Re: Eddie! No!
Reply #28 –
Did anyone else see him trying to explain that if the goal review shows a finger moving back on a hand that it doesn't mean the ball touched the finger.
Went into examples and each one made no
Sense.
For a very smart man at times his love for the pies makes him lose his sense and say things a one eyed supporter would argue not a well respected president and media head.
By the way he used the Travis cloke touched goal from the boundary as his reason to question it. Coincidence that it just happened to be a magpie involved.
Please tell me that he won't be commenting on Friday night?
He tried to say it was like the action movies where they don't really punch but the guy moves with the blow to make it look real and was trying to get Derm to act it out with him. Was he saying the Essendon player flexed his fingers back to pretend the ball touched it?
Its a pretty stupid argument isnt it?
He would have been better off arguing that it wasnt a meaninful touch so the goal should be paid as we see that happen frequently and although its a source of frustration, we cannot goal review every shot at goal because odds are 9 out of 10 will get a bit of a flick on the way through.
Whether or not we want what I have stated to occur is a different matter but I would hazard that at a conservative estimate about 50% of marking contests would be touched in similar fashion and no one really gives a hoot about that aspect of it.
Topic: Eddie! No! (Read 14307 times)
previous topic - next topic
