I'm feeling a bit like the drunk in the bar, unable to just let this go and, instead, arguing on and on…
Morgan, no offence intended, but sometimes you seem to suffer from typical lawyer hubris, determined to be the cleverest man in the room AND always have the last word.
I think that, if you offered those two photos up in a courtroom as evidence for the defence, you'd probably harm your client chances. Both photos clearly show contested marking contests. The Bulldogs player in photo 1 is standing alongside and facing 211, attempting to spoil. In photo 2, Sandi is being doubled up on, as usual, and is using height and reach to mark the ball above the attempted spoil of the St Kilda player, who's also giving him a shove in the back, as per usual.
Neither photo shows Sandi intentionally jumping forward and into the back of an oncoming player. In fact, both photos suggest Sandi might be aware that a bloke of his height has potential to inflict a degree of pain, and seems to be trying to limit impact on both occasions.
In my view, this whole argument isn't about technique, since we probably all agree that Nic’ll-knacker-you-with-his-knee has neither talent nor technique.
My issue is with the AwFuL’s blatant double standards, which allow an honest player like Sandi to be rubbed out for weeks with car crash-like injuries, possibly intentionally caused, without even a murmur, let alone MRP consideration, because Nic the Knee is among the elite. He’s among the game’s most protected. He’s the AFL marketing department’s dream player. Commentators and sycophantic journos drool and dribble over all his nearly marks, his nearly tackles and missed tap-outs, and it really, really doesn't matter to these fools that he can’t actually play the game. So what if his rubbish technique finally results in an opponent being badly hurt? They'll put out emotionless PR statements, calling it collateral damage, and tell us it’s what makes our game so great! Whatever. As long as the cash registers keep going ker-ching!
