? From what I heard Eddie commentating on the Foxtel coverage defended Robbie.
3rd qtr it was
And yes they did Healy (I think) suggested the Swans players head ended up going into Robbie's thigh, can tell you from the vision I saw today from one angle in particular the Swans players head goes striaght into the ground. Nahas has him and rolls him head first into the ground - should have been a free but the umpire (surprise surprise) was ont he wrong side to see it
As I said it doesn't look good at all
-
I'm trying to remember the incident. From memory didn't the Swans player duck and burrow into Nahas initiating the contact? From what I heard Eddie commentating on the Foxtel coverage defended Robbie.
3rd qtr it was
And yes they did Healy (I think) suggested the Swans players head ended up going into Robbie's thigh, can tell you from the vision I saw today from one angle in particular the Swans players head goes striaght into the ground. Nahas has him and rolls him head first into the ground - should have been a free but the umpire (surprise surprise) was ont he wrong side to see it
As I said it doesn't look good at all
If it was umpire No.32 then no surprise as he had no idea lol. As for the MRP's decision and what angles of vision they look at then who knows :-\.
-
I'm trying to remember the incident. From memory didn't the Swans player duck and burrow into Nahas initiating the contact? From what I heard Eddie commentating on the Foxtel coverage defended Robbie.
3rd qtr it was
And yes they did Healy (I think) suggested the Swans players head ended up going into Robbie's thigh, can tell you from the vision I saw today from one angle in particular the Swans players head goes striaght into the ground. Nahas has him and rolls him head first into the ground - should have been a free but the umpire (surprise surprise) was ont he wrong side to see it
As I said it doesn't look good at all
It doesn't look good WP, but i think he has the defence that he had no choice to tackle him the way he did. Just trying to cast my memory back a little, did the swans player initiate the contact with Nahas?
-
It doesn't look good WP, but i think he has the defence that he had no choice to tackle him the way he did. Just trying to cast my memory back a little, did the swans player initiate the contact with Nahas?
For mememory the Swans player had the ball and ducked ever so slightly Nahas tackled him as he ducked so automatically had him head high. Nahas then ended up on his backside and dragged the Swans player over his shoulder head first into the turf (reminded me of World Championship Wrestling from the early mid 1970's)
-
It was a DDT
Swans player went into him head first so he had no other option but to tackle him while the player was positioned that way
-
I think if you look at it closely, Nahas actually has tackled him on his shoulders from the 'backwards' position so in effect there is no high tackle to be paid, especially as the Swans player ducked in the first place. And Nahas has little control from that point as the Swans player has the momentum that helps carry them both to the ground. Will be very very unlucky if he gets cited for it imho.
-
I think if you look at it closely, Nahas actually has tackled him on his shoulders from the 'backwards' position so in effect there is no high tackle to be paid, especially as the Swans player ducked in the first place. And Nahas has little control from that point as the Swans player has the momentum that helps carry them both to the ground. Will be very very unlucky if he gets cited for it imho.
Fair call smokey but the MRP being the MRP means this week he is likely to get 2 weeks (reduced to 1) and next week he'd likely to get off
There is 1 piece of vision that looks damning IMHO and that's the one I reckon they will ping him on
Now seeing I am home today doing very little I'm just about to watch the game again ;D will have another close look at it :thumbsup
-
I think if you look at it closely, Nahas actually has tackled him on his shoulders from the 'backwards' position so in effect there is no high tackle to be paid, especially as the Swans player ducked in the first place. And Nahas has little control from that point as the Swans player has the momentum that helps carry them both to the ground. Will be very very unlucky if he gets cited for it imho.
Fair call smokey but the MRP being the MRP means this week he is likely to get 2 weeks (reduced to 1) and next week he'd likely to get off
There is 1 piece of vision that looks damning IMHO and that's the one I reckon they will ping him on
Now seeing I am home today doing very little I'm just about to watch the game again ;D will have another close look at it :thumbsup
Fingers crossed then. :pray
-
At first I thought I saw him maybe use his leg to trip him but on other angles didn't look as such. Anyone else notice this or was his leg just swung underneath him due to the tackle
-
Might have been his other leg.
-
Cleared (according to SEN)
-
Cleared (according to SEN)
Link??
-
Cleared (according to SEN)
Link??
-
Yep cleared,
Link? Our word :rollin
-
Might have been his other leg.
:lol
-
Yep cleared,
Link? Our word :rollin
Where's the link to your word??
-
From The Age:
The two other players scrutinised for tackles that caused their opponents to hit the head on the ground, Richmond's Robin Nahas and Essendon's Nathan Lovett-Murray, both escaped charges
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/crows-dream-run-ends-with-walker-suspended-20120514-1ymji.html#ixzz1upD1gZA7
Very lucky - will take it :thumbsup
-
Here is the MRP's explanation...
Contact between Richmond's Robin Nahas and the Sydney Swans' Nick Smith from the third quarter of Saturday's match was assessed. Smith has his head down after picking up the ball when he is tackled by Nahas. Nahas applies a tackle, without making high contact, and takes Smith to ground with the forward momentum of the Sydney player. Smith's head makes contact with the ground but it was the view of the panel that Nahas did not use excessive force or drive his opponent into the ground. No further action was taken.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/135770/default.aspx
-
Thought as much. Nothing in it.
-
From The Age:
The two other players scrutinised for tackles that caused their opponents to hit the head on the ground, Richmond's Robin Nahas and Essendon's Nathan Lovett-Murray, both escaped charges
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/crows-dream-run-ends-with-walker-suspended-20120514-1ymji.html#ixzz1upD1gZA7
Very lucky - will take it :thumbsup
Lovett-Murray is the lucky one.
-
if it wasnt the dreamtime game they would have suspended lovett murray or if he was of a different culture. afl is fos, reverse racism at its best
-
if it wasnt the dreamtime game they would have suspended lovett murray or if he was of a different culture. afl is fos, reverse racism at its best
Why wasn't Nahas suspended then?
-
please explain reverse racism
-
please explain reverse racism
Well there is no reverse racism in this case, if there is such a thing. Racism is racism, it does not matter where it comes from. If Nahas was suspended then perhaps one could argue a weak case.
-
thats what i was i getting at GR12. It's normally a silly term that by it's nature in the way it's used implies that only whites can be racist.
but giving favor to someone based on race could actually be reverse racism, as x man claims.
not that i think it's the case though.
-
thats what i was i getting at GR12. It's normally a silly term that by it's nature in the way it's used implies that only whites can be racist.
but giving favor to someone based on race could actually be reverse racism, as x man claims.
not that i think it's the case though.
I knew where you coming from, Al and i agree.
However, i think the term username is looking for is 'affirmative action'.