LRT and Bolton - The 'Tunnelling' thread

Iceman234 · Post: # 537455Post **Iceman234** » Wed 26 Mar 2008 6:55pm

What did we expect?

It's been raised, it's a public issue now, we're seen as whingers, matter of who the AFL think less of in the end.

As much as has been said about Demetriou not seeing eye-to-eye with Roos, it is not in the best interest to punish Sydney right now while trying to raise interest in the AFL profile there for a second club.

We were never going to win.

Until a fave club player gets seriously injured, then we'll hear the spin about how "we've been investigating it since it was raised by Malthouse etc....."

bigcarl · Post: # 537481Post **bigcarl** » Wed 26 Mar 2008 7:37pm

saintbrat wrote:afl.com.au have todays poll up
What do you think of this weekâ€™s â€˜tunnellingâ€™ controversy? Vote now!

What do you think of this weekâ€™s â€˜tunnellingâ€™ controversy?
Itâ€™s a beat-up59%
Itâ€™s a genuine concern40%
close 64 votes
http://afl.com.au/

i dare them to put a poll up on whether 18 teams is a good idea or not.

since when has the league given a rat's about what the public thinks anyway?

i voted "it's a genuine concern"

matrix · Post: # 537577Post **matrix** » Wed 26 Mar 2008 10:22pm

just heard a quick update on the news/sports tonight
and the snippet was "swans in the clear on tunneling"

dunno if u guys get it in diff states, but it'll be on after the news thats on channel ten now

bahhh...they pretty much said f*** all.
although it was commented that the umpires apparently did admit that Roo should have received a couple of frees.

u reckon?

bigcarl · Post: # 537591Post **bigcarl** » Wed 26 Mar 2008 10:51pm

matrixcutter wrote:just heard a quick update on the news/sports tonight
and the snippet was "swans in the clear on tunneling"

dunno if u guys get it in diff states, but it'll be on after the news thats on channel ten now

i heard that too.

the swans are off the hook in the short term but imo will not persist with the tactic because it is (quite rightly) on the agenda now.

the umpires will at least pay a free kick for interference from now on and if the issue keeps coming up it will become a reportable offence.

Otiman · Post: # 537610Post **Otiman** » Thu 27 Mar 2008 2:26am

I've stayed out of this for a while, but here's where it's at.

1. Bolton and LRT managed to upend St. Kilda players on the weekend. Their intent or any preconcieved strategy is not able to be established, so we should give them the benefit of the doubt at present.

2. The act can be considered dangerous, from a neck/back/shoulder injury related perspective.

3. It is an effective method in stopping lead up forwards from taking a mark, or at the very least putting doubt in their mind about taking flying grabs. Therefore if not clamped down upon, may be used in the future.

4. It is an illegal move, that should be penalised with a free kick.

5. Umpires will now be intimately aware of this now, and future events will be heavily scrutinised.

Richter · Post: # 537776Post **Richter** » Thu 27 Mar 2008 3:50pm

Just thought I'd add in a postscript. The age reports today from "Mr Innocent" Paul Roos, complaining about Archie bringing up this issue.....

........Paul Roos launching a spirited defence of his captain Craig Bolton........ Roos yesterday turned the heat back on Saints chief executive Archie Fraser, saying his comments regarding Bolton, who has been accused of using unfair tactics against Riewoldt, should not have been made public......

"But I think we need to make it clear to Archie that's not the appropriate way to do things. It's a bit of a slur on Craig, he's a captain of our footy club and it's a bit of a slur on us."

Blah, blah, but here comes the gold!

"If Archie hadn't said anything, no one would know anything about it."

GOTCHA!

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/l ... 08772.html

stinger · Post: # 537778Post **stinger** » Thu 27 Mar 2008 3:57pm

Richter wrote:Just thought I'd add in a postscript. The age reports today from "Mr Innocent" Paul Roos, complaining about Archie bringing up this issue.....

........Paul Roos launching a spirited defence of his captain Craig Bolton........ Roos yesterday turned the heat back on Saints chief executive Archie Fraser, saying his comments regarding Bolton, who has been accused of using unfair tactics against Riewoldt, should not have been made public......

"But I think we need to make it clear to Archie that's not the appropriate way to do things. It's a bit of a slur on Craig, he's a captain of our footy club and it's a bit of a slur on us."
Blah, blah, but here comes the gold!
"If Archie hadn't said anything, no one would know anything about it."
GOTCHA!

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/l ... 08772.html

that's gold...blame archie.....

wonder if that one would work on the missus.........not my fault i was cheating on you.....if blah blah hadn't told you, you wouldn't know anythingabout it.....

...ffs.......the guys a bigger clowen than i thought.....

Hurricane · Post: # 537900Post **Hurricane** » Thu 27 Mar 2008 7:44pm

The most important thing in this entire issue is that Western Bulldogs defender Brian Lake took the time out of his busy schedule to call the MX "newspaper" to say he had never heard of "tunneling"

BANG BANG

my les foote · Thu 27 Mar 2008 9:32pm

This from another article made me laugh

Richard Hinds in The Age wrote:Roos and Bolton yesterday reviewed the incidents during their regular post-match analyses. Roos said that on one occasion, the ball had been kicked over Riewoldt's head, Bolton judged the flight better, spun in the air attempting to go backwards and put a hand on the St Kilda forward to steady himself.

One guy gets both his hands on the ball and the other one gets nowhere near it. Who did you say judged it better?