I can't believe none of you liked my second Maro Itoje idea.

Printable View

10-31-2025, 12:58 PM
Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

I can't believe none of you liked my second Maro Itoje idea.

When we found out that our striker who's named after a pre-supper dip is the cousin of Maro Itoje, I suggested a long throw routine like a line out with the players changing positions and then lifting up the tallest of our players to head goalwards.

But then I had an even better idea.

From kick off, form a scrum with Willy, Vik and Gabby in the front row, MnM and Dec behind them, Cala as no.8 and then the wingers, B/Noni and Gabbygol/Leo as the flankers.

Put the ball into the middle and charge forward like a ruck. Then as we get to the goal line, put the ball out one side or the other to one of the wingers playing as wing forwards {flankers} so they can smack the ball into the net.

I don't think we could be legally stopped. Get Maro to be the coach for this like Jover does the other set pieces.

The meeja would hate us even more if we scored goals like that.
10-31-2025, 01:57 PM
Peter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

When we found out that our striker who's named after a pre-supper dip is the cousin of Maro Itoje, I suggested a long throw routine like a line out with the players changing positions and then lifting up the tallest of our players to head goalwards.

But then I had an even better idea.

From kick off, form a scrum with Willy, Vik and Gabby in the front row, MnM and Dec behind them, Cala as no.8 and then the wingers, B/Noni and Gabbygol/Leo as the flankers.

Put the ball into the middle and charge forward like a ruck. Then as we get to the goal line, put the ball out one side or the other to one of the wingers playing as wing forwards {flankers} so they can smack the ball into the net.

I don't think we could be legally stopped. Get Maro to be the coach for this like Jover does the other set pieces.

The meeja would hate us even more if we scored goals like that.

As soon as a defender attempts to get through the 'ruck' the player in the front row would be obstructing. Free kick.

I did like the throw in idea.
10-31-2025, 03:21 PM
Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter

As soon as a defender attempts to get through the 'ruck' the player in the front row would be obstructing. Free kick.

I did like the throw in idea.

How come? It's not obstruction. A defender can shield the ball out for a goal kick, for example.

Or imagine this. Edge of the opponent's box, ball comes diagonally into Vik who has his back to goal and he cushions it to MnM who is a yard further out and about to play the ball forward into the box for Gabby to run on to.

The defender marking Vik who is basically right up close to Vik's back can't push through Vik to tackle MnM. So what's the difference?

Btw, the throw in idea would be great if it's about 10-15 yards from the goal line. They all run around and end with Willy in position 2 and Gabby in position 6. Then numbers 1 and 3 lift Willy or numbers 5 and 7 lift Gabby. I'd love to see us try that.

But two questions. The other day, B controlled the ball about 2-3 yards in from the touchline, facing that way. An opposing defender just came and shoved B in the back as he was bringing the ball under control and pushed him and the ball into touch. How come that's not a foul?

Also, the young Doctor was tripped in the box as he was driving parallel to the goal line. How is that not a foul? If one of our lads had done that, I'd have expected us to concede a pelanty and wouldn't have had any complaints.
10-31-2025, 06:04 PM
Peter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

How come? It's not obstruction. A defender can shield the ball out for a goal kick, for example.

Or imagine this. Edge of the opponent's box, ball comes diagonally into Vik who has his back to goal and he cushions it to MnM who is a yard further out and about to play the ball forward into the box for Gabby to run on to.

The defender marking Vik who is basically right up close to Vik's back can't push through Vik to tackle MnM. So what's the difference?

Btw, the throw in idea would be great if it's about 10-15 yards from the goal line. They all run around and end with Willy in position 2 and Gabby in position 6. Then numbers 1 and 3 lift Willy or numbers 5 and 7 lift Gabby. I'd love to see us try that.

But two questions. The other day, B controlled the ball about 2-3 yards in from the touchline, facing that way. An opposing defender just came and shoved B in the back as he was bringing the ball under control and pushed him and the ball into touch. How come that's not a foul?

Also, the young Doctor was tripped in the box as he was driving parallel to the goal line. How is that not a foul? If one of our lads had done that, I'd have expected us to concede a pelanty and wouldn't have had any complaints.

The whole point of the idea is obstruction. Players forming a tight obstacle in front of the guy on the ball. Entirely deliberate. Refs aren't that stupid.

The push in the back is a foul, but it is easy to miss. Shoulder to shoulder is fine but shoulder in the back is a foul.

The feeling with the Dowman penalty is that the defender's foot was planted and he ran over it. Didn't see a clear enough replay so I don't know.