Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Gday Ben. In reference to your last sentence I’d say the umpires are gutless and the afl are the ones confused. Umpires can but will not step in and make the correct call in the instance where necessary, Ginni being case in point. Now if the AFL have instructed umpires to totally ignore any attempts to remove Ginnivans head that is a lawsuit in the future that will probably unveil many more cover ups as a total entity that is the AFL so why would they want that attention? I just cannot see why they would expose themselves to that. So then why wouldn’t the umpire department play by the rule book? They still have a duty of care for players well-being on the field and penalise the offender when necessary but that cheating prick stevic didn’t. He should be investigated, he has brought the game into disrepute but we know they won’t, they are a protected species.
You know what your probably right, the only way the conspiracies stop is by a whistleblower and that needs to be a Collingwood insider that is unbeknown within the halls of the AFL. We all know we don’t get a fair go on game day, the game is to easy to manipulate and no one is accountable. There is corruption within and only a few clubs in the land are exempt from it. Equalisation means more than just a cap on footy department spending.

Mr Miyagi wrote:

stui magpie wrote:Good on Coxy, nice spray to the AFL.

Wild to think high tackles were put in the game to protect players health and now are being blatantly ignored for a 19 year old. How can we think “the AFL cares about concussions and head high contact” after this.

https://twitter.com/masonsixtencox/stat ... 1233551360

I love Swanny’s reply!

Interesting to see the usually trigger happy AFL not censoring and fining both Cox and Ginni for their social media efforts.

Maybe the AFL realises that that's a hill not worth dying for.

Lethal Leigh Matthews has just weighed into the debate with an impassioned and outraged interview with the Herald Sun. He was revolted by the non-free kick decision to Ginnivan and described it as "symbolic of the state of the game" because it represented a horrible attack on the very fabric of the game. He said that this fabric depends on every player being treated equal, and Ginnivan instead was victimised. This is because the likes of Gil McLaughlin are shifting the paradigm of the game away from protecting the man with the ball to instead making it easier for the tackler. Matthews said that he was sickened by this attack on the game's fabric. He described Redman's tackle on Ginnivan as a " free-kick for the last 100 years" and Redman conduct as borderline reportable for rough conduct. A great contribution from Leigh.

I think every member would be happy to pay one more dollar to their membership next year to provide the club with a kitty to fund AFL fines for public lambasting of the umpiring and AFL.

Raw Hammer wrote:I think every member would be happy to pay one more dollar to their membership next year to provide the club with a kitty to fund AFL fines for public lambasting of the umpiring and AFL.

I’m in. I actually told Eddie once that we should have a swear jar to pay fines lol. I’d be bankrupt though.

Leigh's actual words are quoted by SEN here:
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/07/26/ ... d-boiling/

RudeBoy wrote:That neck choke was the last straw. Let's see if the AFL does anything.

Surely if you did this in a time when the Ginnivan rule was not spoken about, you would have to think Redman would have been reported for a deliberate ,round arm, head high tackle.?? which in my view it was. No pretence about the tackle GOING high, it was straight at the head.

I feel the feeble, fickle AFL are gonna backtrack on their Ginny persecution after all the backlash. He'll probably start getting cheap frees from now.

mudlark wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:That neck choke was the last straw. Let's see if the AFL does anything.

Surely if you did this in a time when the Ginnivan rule was not spoken about, you would have to think Redman would have been reported for a deliberate ,round arm, head high tackle.?? which in my view it was. No pretence about the tackle GOING high, it was straight at the head.

I find it weird that it hasn’t been deemed to be a reportable action

Magpietothemax wrote:Leigh's actual words are quoted by SEN here:
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/07/26/ ... d-boiling/

Here’s the actual video of Leigh talking about it.

https://youtu.be/5jkiAzOXOss

Copped a couple of shit ones again today. The high shot obviously (and they paid about 20 others that were less obvious) but what about the one where he was dragged back in the 1 on 1 on the southern stand HFF??

What I liked about Jack is he just got on with it. In a big sign of maturity Noble gave a free kick away about 55m from goal and was saying something to the umpire and Jack sensed Noble may go too far came over shoved him off the mark and told him to go back into D50 to get him away from the umpire.

Johnno75 wrote:
What I liked about Jack is he just got on with it. In a big sign of maturity Noble gave a free kick away about 55m from goal and was saying something to the umpire and Jack sensed Noble may go too far came over shoved him off the mark and told him to go back into D50 to get him away from the umpire.

I saw that as well and was impressed with the maturity Ginni displayed