Nahas in Trouble

[1965]

so we traded Morton for Nahas and Edwards??

 

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.

 

[Coach]

so we traded Morton for Nahas and Edwards??

 

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.

 

There's a Wallace/Vickery thread.

I think you should go to sleep as well.

[Go Richo 12]

I thought Nahas' pressure in the forward 50 was excellent yesterday.

Don't be silly......trade him..... , 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.... ..

Nah no fear, not trying to start a blue at all WAT
I was actually trying to break the fight up

[WA Tiger]

I thought Nahas' pressure in the forward 50 was excellent yesterday.

Don't be silly......trade him..... , 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.... ..

Nah no fear, not trying to start a blue at all WAT
I was actually trying to break the fight up

I know but  ...it's working...

[Hellenic Tiger]

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.

[RedanTiger]

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.

[Hellenic Tiger]

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.

[The Big Richo]

Never said Lids was a poor player just not my favourite.

Sounds like something a Carlton supporter would say.................

[Go Richo 12]

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.

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.

[WilliamPowell]

I watched the replay this afternoon

And I reckon Nahas is in trouble - didn't look good at all

[TigerLand]

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
???

[WilliamPowell]

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 

[mightytiges]

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.

[WilliamPowell]

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

[mightytiges]

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  .