helicopterking wrote:News today, Kelly has refused to sign a contract extension with the Cats beyond 2019. Has 3 kids under 2.5yrs, has family and partner flying over from Perth occasionally. Decision on future will rely heavily on if family can relocate to Geelong.
Really hope he stays. Geelong should lock him up. A real star in the making. Hope this doesn't turn out like Greg Williams.
regards,
REB
What, a massive ******* wanker? I doubt it, looks like a good kid.
Could play though. We need to learn from history and make retaining Kel a priority.
I don't think Naitanui's tackle was worthy of suspension but I can see why the AFL didn't like the look of it. Was a little over zealous, nothing more.
Booney wrote:I don't think Naitanui's tackle was worthy of suspension but I can see why the AFL didn't like the look of it. Was a little over zealous, nothing more.
I think the AFL are clear on their stance that if any tackle results in a players head hitting the turf you can expect a week off
Booney wrote:I don't think Naitanui's tackle was worthy of suspension but I can see why the AFL didn't like the look of it. Was a little over zealous, nothing more.
I think the AFL are clear on their stance that if any tackle results in a players head hitting the turf you can expect a week off
They also don't like the player making the tackle "having his way"* with the bloke being tackled once he's "got him".
Booney wrote:I don't think Naitanui's tackle was worthy of suspension but I can see why the AFL didn't like the look of it. Was a little over zealous, nothing more.
Yep pretty much. It would be nice to see some onus put back on the recipient (ie put your arms out to brace for the fall). I think we're just at that stage where the game has reached it's optimum pace and is quicker than the split milli-second decisions expected of players.
Nic Nat might claim he's not going to change his style, but the tribunal are probably unlikely too either (although who ******* knows with them?!?!)
I get why AFL want to be tough on it, but these tackles are different to a sling tackle where there is generally 2 actions, I reckon 1st one you should get a formal warning (ie Nick Nat's) and if it happens again in the same season then they cop a week.
So Natanui is meant to take into account in a split second the weight difference between himself and another player, yet umpires are not meant to take into account the vagaries of the bounce of the ball when paying deliberate out of bounds even though they have time to do so?
So Natanui is meant to take into account in a split second the weight difference between himself and another player? This isn't country junior footy where you may have a 17 year old tackling a 13 year old.
Ignore what the tribunal said. At the end of the day Nic Nat drove him into the ground when he didn't need too, regardless of the weight difference. The result was a concussion and was a 1 week suspension every time for mine.
MW wrote:Ignore what the tribunal said. At the end of the day Nic Nat drove him into the ground when he didn't need too, regardless of the weight difference. The result was a concussion and was a 1 week suspension every time for mine.
