We have been labelled as "Gutless" and must respond

[IanG]

I don't want to see Richmond players taking cheap shots like King and Hislop did on Friday. I want to see them act like Collingwood did to King after he hounded one of their play makers for a quarter and half culminating in the cheapshot.

You want to see Richmond players take the cowardly option of ganging up on other players 4-1 when he wasn't expecting it?

 

[Bill James]

You want to see Richmond players take the cowardly option of ganging up on other players 4-1 when he wasn't expecting it?

Spare the moral outrage, King had the ball and was gang tackled high low and wide, he new it was coming. Didak didn't have the ball when King whacked him. I know which I would prefer to see from Richmond players.

 

[Tigerbob]

Spare the moral outrage, King had the ball and was gang tackled high low and wide, he new it was coming. Didak didn't have the ball when King whacked him. I know which I would prefer to see from Richmond players.

He got tackled? He was getting punched, eye gouged and mauled by 4 Collingwood players. Whilst he was helpless on the ground, with the football in hand.

What did you want our boys to do?

I know playing football, you defend your teammate no matter what. When he is getting attacked like that, you don't sit back and watch it.

We didn't start the melee, Collingwood did. They can *smile* and say we used underhand tactics all they want. We were defending our teammate, this is football, not *smile* netball.

You should spare the moral outrage.

 

[IanG]

Spare the moral outrage, King had the ball and was gang tackled high low and wide, he new it was coming. Didak didn't have the ball when King whacked him. I know which I would prefer to see from Richmond players.

King expected a tackle not to be mugged 4 on 1. No matter how you slice it thats worse than what King did.

 

[Bill James]

He got tackled? He was getting punched, eye gouged and mauled by 4 Collingwood players. Whilst he was helpless on the ground, with the football in hand.

What did you want our boys to do?

I know playing football, you defend your teammate no matter what. When he is getting attacked like that, you don't sit back and watch it.

We didn't start the melee, Collingwood did. They can b!tch and say we used underhand tactics all they want. We were defending our teammate, this is football, not *smile* netball.

You should spare the moral outrage.

Tackled and mauled yes. But I didn't see any punching or eyegouging and obviously the match review didn't either. But then we weren't watching the game from dead mans pocket where a whole bunch of things happen that seem invisible on TV.

Didn't say we started the melee, but if Delidio got played like Didak was by King, I would want us to start one the first time the mauler got the ball.

 

[GoodOne]

Didn't say we started the melee, but if Delidio got played like Didak was by King, I would want us to start one the first time the mauler got the ball.

Over-reaction. Players are so precious these days. Deledio has received plenty of similar treatment this year. We don't carry on about it as if someone just commtted murder.

 

[Tigerbob]

Tackled and mauled yes. But I didn't see any punching or eyegouging and obviously the match review didn't either. But then we weren't watching the game from dead mans pocket where a whole bunch of things happen that seem invisible on TV.

Didn't say we started the melee, but if Delidio got played like Didak was by King, I would want us to start one the first time the mauler got the ball.

Being invisible on TV has got nothing to do with some people simply having no idea.

So even though King was in the wrong by hitting Didak (how wrong that can be is teh question) you are having a go at our boys for protecting him whilst getting mauled on the ground?

Some teammate you would have been!

The result in this is inconsequencial. We were protecting a mate. It's football.

 

[GoodOne]

The result in this is inconsequencial. We were protecting a mate. It's football.

Exactly right. Every player in any team, AFL or otherwise would have reacted in exactly the same way. The comments of Maxwell are hypocritical and the whole mele has been over-stated. Just a normal occurrence in footy under the circumstances presented.

 

[BladeTiger]

Being invisible on TV has got nothing to do with some people simply having no idea.

So even though King was in the wrong by hitting Didak (how wrong that can be is teh question) you are having a go at our boys for protecting him whilst getting mauled on the ground?

Some teammate you would have been!

The result in this is inconsequencial. We were protecting a mate. It's football.

Well said Bobby. Anyone who has played football at any level knows this is the unwritten #1 rule for the game. Rule #2 is what happens on the field stays on the field - this is the one Maxwell broke.

 

[jb03]

But then we weren't watching the game from dead mans pocket where a whole bunch of things happen that seem invisible on TV.

Don't really agree with you on this one Bill but that line gave me a great chuckle.

 

[IanG]

Tackled and mauled yes. But I didn't see any punching or eyegouging and obviously the match review didn't either. But then we weren't watching the game from dead mans pocket where a whole bunch of things happen that seem invisible on TV.

It was actually pretty clear that punches were thrown it just wasn't clear enough for charges to be laid. Even if punches weren't thrown ganging up on 1 player is cowardly. Travis and Cameron Cloke were cowards when they ganged up on Lids n his first year, the way the hawks ganged up on Brent Harvey in a final 2-3 years ago was cowardly just to name 2 examples that stick in my mind.

 

[Bill James]

Tackled and mauled yes. But I didn't see any punching or eyegouging and obviously the match review didn't either. But then we weren't watching the game from dead mans pocket where a whole bunch of things happen that seem invisible on TV.

Didn't say we started the melee, but if Delidio got played like Didak was by King, I would want us to start one the first time the mauler got the ball.

Being invisible on TV has got nothing to do with some people simply having no idea.

So even though King was in the wrong by hitting Didak (how wrong that can be is teh question) you are having a go at our boys for protecting him whilst getting mauled on the ground?

Some teammate you would have been!

The result in this is inconsequencial. We were protecting a mate. It's football.

Can you read?

 

[Total Tiger]

Spare the moral outrage, King had the ball and was gang tackled high low and wide, he new it was coming. Didak didn't have the ball when King whacked him. I know which I would prefer to see from Richmond players.

I'll jump in and give you a bit of support Bill. Everyone's got blinkers on with regard to this one, mainly because Maxwell sooked about it. I want our players to be hard and tough at the ball, not the man. If Kingy had some skills, he wouldn't have needed to whack Didak in the guts.

 

[IanG]

I'll jump in and give you a bit of support Bill. Everyone's got blinkers on with regard to this one, mainly because Maxwell sooked about it. I want our players to be hard and tough at the ball, not the man. If Kingy had some skills, he wouldn't have needed to whack Didak in the guts.

No-ones defending what King did, its the fact that Bill is defending the Collingwood players and apparently thinks its OK for a group of players to gang up on 1.