Herkes tarafından bilinerek sevilen site olan 1xbet canlı adresi sizlere büyük avantajlar ile farklı bahis imkanları sunmaktadır. Bilindik bir firma olması nedeni ile her defasında yeni bir 1xbet güncel adrese taşınıyor. Paylaşılan adreslerden sizlere en uygun 1xbet türkiye giriş güncel adresine kolaylıkla hemen ulaşabilirsiniz. Sizlerde kolaylıkla her cihazınızda aktif olan 1xbet mobile ile bahis yaparak, üyelik oluşumunu halledebilirsiniz. Büyük promosyonlardan yararlanarak üyelik açmak için 1xbet live adresini kullana bilirsiniz. Üyelik oluşturduktan sonra kolaylıkla yatırım yapmak için mobil ödeme bahis kabul gördüğünü anlayabilirsiniz. Hiç bir yerde olmayan canlı bahis özelliklerini sizlerde hemen kullanın. Aktif bir şekilde işlem yapan canlı bahis sitesi editörler tarafından özenle araştırılarak seçilmiştir. Ülkemizde resmi yayın yapmayan sitelerin çoğu kaçak bahis adı altında görev yapmaktadır. İnternetten yayın yapan kaçak bahis siteleri kullanıcılarına yüksek oranlar sunan bir adrestir. Hemen sizlerde casino oyunun farkına ve eğlencesine varmak için kayıt oluşturun.
Forum
Index
Docker Discussions
Nic Nee Nat

TOPIC: Nic Nee Nat

dddocker Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #29

dddocker
Has Nic Nee apologized to Sandi yet? That's the least he could do. After all a few inches over and Sandi could be a paraplegic. A shorter man could be in a coma. This is football not kung fu.
Login to reply,

Docker by the Sea Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #30

Docker by the Sea
Sandi unlucky, it happens. Fyfe, throws himself just as aggressively, and some would say recklessly into contests. Morgan is correct in what he says that risks injury equally to himself as others. Would hate to see one of our players penalised for the same incident.
I would however like to see Sandilands be a beneficiary of similar interpretation of couple interference calls that went Nic Nats was in their forward line. This is specifically where I think Sandi gets the raw end of the deal in his free kick stats (in marking contests in our forward line).
Login to reply,
Raglan Matt said You Beaut

Alvin Prpl Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #31

Alvin Prpl
Nic Nats mark was legal but I think he does try to inflict a bit of pain at times with his knee, more so as seen later against Pearce in the middle.
I'm pretty sure that won't be the last time he breaks ribs, actually I suspect it might even happen again this year.

Am I the only one concerned that Sandi might call it quits.
Login to reply,
DockerKnockers said You Beaut

Raglan Matt Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #32

Raglan Matt
And you don't see NN put himself in the situation where he will cop a hit under the high ball, so karma won't kick in. By the way, I fail to see how it is the fault of Sandis teammates that he copped the broken ribs.
Login to reply,

clinical Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #33

clinical
Perfectly legit mark. We would all be cheering if the roles were reversed apart from the injury. Take a grab, take a player out, what's not to like. Get the purple blinkers off, this is footy not netball.
Login to reply,
Mercury, slammen said You Beaut

Tragic Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #34

Tragic
Whilst I agree that is was a legitimate mark, I am not sure that it will always be the case. The AFL rules already state
"FREE KICKS
15.1 INTERPRETATION
15.1.1
Spirit and Intention of Awarding Free Kicks
It is the spirit and intention of these Laws that a Free Kick shall
be awarded to:
(a)
ensure that a Match is played in a fair manner;
(b)
provide to a Player, who makes obtaining possession of the
football their sole objective, every opportunity to obtain
possession;
(c)
protect Players from sustaining injury; and
(d)
a Player who executes a Correct Tackle which results in an
opponent failing to dispose of the football in accordance
with these Laws."
Whilst we do want an exciting game to watch, protecting players from injury is already stated as being important. It won't surprise me if there is a move to ban the "flying knee".
Login to reply,
Dockermus said You Beaut

Dockermus Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #35

Dockermus
Not really sure how this bloke does it. He's the AwFuLs most protected, has a fawning media providing access at the click of his fingers and even has apologists here on Dockerland.
If Rule 15.1.1 (c) had been rigorously applied on the day, Freo would have been given a free kick and Nic the Knee would have spent Monday afternoon explaining himself to the MRP.
The question to be answered is: did Notacluey legitimately use his knee as leverage, to gain extra height, or did he aggressively raise his knee to fend off Sandi, his only genuine opponent in the marking contest? He's already admitted, on Eagle TV, that he saw Sandi running backwards with the flight of the ball and expected Sandi to be hurt in the collision. So he brought his knee up sharply, knowing his opponent would be taken out. And clearly broke rule 15.1.1 (c), in both spirit and letter.
Login to reply,
freoval, DockerKnockers said You Beaut

DockerKnockers Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #36

DockerKnockers
There are plenty of opportunities for players to do what Nic Knee did, but they don't because it's quite a malicious action. I remember school days kick to kick and if anybody lifted the knee in to another persons back "straight on" like that it was severely frowned upon due to the possibility of injury. From a young age in footy, you learn to raise the knee but turn or get it up high enough ... you don't stick it straight out like Nic Knee did.

Sandilands would never do that in a marking contest and if he did, he would do massive injury to the opposition and it would promptly be outlawed.

You've got to watch a lot of football to see any other players do that in a marking contest ... occasionally you might see a vacant player under the ball raise the leg to protect themselves against an oncoming defender, but that's more of a defensive action. Nic Knee had absolutely no need to do what he did ... he was in no danger without raising the knee like that and that sort of action only looks like there is intent to hurt the opposition.

Not good ... I didn't like it in the playground and I've never liked seeing it on the football field.
Gone to bigfooty where there's fewer Docker Haters.
Login to reply,
freoval, okeedokee, Dockermus, Fyfe-ite said You Beaut

slammen Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #37

slammen
He used his knee and took a mark , nothing wrong at all with what he did , get over it .

That's football
Login to reply,

Dockermus Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #38

Dockermus
If you like to see opponents purposefully taken out, you might consider switching your attentions to American Grid Iron footy. Lots of biff and injuries in that game.
Login to reply,

DockerKnockers Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #39

DockerKnockers
Yer slammen, and Mitchell used his knee to simply block Fyfe ... were you on Mitchell's side then too?

Last year I saw J.Riewoldt arrive late in a ruck contest against Sandilands where Riewoldt did his best to raise the knee straight in to the back of Sandi ... it looked real bad because you could see it was done solely with intent to hurt him. Fortunately on that occasion Riewoldt missed the target. Knees lifted up and held in that position at point of contact is just not necessary and it's dangerous.
Gone to bigfooty where there's fewer Docker Haters.
Login to reply,
okeedokee said You Beaut

bpurple Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #40

bpurple
Dockermus I watch a lot of NFL and have son that plays in our local league. I agree there is no hiding the fact that the collisions are designed to stop the opposition and sometimes players get injured. But just like Rugby League and Union lifting a knee into an opponent is outlawed in any situation and carries an extremely heavy penalty. It surprises me that sliding in with the knees in a "contest" of the ball in the AFL is banned because of potential leg injuries, but jumping into someone's back or chest even the head with a raised knee in a "contest" of the ball is OK. Using your leg/knee to push off an opponent to gain height in a marking contest is one thing, but running flat out with a full head of steam and using it as a battering ram is poor form. I did not know that Nic Knees had seen Sandi coming and knew what he was doing would result in him being hurt. That is really poor form because if he had time to think that then he had time to change his stance. Its within the rules but not in the spirit of the game. Would it have been let go by the MRP if ZacD had done it to Kennedy?
Login to reply,
freoval, okeedokee, DockerKnockers said You Beaut

Raglan Matt Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #41

Raglan Matt
2 points.

I) If NNK had used a foot in the way he used his knee, he would (should) have had a free kick awarded against him, and would (should) have been cited for unduly rough play. Maybe the knee is softer than the boot, I don't know, but I do know that in most leagues without video replay, NNK would have had instant and summary justice dished out. That says something for the spirit and intention of the act.

II) FREE KICKS
15.1 INTERPRETATION
(d) a Player who executes a Correct Tackle which results in an
opponent failing to dispose of the football in accordance with these Laws."
I wonder what the AwFL umpiring department think of the way this subsection of law 15.1 was interpreted?
Login to reply,

freofan61 Nic Nee Nat 8 years 1 month ago #42

freofan61
After news that Sandi had to have a rib removed , my young son just came up with this -

Nic Nat hard knee in back Sandi lost a bone.

Sums it up really.
Login to reply,
rogerrocks said You Beaut
Forum
Index
Docker Discussions
Nic Nee Nat