Winless In Seattle
Steve Sauro
Elliott SmithWhacked into Action
August 29th 2009 13:16
Hello, fellow travellers. Your humble, lazy commentator on the serious issues of the day - the way players choose to wear their shorts, for example - is back to whinge profusely on what will surely be the most over-analysed topic for the next week: Matthew Lloyd's bombs-away hit on Brad Sewell.
Readers with long memories will recall that I'm no fan of Lloyd on the basis of his pompous haircut (and, on reflection, the way he wears his shorts "due north").
That said, when his gelled-and-moused melon went flying into frame just as Sewell touched the ball, making direct shoulder-to-head contact, I was surprised. After a week of the bump rule being pored over endlessly, I was amazed at the idiocy of an experienced player taking such a stupid risk.
And let's avoid the "technicality" speak - Lloyd's hit on Sewell was much worse than Franklin's on Cousins. Franklin hit Cousins shoulder-to-shoulder, with the resulting head injury caused by a whiplash effect. At a maximum it was worth a one-week benching (which it should have been, barring the error from the initial review panel).
Lloyd had more time to react and the inevitable consequences of contact were easily foreseeable.
Most of the news reports have called this the turning point in the game, with Essendon "fired up" after the incident and compulsory brawl. More realistically, Hawthorn had nothing left on the interchange, too many senior players gone and too many inexperienced players on the field.
If anything, Essendon should leave this game questioning Lloyd's place in the side. Campbell Brown is right when he calls Lloyd a 'sniper'. He's also selfish and inconsistent. Essendon won today without Lloyd contributing much, besides offloading a key Hawthorn midfielder.
It's disappointing for Essendon players and supporters that their first finals series in five years will be overshadowed by this issue. Personally, I'd prefer to be giggling at the possibility of Collingwood losing to either Essendon or Carlton down the road.
There, I've had my rant. Next topic: Schadenfraude - The Port Adelaide Story.
Readers with long memories will recall that I'm no fan of Lloyd on the basis of his pompous haircut (and, on reflection, the way he wears his shorts "due north").
That said, when his gelled-and-moused melon went flying into frame just as Sewell touched the ball, making direct shoulder-to-head contact, I was surprised. After a week of the bump rule being pored over endlessly, I was amazed at the idiocy of an experienced player taking such a stupid risk.
And let's avoid the "technicality" speak - Lloyd's hit on Sewell was much worse than Franklin's on Cousins. Franklin hit Cousins shoulder-to-shoulder, with the resulting head injury caused by a whiplash effect. At a maximum it was worth a one-week benching (which it should have been, barring the error from the initial review panel).
Lloyd had more time to react and the inevitable consequences of contact were easily foreseeable.
Most of the news reports have called this the turning point in the game, with Essendon "fired up" after the incident and compulsory brawl. More realistically, Hawthorn had nothing left on the interchange, too many senior players gone and too many inexperienced players on the field.
If anything, Essendon should leave this game questioning Lloyd's place in the side. Campbell Brown is right when he calls Lloyd a 'sniper'. He's also selfish and inconsistent. Essendon won today without Lloyd contributing much, besides offloading a key Hawthorn midfielder.
It's disappointing for Essendon players and supporters that their first finals series in five years will be overshadowed by this issue. Personally, I'd prefer to be giggling at the possibility of Collingwood losing to either Essendon or Carlton down the road.
There, I've had my rant. Next topic: Schadenfraude - The Port Adelaide Story.
| 69 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
